[teampractices] A tool for keeping action items accountable?

[Quim Gil]

Thank you GuillaumeL for your contributions to this discussion!

On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Guillaume Lederrey <glederrey at wikimedia.org>
wrote:

> I am naturally suspicious of adding tools in this kind of context.
>

Me too. I was wondering... If the team is taking notes in a document...
what is the problem of documenting in the same doc those small actions that
are either too small or too private for our Phabricator usage?

This is in fact what we do in the Technical Collaboration team, thanks to a
good practice brought by the Community Liaisons. We don't have sprint
retrospectives but we have a weekly meeting, and we record there the
actions that come out of that meeting. Indeed, some tasks won't quite fit
for Phabricator and, as Guillaume says, some tasks are not done a week
later and perhaps even for a good reason.

I think another important factor here is that we use a single document for
all our weekly meetings, as opposed to one document per meeting. This has a
couple of advantages, at least

* The actions we wrote down last week are still there when we use the doc
in the next meeting. If someone missed to complete a task assigned, all
team members can see it clearly.
* Since team members keep visiting the doc after the meeting, sometimes
someone will leave a question or a comment next to an action, and sometimes
that will lead to a small casual discussion or updates about the action.

So perhaps Phabricator + single doc is all you need after all?

-- 
Quim Gil
Engineering Community Manager @ Wikimedia Foundation
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/teampractices/attachments/20160509/f37f4b1c/attachment.html>