Comments by Barbara Goguen: (Thanks to Elaine for scribing!)
- Pulse Group and customer interviews are currently taking place.
- The next IS&T CSS All Hands Meeting will be held on Thursday, January 28, 2010 .
- Would like the group to be as interactive as possible.
- Engagement – get people’s ideas more.
- Not use the same format as we do for the last IS&T CSS All Hands Meeting
- Take lead from Pulse Groups: have 4-6 questions answered anonymously, cut up answers and give
- all answers to one question to one group (4-6 groups) to see ideas and give their feedback.
- Allows people to talk about things in a freer way.
- Have the owner of the question (the person who posed the question they would like help answering) be present at the table reviewing the answers - use that for next steps.
- Challenge is population is large – approximately 80 or more people. It is a challenge to summarize that many questions/answers.
- Not sure if the Pulse exercise fits the large size of CSS Group
- but we want to get CSS Group more involved
- .
- Irina Vainstock suggested sending out questions before the meeting and have someone collect all the answers and put it together for the All Hands Meeting on 1/28/10.
- It would be ideal to let people submit answers anonymously.
- Six tables – 1.5 hours discussion about the questions.
- Mingling around and float from table to table to discuss various answers.
- But do we know what we are fishing for? After fishing, what is the next step?
- The next steps will be presented and there will be some follow up.
- Already understood – articulate more a sense of the problem and the next step(s) to do after we get our arms around the problem.
- One possible foundation for questions are the Task Force recommendations
- For something like this when Sponsors and Client give feedback. Is our role to inform and implement or take a position and advocate that position? Is IS&T a relationship management role?
- Task Force reports can help us come up with good concrete question to tackle.
- Mix the groups up so people in IS&T that do not work together – have a chance to tackle the questions together to find the solutions.
- What do we come out with from the Task Groups? Do we get a sense of the organization?
- Irina Vainstock suggested sending out questions before the meeting and have someone collect all the answers and put it together for the All Hands Meeting on 1/28/10.
- Implementor of MIT or strategizer and implementor rather than a planner?
- Hope to figure out where IS&T is. What is our role – more support or does MIT tell us what to do and we do it? Broad spectrum sense of where folks see themselves and IS&T. We can do some research around that.
- Submit ideas to Barbara Goguen by this Friday (1/8/2010) as to All Hands format and agenda
Software Release Update (Michael Gettes and Patrick McNeil) (Pat scribing)
- SWRT transitioned and decreased resources, but not the work
- all directorates have expressed pain points since the transition
- directors met with Pat and Michael to figure out next steps...
- group has been put together to scope the problem and define the work (1/19/10) and bring it back to the directors:
- Deb Bowser
- Patrick McNeal
- Garry Zacheiss
- Mark Silis
- Oliver Thomas
- Chris Gresham
- Michael Gettes (lead)
- basic questions they will answer:
- what is the current state of software release?
- where is software release going? (future state)
- some pain points identified thus far:
- deployment dependencies
- unclear product ownership
- we don't all do things the same way
- no agreement on what it means to fully support a product
- no agreement as to what we mean by "release" (when is a release project over? When the work is done or when it is fully supported?
- questions around the life cycle:
- how do we decide on new products?
- what about product road maps?
- how do make acquisition decisions? Funding decisions?
- what about sun setting products?
- please send your ideas to the CSS reps (Oliver, Deb, Chris)
Budget – Anne
· Anne (Thanks to Irina for scribing!)
- Anne distributed a CSS FY11 Proposed Budget Summary Sheet & CSS Budget & Funding Source FY06-F11 Sheet
...
- Anne reviewed reductions, risks, assumptions for CSS & IS&T
...
- The Finance Team is currently working on a budget letter for Friday (1/8/10)
...
- The group reviewed the details of both handouts
...
- IS&T was asked to reduce its budget by 6 million overall in 2 years – a lot has been done but not enough yet
...
- The Finance Team has been charged to look at the organization for common standards that can be implemented such as: food for meetings, travel, professional development (the IT Leadership Program will not be funded)
...
- CSS has reduced outside trainers, reduced print paper
...
- The budget needs to be entered in NIMBUS in the Spring
...
- The major expense remains people
...
- If you look at trends the GIB is decreasing and TNIS and Revenue are not increasing
...
- In CSS open positions have been closed and people have not been hired
- Q: How much further do we have to go for F11?
...
- It’s being looked at from IS&T perspective. We are more than ∏ way there.
...
- Q: Is there a 1 page view of IS&T not just CSS?
...
- Anne is working on it.
...
- Q: At some point can we have a better explanation of TNIS?
...
- Anne is working on that and is open to answer questions.
- Next Steps
...
- The group felt that these documents are not confidential but should also not be distributed widely without any explanation or discussion
...
- Trust that they will be used in the right context
...
- Project Management will be part of next month’s agenda