Updates from 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?
  • 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 (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