-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 193
New pattern: Cross-Team Retrospectives #691
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
Merged
Changes from 2 commits
Commits
Show all changes
14 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
c4d03a3
Create cross-team-retrospectives.md
MaineC d2085d0
Auto-fix for markdownlint issues
spier 0c2e2ad
Combine sentences that belong to the same bullet into a single line.
spier 796a987
Combine sentences that belong to the same bullet into a single line.
spier 708e65d
Update patterns/1-initial/cross-team-retrospectives.md
MaineC bf6a263
Update patterns/1-initial/cross-team-retrospectives.md
MaineC dc34b92
Update title, add effect on docs, add link to example checkin questions
MaineC 0975299
Combine sentences that belong to the same bullet into a single line.
spier b60d017
Add link to trusted commiters
spier 950ad56
Using relative links
spier c74e26b
Adding link to retrospective formats
spier 607698a
Different spelling of check-in
spier a58ee72
Merge branch 'main' into cross-team-retrospectives
spier af484b6
Add new pattern to overview
spier File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,75 @@ | ||
## Title | ||
|
||
Retrospectives for continuous improvement | ||
|
||
## Patlet | ||
|
||
A host team working with contributors outside of their own line of management constantly runs into misunderstandings. | ||
As a result collaboration becomes brittle and frustrating. | ||
Setting aside time for regular retrospectives for the InnerSource team consisting of trusted committers and contributors can help make communication smooth. | ||
|
||
## Problem | ||
|
||
For long running collaborations friction between host team and collaborators is substantially reducing focus and energy for everyone involved. | ||
Willingness to continue the collaboration is shrinking. | ||
|
||
## Context | ||
|
||
A host team of trusted committers has started a long running collaboration with a group of contributors. | ||
spier marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
|
||
* Over time the number of misunderstandings grows. | ||
* People may run into mis-communication. | ||
* Teams may discover slight differences in development culture. | ||
* Team members may discover that assumptions they made about the other team are false. | ||
MaineC marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
* Contribution processes may not be entirely clear and workable for everyone involved. | ||
|
||
## Forces | ||
|
||
* Participants are inclined to take "written over verbal" as "only written". | ||
* Trusted committers are all part of the same team. | ||
* There is a group of contributors all coming from the same team. | ||
* As a result trusted committers know each other well and understand constraints, prioritization side effects and team dynamics without ever sharing them with contributors. | ||
* Also contributors form a well knit group. | ||
* The contribution process is seen as transient and temporary. | ||
As a result little is invested in forming a shared team of trusted committers and contributors. | ||
* There is no clear path from contributor to becoming trusted committer - other than becoming a member of the host team. | ||
|
||
## Solution | ||
|
||
Bring host team and contributors together: | ||
|
||
* As a first step it can help to share a meal together and get to know each other. | ||
* For collaborations running over several weeks establish a monthly 30 minute retrospective meeting that involves everyone who is needed for a successful contribution. | ||
MaineC marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
* Make sure that action items for each restrospective are being followed up upon, ideally check these action items at the beginning of the next retrospective. | ||
* Keep the agenda of retrospectives stable and predictable: It's already uncomfortable enough to name and resolve collaboration issues. | ||
|
||
Example agenda: | ||
|
||
* 5 minute checkin so everyone can test their audio setup, silly questions preferred so people can laugh together, reducing overall stress. | ||
* 5 minute review for action items from last meeting (each item presented by its owner) | ||
* 10 minutes to gather strengths and weaknesses of the past collaboration time period. Do this as a combination of writing (sticky notes on a digital white board) and verbally explaining the stickies to make sure introverts get involved as well. | ||
* 2 minutes to put dots against weaknesses that should be addressed in the next cycle. | ||
Pick the top 1-2 weaknesses. | ||
spier marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
* 10 minutes to gather potential remedy actions to address the picked weaknesses. | ||
Again use time for writing sticky notes to involve everyone. | ||
spier marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
* 2 minutes to put dots against action items (each participant may add 2-3 dots), pick at most top 3 items, assign each item two owners - one trusted committers and one contributor. | ||
* 5 minutes for checkout so everyone can wind down and leave feedback on the meeting. | ||
|
||
Caveat: In particular for cases where people have tried to collaborate for a long time already, the initial meeting may need more than 30 minutes. | ||
|
||
## Resulting Context | ||
|
||
* Trusted committers understand how to improve communication and contribution processes. | ||
* Contributors understand how to support trusted committers in improving documentation and processes. | ||
* Likely both uncover issues that are beyond their direct control but also see ways to address these in the organisation adopting InnerSource. | ||
* Ideally several learnings can be shared with other InnerSource teams so they avoid running into the same trouble. | ||
* When done regularly after a handful of retrospectives collaboration improves, issues uncovered reduce, turning the session more and more into a lot of positive feedback. | ||
As a result motivation on both sides increases. | ||
spier marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
spier marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
|
||
## Known Instances | ||
|
||
* Europace AG | ||
|
||
## Status | ||
|
||
Initial |
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would include the cross-team bit here, as that is the key difference to a regular 1-team retro here.
Or maybe "Maintainer + Contributor Retrospectives" or similar.