Windy's notes, Leadership Summit 12/20/13
Dec 22, 2013 2:17:46 GMT
Post by windy on Dec 22, 2013 2:17:46 GMT
Date: December 20 2013
All present:
AK
Abraxas
Dave
Fin
Jessica
Paul
Windy
Synopsis: A three hour long discussion of philosophy on leadership and project management.
0: Old business
No old business was pending.
1: Leadership & project management philosophy
Jessica presented a thorough and comprehensive process flowchart for her vision of role management and overall project leadership. Her presentation included four top-level oversight positions: funds lead, project lead, communication lead, and build lead, with various roles and responsibilities included within their domains.
It was noted that one of the merits of the project responsibility chart is the obvious similarity to a real world corporate (i.e., rational design with paid staff) engineering project.
At least four present agreed that it would be challenging to find volunteers to commit to roles in the work flowchart before the scope of work had been defined, and that it might be premature to try to fill these roles before more definite information about the CORE 2014 sculpture was in hand. There seemed to be consensus by the end of the discussion that it was okay to proceed without having filled some mission critical build roles until after a project proposal had been selected.
The four above agreed that responsibility should be defined in a way that focuses on the work, work scope, and work direction, in contrast with the role oriented model presented at the beginning of the meeting. It was not clear from the following back and forth between the group whether or not this philosophy was the group consensus.
There was some discussion with no general agreement about the scope of the ‘Art and Engineering’ team, focusing on where to draw the line between the responsibilities of the construction team and the art team. Jessica noted that she wanted to have a role responsible for checking that the rough work was finished properly and that the appropriate artistic details were finished before the effigy was shipped. It was also agreed by all present that it was a good idea to have a team (if staff constraints permit) to cover ‘hospitality’ to other participants working on construction by bringing them food and drinks.
It was noted that fire perimeter and safety were not included in the final document but were included in a previous draft.
Action item: None.
2. Communications and web presence
There was agreement that the group should make more full use of existing communication channels from previous year’s projects. Paul is hosting the current webpage and owns the domain and indicated that he would be happy to have someone update the project page so that it is current.
Dave noted that in 2013 the artistic scope of the project had already been determined before any e-mail had been sent to the existing 2012 list, and that many existing CORE participants felt deprived of the ability to collaborate on the project design because of this omission. It was agreed unanimously that all information be sent in an intelligent way to any lists that have been bypassed to prevent such a serious oversight from happening this year.
Windy agreed to handle mass communication and announcements outside of Facebook. Windy also agreed to write to JP to remind him about the proposal guidelines and deadlines for the Shake and Quake Funhouse presentation.
Abraxas voiced interest in acting as the group’s archivist and maintaining the group webpage.
It was agreed that more e-mails (possibly weekly) be sent to the group e-mail address to encourage participants to make use of the information on the forum.
Action item: Verify that the e-mail alias is current and sent information to all CORE participants (current, past) about the 2014 proposal process and deadlines. Windy to write JP, Abraxis and Windy to start turning the gears and updating the webpage.
3. Site selection
Jessica discussed a conversation with Jon Ray about using space at his new warehouse location. No definitive information on rent or utilities (electricity, water, etc) was given. Jessica mentioned that Jon Ray may be interested in a reduced rent rate in exchange for labor to beautify the space.
Action item: None.
4. Next meeting
No meeting time was set for another leadership summit.
Action item: None.
Leadership Summit
AK
Abraxas
Dave
Fin
Jessica
Paul
Windy
Synopsis: A three hour long discussion of philosophy on leadership and project management.
0: Old business
No old business was pending.
1: Leadership & project management philosophy
Jessica presented a thorough and comprehensive process flowchart for her vision of role management and overall project leadership. Her presentation included four top-level oversight positions: funds lead, project lead, communication lead, and build lead, with various roles and responsibilities included within their domains.
It was noted that one of the merits of the project responsibility chart is the obvious similarity to a real world corporate (i.e., rational design with paid staff) engineering project.
At least four present agreed that it would be challenging to find volunteers to commit to roles in the work flowchart before the scope of work had been defined, and that it might be premature to try to fill these roles before more definite information about the CORE 2014 sculpture was in hand. There seemed to be consensus by the end of the discussion that it was okay to proceed without having filled some mission critical build roles until after a project proposal had been selected.
The four above agreed that responsibility should be defined in a way that focuses on the work, work scope, and work direction, in contrast with the role oriented model presented at the beginning of the meeting. It was not clear from the following back and forth between the group whether or not this philosophy was the group consensus.
There was some discussion with no general agreement about the scope of the ‘Art and Engineering’ team, focusing on where to draw the line between the responsibilities of the construction team and the art team. Jessica noted that she wanted to have a role responsible for checking that the rough work was finished properly and that the appropriate artistic details were finished before the effigy was shipped. It was also agreed by all present that it was a good idea to have a team (if staff constraints permit) to cover ‘hospitality’ to other participants working on construction by bringing them food and drinks.
It was noted that fire perimeter and safety were not included in the final document but were included in a previous draft.
Action item: None.
2. Communications and web presence
There was agreement that the group should make more full use of existing communication channels from previous year’s projects. Paul is hosting the current webpage and owns the domain and indicated that he would be happy to have someone update the project page so that it is current.
Dave noted that in 2013 the artistic scope of the project had already been determined before any e-mail had been sent to the existing 2012 list, and that many existing CORE participants felt deprived of the ability to collaborate on the project design because of this omission. It was agreed unanimously that all information be sent in an intelligent way to any lists that have been bypassed to prevent such a serious oversight from happening this year.
Windy agreed to handle mass communication and announcements outside of Facebook. Windy also agreed to write to JP to remind him about the proposal guidelines and deadlines for the Shake and Quake Funhouse presentation.
Abraxas voiced interest in acting as the group’s archivist and maintaining the group webpage.
It was agreed that more e-mails (possibly weekly) be sent to the group e-mail address to encourage participants to make use of the information on the forum.
Action item: Verify that the e-mail alias is current and sent information to all CORE participants (current, past) about the 2014 proposal process and deadlines. Windy to write JP, Abraxis and Windy to start turning the gears and updating the webpage.
3. Site selection
Jessica discussed a conversation with Jon Ray about using space at his new warehouse location. No definitive information on rent or utilities (electricity, water, etc) was given. Jessica mentioned that Jon Ray may be interested in a reduced rent rate in exchange for labor to beautify the space.
Action item: None.
4. Next meeting
No meeting time was set for another leadership summit.
Action item: None.
