Activity discussion - Neos Sprint 2016 - Nuremberg

The Neos Project Neos Team
1

Continuing the discussion from Activity discussion – Neos Sprint 2015 – Frankfurt:

Notes of the discussion about (in)activity during the sprint in Nuremberg. The proposal was prepared and afterwards discussed in the group of sprint participants.

Preface

We want to achieve flexibility, transparency and activity. It should therefore be straight forward to join a team and equally clear how one is removed from a team.

Although being removed from a team always has a personal feeling attached to it, we emphasize that this is not the intention. Rather we want to ensure that team members get a cozy feeling of activity in a team which requires - by definition - activity. Few things demoralize more than sitting in a team meeting by yourself week after week.

Active/Inactive Discussion

There are 2 aspects to activity which are of equal importance: meetings and contribution. One cannot substitute the other.

Activity

  • Meeting attendance
    • team meeting 15 min every week
      • actual meeting attendance
      • asynchronous attendance
      • 50% of attendance should be synchronous
      • rolling average of 2 meetings a month
    • absence of 4 weeks → inactive, at latest at this point the synchronizer will try to talk to the team member to find out where the reasons for the inactivity lie
    • 4 weeks inactive → removal from team is initiated (by team or synchronizer)
    • planned inactivity that has been communicated to the team beforehand can be longer than 4 weeks
  • Contribution
    • time spent on the project: 16h/month in a rolling 6 months average
    • code sprints count towards the contribution
    • there are many forms of contribution

becoming a team member

  • candidate team members should join a team for a trial period (length determined by the team) to verify mutual compatibility
  • a team decides to onboard a new member by consent (potential member has no vote)
  • teams should be balanced and synchronizers can recommend a team

results of inactivity

  • no voting right in team votings
  • no rights to discounts/free sprints/conferences

Removing team members

  • requires majority vote by team
  • reasons for getting removed

    • 4 weeks with status inactive

    • violation of code of conduct
  • results of a removal
    • remove access to vault and infrastructure

process of becoming inactive and being removed

  • team or member or synchronizer starts discussion about member activity
  • if member cannot/doesn’t want to give explanation or refuses to comment, then the synchronizer can set their status to inactive
  • if member stays inactive for >4 weeks team votes about removal

Maximum size of teams

  • 12 active team members (inactive members do not count to team size)

Activity implications for the Neos legal entity

Separate agreement with members

  • define in side letter, that current activity rules will be followed as determined by general meeting (if the rules are updated, the new rules automatically apply)
  • confidentiality about passwords and internal tools
  • accept our code of conduct

directors

  • directors do not automatically lose their status due to inactivity, but are asked to get active again
  • if a director loses their member status they also lose their director status

removing members

  • synchronizer of the team where the member is removed, informs directors about decision
  • a director informs the member and updates the company register

Decision and accrued inactivity

Decision: all in favor of new (in)activity rules, effective today

Already accrued inactivity until today is counted towards inactivity. Therefore the Synchronizers will initiated conversations with affected team members.

4 Likes