Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

Micci Bogard, Greg Bronson, Greg Busby, RJ Davies, Jean Gustafson, Graham Hall, Stephanie Herrick (co-Facilitator), Butch Labrecque (co-Facilitator), Ned LaCelle, Benoit McNicoll, Greg Menzenski, Christine O'Brien, Ron Parks, Nathan Reimer, Andy Slusar, Casper Vanwyk

ADMINISTRIVIA:

...

  • IS Activity Code - 1853: Lessons Learned Working Group

...

...

...

  • LLWG Session 3 – TBA
Agenda:

...

  • Review Agenda

...

  • Purpose of the Meeting & Tie back to Session 1

...

  • "Report Back" presentations (15 min each) & Group Feedback (10 min each)

...

  • Closing
PURPOSE OF MEETING:

Share & discuss working groups' results (potential solutions to top LL problems) and present strategies for implementing the solution(s) to the group in order to create and improve LL practices & tools

...

Two new expectations were added to the list: *

  • Share LL's to take back to other PM's/projects

...

  • Move LL's from project to project in order to start each project "slightly higher"

We reviewed the Expectations expressed in Session 1 and identified themes between these and the newly expressed Expectations:  LearningLearning, Applying, Benefits, Common (repository), Best (practices), Capturing, Future (projects). *

  • Get the "Cornell view" on LLs

...

  • Learn from others, apply to other projects

...

  • "we talk about it", but how do we make sure that others benefit from it?

...

  • Learn common/"best" way to do LLs

...

  • Discover if LLs can be "generalized"

...

  • Put best practices in place & perhaps develop a common repository

...

  • We don't currently have a way to capture LLs (repeatable process)

...

  • How can we work LLs into best practices

...

  • Find out if there is a way for the PM to find "balance" conducting & participating in LLs as well as to apply LLs to future projects

...

  • Learn and hear others' experiences

...

  • Observe & learn how to conduct LL sessions

...

  • Can we combine LLs with something else to make it more valuable/practical?

...

  • Support problem ID & LL action items/next steps in order to benefit future PMs/projects

...

  • How to capture LLs, collaborate w/ the info & be more proactive with (acting on)

...

  • LLs

We also reviewed Session 1 evaluation feedback: some positive feedback – thank you! – and some suggestions for improvement (more time, more time for intro's, team building activity was unnecessary, needed coffee). 

We discussed how many of the Expectations expressed in Session 1 would be addressed (to some degree) in Session 2 and that we tried to work in folk's evaluation feedback from Session 1 into Session 2's agenda.  Evaluations will be handed out at each session.  Looking ahead to Session 3, we will make every effort to incorporate participant's feedback.

Report back & group feedback

Each team was asked to present their working group results with the larger group and allow time to collect feedback.  The report-back format was as follows:
1   1.       Introduce work group team members for the benefit of new LLWG participants
2   2.       Provide clear definition of problem(s) addressed by the work group
3   3.       Present the proposed solution(s)
4   4.       Suggest strategies for implementing the solution(s)
5   5.       Recommend next steps (action plan)

...

-          <ask each team to record theirs>

CLOSING/NEXT STEPS

...

  • We recapped progress to date and illustrated how the LLWG teams and deliverables are naturally interdependent:

...

  • Teams were asked to meet to incorporate feedback received from the larger group into their solutions

...

  • Steph & Butch will post meeting notes to Confluence, plan Session 3 (agenda TBA)

...

  • Post-meeting evaluation

...


SESSION 2 LESSON LEARNED: formally facilitated, non-projectized working groups are very powerful!