06:03:38 RRSAgent has joined #chairs 06:03:38 logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/11/13-chairs-irc 06:03:45 RRSAgent, make logs public 06:03:50 scribeNick: nigel 06:03:59 chair: Charles 06:04:06 wilhelm has joined #chairs 06:04:24 chaals has joined #chairs 06:04:42 koalie has joined #chairs 06:04:43 wseltzer has joined #chairs 06:05:12 s/Charles/chaals 06:05:55 agenda+ Having an agenda 06:07:00 agenda+ What do people find difficult? 06:07:03 koalie has changed the topic to: breakout: being a better Chair 06:07:07 RRSagent, make minutes 06:07:07 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/11/13-chairs-minutes.html koalie 06:07:24 RRSAgent, make logs public 06:08:04 agenda+ getting broad participation 06:08:07 Meeting: breakout: being a better Chair 06:08:48 topic: getting people to contribute 06:09:25 chaals: can be easy to get people to talk, less so to contribute materially 06:10:01 chaals goes through Chairs breakfast notes going through issues identified 06:10:09 ... Knowing how tools work. 06:10:23 ... Important for chairs, hard to find out. 06:10:41 present: WendySeltzer, NigelMegitt, DavidBaron, WilhemJoyAnderson, MounirLamouri, CoralieMercier, DanAppelquist, MarkSadecki 06:10:55 present+ CharlesMcCathieNevile 06:11:39 Introductions 06:13:26 scribenick: koalie 06:13:38 chaals: tips so far: 06:13:43 ... have an agenda 06:13:50 ... delegate tasks 06:15:29 virginie has joined #chairs 06:15:37 dbaron_ has joined #chairs 06:15:55 scribenick: nigel 06:16:16 dka has joined #chairs 06:16:23 Hey. 06:16:40 agenda? 06:16:54 Zakim has joined #chairs 06:17:07 zakim, agenda? 06:17:07 I see nothing on the agenda 06:17:12 agenda+ Names 06:17:16 agenda+ Tools 06:17:23 agenda+ Contributions 06:17:27 agenda+ Clashes 06:17:52 agenda? 06:17:57 agenda+ Having an agenda 06:17:57 agenda+ What do people find difficult? 06:17:57 agenda+ getting broad participation 06:18:17 dka: Trolls. I dealt with one by just ignoring him 06:18:34 ... but others felt they needed to pay attention. 06:18:37 dka: there may have been actual technical issues 06:18:51 dka: but the nonsense made it difficult to access them 06:19:31 chaals: it would be wrong to pass up on the sound technical points due to the trolling 06:19:41 i|dka: Trolls|Topic: Handling human clashes| 06:19:44 Zakim, drop item 4 06:19:44 agendum 4, Clashes, dropped 06:19:58 dbaron: W3C being too lenient here. 06:20:19 chaals: I've used a 'banning' technique, for a fixed period. When the person returned they were more pleasant to deal with 06:20:32 ... It's important to set the tone for acceptable behaviour, as a chair. 06:20:56 dbaron: the person being rude drives others away too. 06:21:16 mounir: trolls via emails are easier to handle than face to face clashes. 06:23:22 nigel: the way I've tackled that is to use the pause when everyone wants to avoid the 'fight' to step in and pull out the technical issue 06:23:51 ... if it comes down to an objection/proposal then they have nowhere to go, unless there's a genuine issue. 06:24:03 chaals: Chairs should always be polite, in all circumstances. 06:24:39 ... They set the behavioural expectations - this won't work if they can't do it themselves. 06:25:13 chaals: A good technique in general is to keep agenda items short. If people waste a long time over a proxy technical argument, then the time limit can stop it. 06:26:01 wilhelm: In 'high drama' scenarios, strict speaking queue and time rules help. Can rearrange speaker queues to keep things fair, actively. 06:26:23 wilhelm: Strong chairing can be useful for dealing with that, though I've not seen that in W3C. 06:26:47 chaals: Summarises: focus on issues and process (fair conduct of meetings etc) 06:27:18 dbaron_ has joined #chairs 06:27:36 wilhelm: At W3C TPAC 2013 there was a strong disagreement - I moved the focus on concrete actions, which helped make the decision. 06:27:40 MarkS has joined #chairs 06:28:08 nigel: did the party whose view did not win out feel outmaneouvred? 06:28:20 wilhelm: both parties were equally unhappy, and could understand the reason for the decision. 06:28:54 chaals: SOmetimes losing people can be an improvement but generally it's not a good thing. Comes from frustration usually. 06:29:36 chaals: Timeboxing discussions and stating 'we will return to this later'. If you allow an objection to be fought out immediately someone will 'die'. 06:29:53 ... Waiting for a bit, allowing calming time, allows for a happier resolution often (not always!) 06:30:16 chaals: Getting people 'shipping' product is a 'feature'. 06:31:10 chaals: some people work against the draft, others work according to a timed contract etc. 06:31:27 ... W3C insists on publishing documents, otherwise it has no point. 06:32:10 wseltzer: what if some working group participants have the goal of preventing completion? 06:33:47 chaals: it's a known problem in standards orgs. The question is what can you do about it? 06:34:37 ... Can figure out how to balance the 'don't abuse the process' against 'looking at the possibility of forcing people to stop delaying' 06:35:34 present+ YosukeFunahashi 06:36:13 chaals: need to figure out what the reason is. One option is to change direction, puts the onus on the objector to put up or shut up. 06:36:23 ... If they don't have an alternative they have nowhere to go. 06:36:26 q? 06:36:45 wilhelm: But it might be that the group is doing stuff that shouldn't be done. 06:37:01 chaals: It's unusual for chairs to take on work that they disagree with - can resign! 06:37:31 dka: Can also reformulate what the output is, e.g. change the charter, break up the WG, move the activity to other WGs etc 06:37:44 agenda? 06:38:17 chaals: zakim, drop item 1 06:38:27 zakim, drop item 1 06:38:27 agendum 1, Names, dropped 06:38:52 chaals: If W3C could do something, what would we ask them for? 06:39:22 wilhelm: resource limits create difficulties. Not sure what could be done to help. 06:39:40 ... I and editor have day jobs that need to be done. 06:40:18 chaals: Part of that is getting people to contribute. E.g. asking for scribes - some people are good at it but don't want to, others are happy to do it but not good at it! 06:41:02 chaals: it's tricky if you don't have time to maintain quality in a time-pressured environment. 06:41:36 chaals: can focus on key features first, others later. 06:41:53 chaals: who has co-chairs? They're useful. (lots of people raise hands) 06:42:23 mounir: if the two co-chairs want to go in different directions that can be difficult. 06:42:34 dka: it's also about communication style, and relationships. 06:42:52 dka: I've been in a situation where the chairs aren't friends 06:44:08 dka: splitting work up and creating task force leaders can be helpful for diminishing conflict. 06:44:37 dka: having an agreed work split really helps, e.g. alternating calls. 06:45:04 nigel: what about issue/functionality-based work splits? 06:45:27 dka: we did that too in another group. It went okay for a while. 06:46:02 ... Priorities need to stay aligned too. E.g. perfectionism vs delivery. 06:46:45 chaals: Would ask W3C to give us staff contacts who are reasonable. Chairs should be happy to complain about staff contract to their manager. 06:47:06 koalie: How would you know if a staff contact isn't performing? 06:47:46 chaals: if it doesn't work then it doesn't work. If it turns out the chair's expectations are too high the manager will bounce it. 06:48:02 ... but if the staff contact doesn't do anything, argues in meetings etc. then that isn't right. 06:49:03 nigel: can discuss strengths and weaknesses of staff contacts with them. 06:49:37 dka: in some groups the staff contacts effectively chair. In others they play a more muted role. 06:50:38 dka: I was surprised at the level of difference in involvement. There's no right or wrong though. It's really helpful if they can play a strategic planning role in the group. 06:50:49 -> https://www.w3.org/Guide/staff-contact.html Guidebook: staff contact role 06:51:03 chaals: It's important to have a functioning working relationship with the staff contact. 06:51:33 ... I was taken off as a staff contact when I didn't get on well with the chair - we were both surprised. But it does happen. 06:52:04 ... Negotiating the relationship and expectations is about what you need. If your staff contact is going to disappear for 2 months that's not very good. 06:52:42 Topic: tools and documentation for tools 06:53:16 chaals: "Dinner" 06:53:27 zakim, agenda? 06:53:27 I see 5 items remaining on the agenda: 06:53:28 2. Tools [from nigel] 06:53:28 3. Contributions [from nigel] 06:53:28 5. Having an agenda [from koalie] 06:53:28 6. What do people find difficult? [from koalie] 06:53:28 7. getting broad participation [from koalie] 06:54:11 chaals: I think W3C should buy us dinner. (everyone seems to be in favour) 06:54:25 wilhelm: Knowing each other is really helpful. 06:54:50 [Jeff Jaffe enters] 06:55:23 chaals: During a 'time out' if you can get the antagonists to sit down together that often helps them get to a resolution. 06:55:49 nigel: You can action them to return with a joint proposal. 06:56:02 Topic: Conclusions 06:56:22 mounir: What about chairing and contributing at the same time? 06:56:28 chaals: "Hats" 06:56:44 dka: Have to be explicit about which role you're taking at any moment. 06:57:22 chaals: As a co-chair it's tempting to summarise and lead, and take up too much time giving an opinion rather than allowing contributors to engage. 06:57:41 chaals: So can hand over to the co-chair to allow you to contribute. 06:57:52 ... Don't give yourself special treatment. 06:57:58 ... It's an important issue. 06:58:30 dka: If you have a straw poll it's fair not to vote on an issue as a symbolic gesture of neutrality if you have a strong view. 06:58:43 chaals: I don't find that productive. The chair's contribution is also valuable. 06:59:12 chaals: The other thing that's frustrating is keeping staff contacts out of the discussion, as they're very competent. 06:59:20 dka: A gavel is very useful. 06:59:30 chaals: Summarising. 07:00:18 ... Things that are important: agenda, time management, good manners (setting an example), focus on technical issues, chair treating themselves as a contributor equal to other contributors. 07:00:44 ... Getting a constructive relationship with staff contacts and co-chairs, and continually revise as needed. 07:01:00 ... Appropriate use of dinner/time in the bar/non-meeting focused conversations. 07:02:11 ... Dealing with stallers and delivering. Consider if staller has a good point. Use versioning as a way of getting stuff published. We have a goal to publish. 07:02:37 nigel: Can modularise too, as a tool to get things into a publishable state in the required timeframe. 07:02:49 chaals: Documentation about tools would be good, and how people use them. 07:04:01 chaals: This hasn't covered everything - we'll need to do this again next year. 07:04:33 dka: At the chair's breakfast we talked about more forums between chairs. Tools to do that could be used. 07:04:58 chaals: I wouldn't do that - the problem isn't the tools. Conversations do help though. 07:05:10 chaals: There is a chairs mailing list that isn't used. 07:05:16 dka: It's not appropriate - too big. 07:05:27 wseltzer: what about visits from other chairs or team contacts? 07:05:52 RRSagent, make minutes 07:05:52 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/11/13-chairs-minutes.html koalie 07:05:55 chaals: I do watch chairs in other groups. And others come to my meetings and watch. This is rational behaviour! 07:06:12 mounir_ has left #chairs 07:06:29 nigel has left #chairs 07:06:52 RRSagent, make minutes 07:06:52 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/11/13-chairs-minutes.html koalie 07:07:43 Chan_ has joined #chairs 07:08:12 RRSAgent, bye 07:08:12 I see no action items