13:47:21 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #pwe
13:47:21 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/04/13-pwe-irc
13:47:23 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:47:24 <Zakim> Meeting: Positive Work Environment CG
13:47:39 <Ralph> agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pwe/2021Apr/0001.html
13:55:17 <tzviya> tzviya has joined #pwe
14:00:55 <Ralph> present: Tzviya, WendyReid, DanA, Léonie, Nishad, Liz, Ralph
14:01:02 <tink> present+ Léonie (tink)
14:01:02 <Ralph> present+ Jemma
14:01:16 <Ralph> chair: Tzviya
14:01:48 <tzviya> Agenda+ Discussion on job description for Ombudsman role [3]
14:01:48 <tzviya> Agenda+ Diversity Fund Update
14:01:48 <tzviya> Agenda+ PWE will be cancelled on 27 April for AC Meeting
14:01:48 <Ralph> Agenda+ Discussion on job description for Ombudsman role [3]
14:01:48 <Ralph> Agenda+ Diversity Fund Update
14:01:48 <Ralph> Agenda+ PWE will be cancelled on 27 April for AC Meeting
14:01:49 <tzviya> Agenda+ AOB
14:01:49 <Ralph> Agenda+ AOB
14:02:02 <Ralph> clear agenda
14:02:08 <Ralph> Agenda+ Discussion on job description for Ombudsman role [3]
14:02:08 <Ralph> Agenda+ Diversity Fund Update
14:02:08 <Ralph> Agenda+ PWE will be cancelled on 27 April for AC Meeting
14:02:09 <Ralph> Agenda+ AOB
14:02:11 <wendyreid> scribe+
14:02:23 <Ralph> present+ Judy
14:02:41 <dka_> dka_ has joined #pwe
14:03:01 <dka_> present+ Dan_Appelquist
14:03:06 <Nishad> Nishad has joined #PWE
14:03:13 <wseltzer> present+
14:03:14 <Ralph> -> https://www.w3.org/2021/03/30-pwe-minutes.html previous 30-March
14:03:48 <Ralph> zakim, next item
14:03:48 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Discussion on job description for Ombudsman role -- taken up [from 3]
14:03:56 <tzviya> https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/blob/main/DraftOmbudsJobDescription.md
14:04:02 <Ralph> -> https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/blob/main/DraftOmbudsJobDescription.md Ombuds Job Description W3C, draft
14:04:03 <wendyreid> tzviya: First topic is the job description for the ombudsperson role
14:04:12 <Jemma> Jemma has joined #pwe
14:04:12 <jeff> jeff has joined #pwe
14:04:20 <wendyreid> ... we haven't had this in the past, but other organizations have described this
14:04:24 <Jemma> present+
14:04:32 <Jemma> agenda?
14:04:33 <wendyreid> ... Shiela has helped to put this together
14:04:39 <jeff> present+
14:04:41 <wendyreid> ... wanted to open up discussion on this
14:04:45 <wendyreid> q?
14:04:53 <tzviya> ack sh
14:04:55 <jeff> q+
14:05:07 <Ralph> present+ Jeff
14:05:16 <Judy> Judy has joined #pwe
14:05:27 <tzviya> ack je
14:05:36 <Ralph> present+ Tess
14:05:48 <Ralph> -> https://github.com/w3c/PWETF/blob/main/DraftOmbudsJobDescription.md Ombuds Job Description W3C, draft
14:06:06 <Ralph> present+ Sheila
14:06:20 <wendyreid> Sheila: Happy to provide an overview
14:06:48 <wendyreid> ... people often don't report problems to any institution because they do not know how, or are concerned about the consequences
14:06:56 <wendyreid> ... the ombuds program offers a neutral third party
14:07:02 <wendyreid> ... we list here the main purposes
14:07:04 <wendyreid> ... peer support
14:07:09 <wendyreid> ... helping navigate options
14:07:16 <wendyreid> ... ombuds trained in the formal processes
14:07:27 <wendyreid> ... help an individual file complaints or just raising to leadership
14:07:31 <jeff> q+
14:07:37 <wendyreid> ... pattern recognition and sharing with leadership
14:08:00 <wendyreid> ... they would not be affiliated with leadership, they share only what they are permitted to
14:08:11 <wendyreid> ... it's not to replace a grievance process, but to supplement it
14:08:14 <tobie> present+ Tobie_Langel
14:08:19 <wendyreid> ... allow people to engage with the process and understand it
14:08:38 <wendyreid> ... this document outlines the requirements and what we'd be looking for in a candidate
14:08:45 <wendyreid> ... next steps would be how we choose someone
14:08:49 <tzviya> ack jeff
14:08:54 <Judy> present+
14:08:59 <Judy> q+
14:09:02 <sheila> sheila has joined #pwe
14:09:06 <wendyreid> jeff: To contrast this with the current ombuds program
14:09:13 <chaals> chaals has joined #pwe
14:09:17 <wendyreid> ... I think that today's ombuds, who also happen to be team
14:09:25 <chaals> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:09:25 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/04/13-pwe-minutes.html chaals
14:09:29 <wendyreid> ... do everything, or try to, that Sheila has laid out
14:09:51 <wendyreid> ... plus more, they also try to make the right things happen to fix situations
14:09:57 <wendyreid> ... if action is required
14:10:16 <dka_> q?
14:10:16 <wendyreid> ... like suspensions, changing groups, the ombuds can make those recommendations
14:10:25 <dka_> q+
14:10:34 <wendyreid> ... they have access to W3M (because many are)
14:10:52 <wendyreid> ... do we need to mention that in the job description, that they would work with W3M
14:10:53 <tzviya> q+ to discuss disciplinary action vs ombuds
14:11:03 <wendyreid> ... it's too much of a neutral sounding board with not enough action
14:11:08 <tzviya> ack Judy
14:11:27 <wendyreid> Judy: It's good to see this job description, from my perspective it's much closer to what I've seen in other orgs
14:11:37 <wendyreid> ... a few things I noticed
14:11:56 <wendyreid> ... I think an effective ombuds needs to be knowledgable about the processes of the org
14:12:09 <wendyreid> ... they'd need training in that and interacting with reporters
14:12:17 <wendyreid> ... would like to see more on that
14:12:31 <wendyreid> ... the function of being a sounding board is important, listening could be emphasized
14:12:49 <wendyreid> ... the very first sentence, impartial peer support seemed incongruous to me
14:13:12 <wendyreid> ... impartial yes, but maybe not peer support, I'd expect someone who is trained, a more elevated position
14:13:26 <lutgendorff> lutgendorff has joined #pwe
14:13:29 <wendyreid> ... a bit of a mismatch, but the rest is on target for what we should be moving towards
14:13:51 <tzviya> ack Ralph
14:13:51 <Zakim> Ralph, you wanted to maybe agree or maybe no and to not agree
14:13:54 <wendyreid> ... it has been structured like we have it, but that may not be in line with other orgs
14:14:03 <wendyreid> Ralph: Thanks Sheila and Tzviya, great start
14:14:08 <wendyreid> ... I agree with Judy
14:14:12 <wendyreid> ... and Jeff's concern
14:14:15 <jeff> q+ to further contrast W3C Ombuds historical with Ombuds best practice as seen elsewhere
14:14:22 <wendyreid> ... identifying the separate roles of a neutral advice giver
14:14:37 <wendyreid> ... separating that role from the grievance procedure
14:14:46 <wendyreid> ... I believe that is best practice, and we should be following it
14:14:57 <wendyreid> ... if we all agree that separating those roles is best practice
14:15:08 <sheila> q+
14:15:13 <wendyreid> ... we should also be starting the draft of what is the right grievance process
14:15:23 <wendyreid> ... it would be useful to have that in parallel
14:15:37 <wendyreid> ... our current model is far more on the grievance side than on the providing a forum for listening
14:15:40 <wendyreid> ... we need both
14:15:44 <Judy> s/reporters/complaint reporters/
14:15:47 <tzviya> ack dka_
14:16:00 <lutgendorff> q+
14:16:05 <wendyreid> dka_: I think the job description looks good
14:16:21 <wendyreid> ... I'm a bit concerned about the term ombudsperson
14:16:33 <wendyreid> ... I know there's prior art on this
14:16:35 <chaals> q+ to suggest a disagreement with Ralph (to my astonishment)
14:16:50 <wendyreid> ... nobody else in tech uses this term
14:17:04 <wendyreid> ... it may be a generational thing
14:17:05 <tobie> +1 to Dan's point. I was debating bringing this up too, for the same reasons.
14:17:19 <wendyreid> ... I think a lot of people who we interact with, won't be familiar with this term
14:17:43 <wendyreid> ... people understand a code of conduct, and enforcement for codes
14:17:50 <wendyreid> ... we need to think about how to make this more friendly
14:18:02 <wendyreid> ... we need to be thinking about making it more approachable as a system
14:18:15 <wendyreid> ... we don't want to discourage anyone from using the reporting procedures
14:18:15 <tobie> q+ to +1 Dan's point.
14:18:33 <wendyreid> ... especially people coming into this space fresh, like younger technologists
14:18:37 <chaals> [+1 to DKA - it is important to ensure that the reporting systems are friendly, and seen as accessible and supportive to the people who most need them]
14:18:53 <tzviya> ack tobie
14:18:53 <Zakim> tobie, you wanted to +1 Dan's point.
14:19:03 <wendyreid> tobie: I don't have a proposed term
14:19:10 <wendyreid> ... common terms like reporter/reportee
14:19:18 <wendyreid> ... strongly +1 to dka_
14:19:26 <wendyreid> tzviya: I've heard a lot of people trip on this
14:19:33 <tzviya> ack tzviya
14:19:33 <Zakim> tzviya, you wanted to discuss disciplinary action vs ombuds
14:19:34 <wendyreid> ... it's worth considering changing it
14:19:50 <wendyreid> ... I wanted to thank people for raising concerns about the difference between this and the current process
14:20:02 <wendyreid> ... one of the things we lack right now and need to work on
14:20:05 <Ralph> [ digging into the PWE CG archive: -> https://www.w3.org/2019/10/31-pwe-minutes.html#resolution02 "Keep 'Ombuds' name"]
14:20:09 <chaals> [-1 to something that says report because it aligns to "traditional hierarchical structure". But while I think ombuds is the correct technical english term, that doesn't mean people will recognise it or that it is a good choice in practice]
14:20:15 <wendyreid> ... a clear document for disciplinary action
14:20:21 <wendyreid> ... we have one, but it's not clear about triggers
14:20:29 <wendyreid> ... "if you violate" there are consequences
14:20:45 <Ralph> present+ Chaals
14:20:51 <wendyreid> ... Léonie pointed out we don't have clear if you do x then y happens
14:21:08 <tobie> q-
14:21:12 <wendyreid> ... we have ombuds to help people cope with situations, but we have a CoC but no clear consequences
14:21:41 <wendyreid> ... current process is that someone goes to an ombudsperson, and they have to figure out what to do, we have quidelines for extreme cases but nothing in the middle
14:21:42 <tzviya> ack jeff
14:21:42 <Zakim> jeff, you wanted to further contrast W3C Ombuds historical with Ombuds best practice as seen elsewhere
14:21:57 <wendyreid> jeff: Thanks to judy and Ralph clarifying the general use
14:22:08 <wendyreid> ... tzviya for clarifying that we need better procedures
14:22:17 <wendyreid> ... it gets to the concerns I had
14:22:31 <wendyreid> ... I wasn't saying that the new ombuds need to do all of the things the current ones do
14:22:42 <wendyreid> ... we'd replace the existing one, but the functions disappear
14:22:54 <wendyreid> ... if we introduce new procedures at the same time, my concern evaporates
14:22:55 <tzviya> ack she
14:23:13 <wendyreid> sheila: Thanks everyone, excited to incorporate the feedback
14:23:17 <wendyreid> ... especially around training
14:23:27 <wendyreid> ... I wanted to help clarify the why of the best practice
14:23:33 <wendyreid> ... I left it out in the intro
14:23:38 <wendyreid> ... the reason it's encouraged
14:23:47 <wendyreid> ... the fear of action is why some people don't raise concerns
14:23:56 <dka_> Just to clarify - i am not necessarily trying to argue to do away with "ombuds" as a formal role, but I do think we need be friendlier when we are communicating what this role is when it comes the enforcement procedures in the code of conduct, etc...
14:23:59 <wendyreid> ... for any number of reasons, it can deter people from reporting
14:24:16 <wendyreid> ... this gives them an avenue to share, and then get presented their options
14:24:24 <wendyreid> ... then choose their path
14:24:35 <wendyreid> ... with the exception of things that are legally required to be reported
14:24:48 <wendyreid> ... it can feel like a lot of complexity to have multiple channels for reporting
14:24:52 <wendyreid> ... I've found it to be beneficial
14:25:10 <wendyreid> ... when they have separate avenues depending on the level of comfort, the actions they want to take
14:25:25 <wendyreid> ... we can incorporate to the CoC process with elaborating on the paths that can be taken
14:25:34 <dka_> +1 to sheila's comment here - about separate avenues and options available to people and having more or less formal approaches.
14:25:36 <wendyreid> ... here are the consequences for doing these things
14:25:41 <jeff> +1 sheila
14:25:44 <wendyreid> +1
14:25:45 <tzviya> q?
14:25:49 <tzviya> ack lutgendorff
14:25:59 <wendyreid> lutgendorff: Couple of things, I agree with changing the name of the ombuds
14:26:07 <wendyreid> ... in the UK it has a very specific legal meaning
14:26:13 <wendyreid> ... dispute resolution
14:26:30 <Judy> q+
14:26:48 <wendyreid> ... regulators are beholden to their decisions, but it's confusing
14:27:04 <wendyreid> ... I agree with the separation of powers
14:27:11 <Ralph> [sounds like the US term "Arbitrator" -- a role that has some authority to enforce a solution]
14:27:25 <wendyreid> ... as a union rep, I was the only one for my department, I always had a large caseload
14:27:34 <wendyreid> ... multiplied by the number of people in the W3C
14:27:42 <wendyreid> ... it's very hard on the person
14:27:45 <wseltzer> q+
14:27:46 <Judy> q+ to clarify we have not been using the term ombudsman, rather ombuds or ombudsperson; and in some countries what Liz describes would fall more in the category of mediation
14:28:10 <wendyreid> ... there needs to be clear what the expectations are for the position
14:28:19 <wendyreid> ... training on how to manage their caseloads, mental health
14:28:29 <wendyreid> ... prevent burnotu
14:28:59 <wendyreid> ... going through formal resolutions can be difficult
14:29:32 <wendyreid> ... should we have an increased focus on mediation?
14:29:38 <wendyreid> ... especially early on the process
14:29:39 <wseltzer> q+ to ask about paid roles, making achievable promises
14:29:52 <jeff> [Today's ombuds certainly attempt mediation where possible.]
14:30:01 <wendyreid> ... how do we manage this?
14:30:11 <wendyreid> ... it can also be a drain on time/resources
14:30:26 <chaals> [+1 to everything Liz said, which seem to me a collection of really important points]
14:30:28 <wendyreid> ... it might be worth hiring someone for this
14:30:33 <sheila> +1 to the idea of compensation!
14:30:49 <tzviya> ack chaals
14:30:49 <Zakim> chaals, you wanted to suggest a disagreement with Ralph (to my astonishment)
14:31:04 <wendyreid> chaals: I certainly think we should document emotional drain
14:31:13 <wendyreid> ... having worked with people who have done similar work
14:31:19 <wendyreid> ... many companies have people who do this
14:31:27 <wendyreid> ... I wanted to disagree with Ralph
14:31:50 <wendyreid> ... on the idea of having someone you go to for advice, and one for action
14:31:53 <hober> present+
14:32:11 <wendyreid> ... having one person to go to who has the authority to start a grievance procedure
14:32:47 <wendyreid> ... without revealing details, that person has authority to go to W3C to ask them to consider this an issue, without revealing names/PII
14:33:01 <wendyreid> ... there's something happening that requires investigation
14:33:15 <wendyreid> ... or requires action from W3M
14:33:28 <wendyreid> ... the complainant has authority to pursue the action they want
14:33:53 <tzviya> q+ to suggest that an ombuds can always be the person who facilitates a formal grievance
14:33:56 <wendyreid> ... in most situations mediation is the first thing you want to try, but there's some cases where that's impossible
14:34:15 <Ralph> [I think Chaals' perspective is not completely inconsistent with the draft]
14:34:22 <wendyreid> ... I would prefer to see a situation where someone can go to one person they trust and not have to deal with multiple people
14:34:36 <wendyreid> ... especially when it's a sensitive situation
14:34:41 <lutgendorff> +1 the more actors involved, the more frustrating for people wanting resolution
14:35:23 <wendyreid> tzviya: I think we're in more agreement
14:35:42 <wendyreid> ... if someone goes to an ombudsperson, they can always be the gobetween
14:36:01 <tzviya> q?
14:36:28 <wendyreid> sheila: I think that's right, a lot of people prefer to have more than one person to go to
14:36:39 <wendyreid> ... especially when they have existing relationships
14:36:52 <wendyreid> ... the ombuds can help them through that process
14:36:58 <wendyreid> ... this is related to training as well
14:36:59 <tzviya> ack ju
14:36:59 <Zakim> Judy, you wanted to clarify we have not been using the term ombudsman, rather ombuds or ombudsperson; and in some countries what Liz describes would fall more in the category of
14:37:02 <Zakim> ... mediation
14:37:25 <tzviya> q-
14:37:30 <wendyreid> Judy: If we can get good training and resourcing, that is one of the most important things
14:37:48 <tobie> q+ to get clarification around the reporting process
14:37:50 <wendyreid> ... we've specifically have been using ombudsperson to avoid ombudsman
14:38:04 <chaals> [And also +1 to Judy's point that this is a hard job, and training is likely to be pretty important]
14:38:13 <wendyreid> ... the process you were describing, the broad category of alternative dispute resolution
14:38:18 <wendyreid> ... there's a spectrum of resources
14:38:50 <wendyreid> ... if W3C does separate these roles, sounding board vs procedural role, it would be good for us to do so, we need to ensure the mediation piece is resourced directly
14:39:15 <wendyreid> ... the reasons people often want to approach a neutral party relates to fear of retaliation
14:39:32 <wendyreid> ... the deterrent to reporting is most often retaliation
14:39:40 <wendyreid> ... +1 to Sheila
14:39:43 <lutgendorff> (Example Ombuds roles in the UK: https://www.pensions-ombudsman.org.uk/, https://www.ombudsman-services.org/ very on the dispute resolution side)
14:39:53 <tzviya> ack wseltzer
14:39:53 <Zakim> wseltzer, you wanted to ask about paid roles, making achievable promises
14:40:03 <wendyreid> wseltzer: lots of good material in this document
14:40:08 <wendyreid> ... from the team perspective
14:40:26 <wendyreid> ... given the amount of labour, emotional and real, should management consider this a paid position
14:40:47 <wendyreid> ... organizationally a key concern is how do we support the community by making achievable promises
14:41:00 <wendyreid> ... its important to have a place where people can report and be supported
14:41:07 <wendyreid> ... give them the means to stop misconduct
14:41:17 <wendyreid> ... and have a relatively short path to responsiveness
14:41:20 <tzviya> ack tob
14:41:20 <Zakim> tobie, you wanted to get clarification around the reporting process
14:41:34 <wendyreid> tobie: Thanks Sheila, the document you drafted is a great place to start from
14:41:41 <wendyreid> ... I have a few questions about the process
14:41:52 <wendyreid> ... I think there's a lot of confusion in the reporting process
14:41:59 <wendyreid> ... what happens if the reporter is staff?
14:42:00 <tink> q+
14:42:04 <wendyreid> ... that needs to be clarified
14:42:20 <wendyreid> ... what I'm seeing right now is a lot of confusion about where the parts connect
14:42:23 <jeff> q+ to clarify Tobie's question about staff raising issues
14:42:26 <wendyreid> ... this is an important part of the process
14:42:33 <wendyreid> tzviya: +1
14:42:37 <tzviya> ack tink
14:43:07 <wendyreid> tink: I had a question for Dan, when you said that in tech ombuds aren't a thing, are they not called that or do not exist?
14:43:40 <wendyreid> dka_: I'm saying that communities are socialized to CoC's and enforcement for those, but ombuds sounds very formalized and is not a term used by those communities
14:44:07 <wendyreid> ... we now have a modern CoC, it feels very wrenching to have a modern document then see a more archaic term like ombud
14:44:18 <tobie> q+ to answer Léonie
14:44:19 <wendyreid> tink: Is there a typical escalation pathway in the modern CoCs?
14:44:30 <wendyreid> dka_: Point of escalation, there's not a term I think
14:44:41 <sheila> great question tobie! where I've seen this done successfully, once the different processes (formal and informal) were defined, they were clearly communicated through avenues like the Code of Conduct etc.
14:44:50 <lutgendorff> I think describing a process, rather than a person may help
14:44:53 <wendyreid> ... I'm not trying to scrub ombuds out, when we're presenting it to people, we need to make sure they understand
14:44:59 <tzviya> ack je
14:44:59 <Zakim> jeff, you wanted to clarify Tobie's question about staff raising issues
14:45:01 <lutgendorff> So grievance or whatever process, rather than a perosn
14:45:24 <lutgendorff> +q
14:45:25 <wendyreid> jeff: On tobie's question, most people have interpreted the current program applies to staff, and the new program would too
14:45:27 <tzviya> ack to
14:45:27 <Zakim> tobie, you wanted to answer Léonie
14:45:42 <sheila> q+
14:45:49 <wendyreid> tobie: To answer tink, as Dan pointed out, it's usually a mailing list or points to a working group
14:46:00 <wendyreid> ... it's not put forward as a name, but a path to contacting
14:46:07 <chaals> [A piece of anecdata… from an Australian perspective, the common pattern where an industry has a lot of misbehaviour (banking, telecoms, …) an ombudsperson is appointed with specific responsibility for dealing with problems people face in that industry. That's relatively new, although there has been a generic ombudsperson for dealing with the government for a very long time]
14:46:12 <hober> q+
14:46:22 <wendyreid> tzviya: My experience is ombuds is academic, it's worth considering what we call this
14:46:23 <tzviya> ack lut
14:46:42 <wendyreid> lutgendorff: Thinking back to the name of the thing, maybe getting hung up on it is bad
14:46:48 <wendyreid> ... think of it more as a process
14:46:57 <wendyreid> ... especially if someone is well-known and gets more contacted
14:47:11 <wendyreid> ... if you're unhappy with someone, contact this email/group
14:47:18 <wendyreid> ... it's more manageable when it's distributed
14:47:28 <tobie> q+ to mention context matters too.
14:47:32 <wendyreid> ... don't have to worry about names just process
14:47:43 <tzviya> ack sheila
14:48:06 <wendyreid> sheila: I also love the idea of the name "advocate", Liz just covered what I was going to say about sequencing
14:48:10 <wendyreid> ... it's not covering the process
14:48:23 <wendyreid> ... where I've seen success is where they define the formal and informal process
14:48:33 <tobie> +1 to sheila's point.
14:48:33 <Judy> q+
14:48:39 <wendyreid> ... we're seeing the gaps in the formal process by looking at the informal one
14:48:59 <wendyreid> ... the framing of the process separate from people, so putting it in the CoC, trainings, intro materials
14:49:08 <tzviya> q+ to talk about documenting the process
14:49:10 <wendyreid> ... without context it can feel like a complicated process
14:49:16 <tzviya> ack ho
14:49:32 <wendyreid> hober: One of the things that is interesting about W3C is how people come from many backgrounds
14:50:10 <wendyreid> ... I agree with the sentiment that an approachable name (I like advocate), for those that come to W3C from more established orgs
14:50:19 <wendyreid> ... we need to explain the terminology
14:50:19 <sheila> I did exactly that when I joined the W3C! searched for "ombuds" in the processes
14:50:27 <wendyreid> ... "advocate" or ombudsperson
14:50:36 <Judy> +1 Tess' point
14:50:36 <wendyreid> ... people will search for what you know
14:50:49 <tzviya> ack Judy
14:51:13 <wendyreid> Judy: I think the question of making the term approachable is important
14:51:18 <wendyreid> ... +1 to Dan and Tess
14:51:35 <wendyreid> ... I'm always interested in the unintended consequences of naming things
14:51:51 <wendyreid> ... opposite reaction to advocate, will it completely reframe the process
14:51:59 <wendyreid> ... swinging people to expectations
14:52:01 <tobie> +1 to Judy's point
14:52:14 <tzviya> ack tobie
14:52:14 <Zakim> tobie, you wanted to mention context matters too.
14:52:24 <wendyreid> tobie: I wanted to add something to my earlier point, context matters
14:52:46 <wendyreid> ... reporting an incident at a conference is different from an incident on a mailing list or email
14:52:52 <wendyreid> tzviya: +!
14:52:54 <wendyreid> +1
14:52:56 <tzviya> ack tz
14:52:56 <Zakim> tzviya, you wanted to talk about documenting the process
14:53:10 <wendyreid> ... we've talked a lot about the job description, sounds like we have tweaks to make
14:53:17 <wendyreid> ... we're missing some of the steps
14:53:27 <wendyreid> ... I've been working on some of those procedures
14:53:34 <wendyreid> ... we don't have a workflow document for CEPC
14:53:41 <dka_> q?
14:53:43 <dka_> q+
14:53:47 <wendyreid> ... "I have a complaint" what next?
14:54:03 <wendyreid> ... I get contacted with this a lot
14:54:14 <wendyreid> ... we need to find a way to outline next steps for people
14:54:16 <tzviya> ack dka_
14:54:42 <lutgendorff> Design workshop!
14:54:46 <wendyreid> dka_: Is there some way we can without disclosing information, bring together who have done dispute resolutions
14:55:03 <wendyreid> ... hash out anonymized examples to bring clarity
14:55:04 <jeff> q+
14:55:05 <lutgendorff> +1 to Daniel
14:55:08 <wendyreid> ... we're talking about so many things
14:55:14 <wendyreid> ... confidential session to do this
14:55:21 <tzviya> ack jeff
14:55:28 <wendyreid> jeff: I think we can get close to that
14:55:36 <wendyreid> ... a lot of cases are hard to anonymize
14:55:47 <lutgendorff> +q
14:55:48 <wendyreid> ... it's possible to characterize issues that come up based on issues we know of
14:56:04 <wendyreid> ... hold a small unminuted meeting to discuss this
14:56:05 <tzviya> ack lutgendorff
14:56:20 <wendyreid> lutgendorff: Design workshop, when we try to solve a problem
14:56:28 <wendyreid> ... you want to get someone from the start of a journey to the end
14:56:36 <wendyreid> ... the paths that can take can be mapped out
14:56:43 <Judy> q+
14:56:59 <wendyreid> ... if there's people who are aware of the current process, put together with people interested
14:57:12 <wendyreid> ... we can work on it
14:57:13 <tzviya> ack ju
14:57:19 <wendyreid> Judy: I like the idea of a design workshop
14:57:48 <wendyreid> ... identifying the things that come up as stumbling points
14:57:56 <wendyreid> ... overuse/underuse of confidentiality
14:58:05 <wendyreid> ... there's a whole set of predictable issues
14:58:16 <wendyreid> tzviya: This is great, we can attempt to do this in a meeting slot
14:58:23 <wendyreid> ... chairs will plan this
14:58:36 <wendyreid> ... we'll go back to the job description and tweak it
14:58:46 <wendyreid> ... and other information on the ombuds program
14:58:58 <wendyreid> ... dka_ you might want to open an issue
14:59:18 <wendyreid> ... we will not be meeting on the 27th as it overlaps with the AC meeting
14:59:22 <wendyreid> ... next meeting is May 11
14:59:32 <wendyreid> ... long way off but lots of time to work on the ombuds program
15:02:41 <tzviya> rrsagent, make minutes
15:02:41 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/04/13-pwe-minutes.html tzviya
15:04:33 <Ralph> zakim, end meeting
15:04:33 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Tzviya, WendyReid, DanA, Léonie, Nishad, Liz, Ralph, (tink), Jemma, Judy, Dan_Appelquist, wseltzer, jeff, Tess, Sheila, Tobie_Langel,
15:04:36 <Zakim> ... Chaals, hober
15:04:36 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2
15:04:36 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/04/13-pwe-minutes.html Zakim
15:04:38 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, Ralph; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
15:04:43 <Zakim> Zakim has left #pwe
15:27:27 <Judy> Judy has joined #pwe