| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
I think Geoff makes an excellent point, one which I was discussing with a friend the other day when he was describing business meetings going back and forth between in-person and online. Familiarity is an enabler for effective on-line meetings. It builds empathy and understanding, which are vital to the consensus process. (or any agreement process). With small groups (<10), some personal ‘check-in’ or ‘chit-chat’ time often helps to build familiarity online, but that doesn’t scale well.
For the most part, to the new participant, online meetings are kind of like cold sales calls. I don’t think I’ve seen an effective model yet for building that familiarity with an extended sequence of online-only meetings. So either we’d have to invent one (which I think is a bit of social science outside our primary expertise) or we need to weave personal interaction into the future meeting discussion. For me, I think this means at least a couple face-to-face meetings per year, with participation/membership/voting rights heavily weighted to encourage attendance.
-george
From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List ***** <STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org> On Behalf Of Geoff Thompson
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2021 10:17 AM
To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [802SEC] Your Input needed by the IEEE 802 Future meeting ad hoc
Colleagues-
The one topic I don't see on the list here that is significantly different between the short term problem and long term meeting remotely is that in addressing the short term problem, we had a situation where we all knew each other. It is much easier to function in a remote meeting when it is between people who know each other.
When we went remote we had a lot of new folks attending because it was free and didn't require travel or huge blocks of time to do that. I don't think we got a lot of new contributors or even critics during the process.
If we wish to continue remote or mixed on a long term basis we need to figure out how new blood will be able to worm their way into our process.
Geoff
On Tuesday, November 30, 2021, 08:23:23 AM PST, Paul Nikolich <paul.nikolich@att.net> wrote:
Dear EC Members,
Please respond to Andrew's below request, as your observations are important input to the IEEE 802 Future Meeting ad hoc. If you don't have time to respond, please delegate it to an appropriate WG/TAG member.
Thank you and regards,
--Paul
------ Original Message ------
From: "Andrew Myles (amyles)" <00000b706269bb8b-dmarc-request@listserv.ieee.org>
Sent: 11/26/2021 12:30:06 AM
Subject: [802SEC] More on IEEE 802 Future meeting ad hoc
G’day all
It has been four weeks since the last remote-only meeting of the IEEE 802 Future meeting ad hoc. So far we have heard two perspectives on what has worked well and not so well in remote-only meetings over the last two years from:
- George Zimmerman: see ec-21-0237-00
- Ben Rolfe: see ec-21-0238-00 (I have included some of Ben’s notes below)
There has also been a small amount of e-mail discussion, questioning the efficacy of holding remote-only meetings for various TG and WGs in a short block
Would anyone else like to share their perspectives … before I start driving the group towards conclusions?
The request for perspectives is based on the following questions:
- What aspects of remote operation have worked during COVID?
- Highlight real examples
- Identify why remote operation was successful in these cases
- What aspects of remote operation have NOT worked during COVID?
- Highlight real examples
- Identify why remote operation was NOT successful in these cases
- What could be done to turn any failures into successes?
- Describe some real turnaround examples (if any)
- … or hypothesise about how this could be done
If we get a volunteer, I will suggest another remote-only call this year
Andrew
Ben Rolfe’s notes from the session he led on 27 Oct 2021
How can we make meetings more efficient?
· Streamline the meeting preamble: develop a concise and consistent way of presenting
o Right now various groups do it differently and it can take a significant time
o Most participants have seen it many times already
o Could ask people to review the slides before the meeting (maybe on calendar entry)
o Need SA input on how abbreviated we can get
· Reduce meeting density during sessions (ie number of meetings running in parallel)
o More flexible for remote meetings more than in-person or hybrid
o Less overlap can improve cross-WG participation
o Not practical for in-person meetings
o Some overlap unavoidable - a month long virtual session doesn’t work
o Overlapping some things is more OK than other things
Observations on in person vs remote:
· Initial impressions are important in building working relationship
· The importance may vary based on activity
· Remote makes this more difficult
· Seen this slowing things down in 2020-21
Observations on the “IETF Experience”
· Different “normal” than 802
· But similar impacts noted:
o Easier to continue progress on existing projects, mature projects
o New work slowed
Question about remote only (whether temporary or as an alternative long term):
· Need a process for improved socialization
· Could a virtual social be useful?
o Been tried in other forums
o Results mixed
o Comment that (technical conference) it didn’t’ work
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-SEC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-SEC&A=1
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-SEC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-SEC&A=1
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-SEC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-SEC&A=1
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-SEC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-SEC&A=1
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-SEC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-SEC&A=1