Search This Blog

Showing posts with label Confluence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Confluence. Show all posts

Tuesday, 16 February 2016

Draining the meeting bogs and how not to suffer from email overload (part 2)

This is the second in my series of blog posts about how we unknowingly often let our IT determine how we communicate, and what to do about it.

Teams need to communicate at three different speeds: Tomes, Task Tracking and Information Ping-pong. When we don't have the right IT support to for all three, things go wrong.

In this post, I'll talk about team communication by Tomes.

Tomes are documents that answer "Who are we? What do we do? How did we get here? Why are we doing this?"

These are often important things to say, but they aren't particularly urgent. They might or might not be read by people inside the team. Quite often they are read by people outside of the team, but often weeks or months after they were written.

Examples include:
  • Project decisions
  • Strategic plans
  • Frequently asked questions
  • Status reports for long, ongoing projects 
  • Minutes of meetings
  • Discussions about any of the above

These are often tedious to write, and the task is often given to the person with the most free time using whatever tools are at hand. Generally, this means either email or MS-Word documents. There are serious flaws with both of these. Writing emails just contributes to the email overload problem. Writing a Word document and putting into a fileshare (or on to Sharepoint) leads to more meetings because it won't get read. Emailing a Word document around (which is probably the most common approach) manages to be the worst of both worlds.

I've made an attempt at distilling the 5 requirements for a tool to support Tomes. If you can think of more, let me know.

NAME MENTIONING If someone is mentioned in a Tome they need to be notified automatically. This keeps everyone on the same page (virtually). A common miscommunication I've seen is where everyone was expecting a response or involvement from someone outside of the team -- but the individual was never aware that they were supposed to be doing anything. Automatic notification mitigates this.

TASK ASSIGNMENT AND DUE If a task is mentioned in a Tome, it should be easy to assign it to someone and to give it a due-by date. The task should automatically appear on that person's to-do list. Otherwise, it is too easy for the task to get lost.

LIVE TASK STATUS When someone marks off a task as completed from their to-do list, this should be reflected automatically in the Tome. If a task has a lifecycle (e.g. it has to be reviewed by another team before it can be marked off as "Done"), then the live status of the task should appear.

This saves time in meetings working out whether something has been done or not. One of the most frustrating meetings I can remember (and I've had a few) is was a pointless nothing-to-report meeting: everyone admitted in the meeting that they hadn't had time to do anything and that there was nothing to report. This could have been trivially seen by the project manager who convened the meeting if he had been able to see the lack of progress on the task list of the minutes of the previous meeting.

IN-PAGE COMMENTS Comments about the Tome should appear with the tome. It should be easy to discuss and have a conversation about any part of the Tome.

CHANGE TRACKING AND WATCHING It should be easy to change the Tome. If it is changed, then it should be easy to see what changed even though the Tome displays the latest version by default. It should be possible to register an interest in changes to the Tome and get notified when this happens.



These seem obvious, and seems like a reasonably complete list.

  • Email can do #1 (you can CC someone outside your team). If you are using Outlook you can drag the email into your todo list (and Gmail can do something roughly equivalent), so that satisfies #2. But #3 and #5 are impossible, and #4 by email is a recipe for giving everyone a full inbox that just gets dumped.
  • Word documents in a portal or fileshare do #1 very poorly; #2 is even worse. #3 is impossible, but does OK on #4 or #5.
  • Slightly more innovative companies will use Google Docs. The collaborators list can act as #1, and it does as well on #4 and #5 as a Word document does. #2 and #3 are sort-of possible if the tasks are put into a Google Sheets document instead, but it is rather fragile, complex to set up and means that there are multiple documents for the one event or topic.
  • Startups often use Confluence. It nails all 5 requirements very well.



So what usually happens?

In large, traditional organisations, I see teams with Word documents being emailed around by a project manager, a deluge of emails (CC'ed to everyone the project manager sent the project tracking document to) and then meetings at least once a week so that everyone can work out whether or not they were supposed to have done something, and why that probably wasn't a high priority anyway.

Smaller organisations manage better, although the ones that try to do this with Google Docs tend to be very chaotic, and have someone always complaining about how they really haven't got their procedures and processes sorted out yet.

We think this mess is normal, but it's just driven by the software we use to intermediate our communications.

The next post in the series will hopefully be next Tuesday.

I'm hoping to put this (and many other thoughts) together in a book (current working title: "Bimodal, Trimodal, Devops and Tossing it over the Fence: a better practices guide to supporting software") -- sign up for updates about the book here:  http://eepurl.com/bMYBC5

If you like this series -- and care about making organisations run better with better tools -- you'll probably find my automated estimator of effort and duration very interesting.


Greg Baker (
gregb@ifost.org.auis a consultant, author, developer and start-up advisor. His recent projects include a plug-in for Jira Service Desk which lets helpdesk staff tell their users how long a task will take and a wet-weather information system for school sports.

Tuesday, 9 February 2016

Draining the meeting bogs and how not to suffer from email overload (part 1)


Some meetings are important; sometimes face-to-face is the best way to work through an issue. And email is a necessary business tool. But in many of the organisations I work with, I've seen meetings and emails used as a crutch because their staff aren't given what they need in order to work more efficiently.

I blame IT for this, perhaps too harshly, but IT should be thinking both about how individuals communicate, and also about the requirements for teams to communicate.

In general, there are three broad ways that teams communicate:
  • With Tomes that answer "Who are we? What do we do? How did we get here? Why are we doing this?"
  • Using different ways to say "We're working on it"
  • By playing Information Ping-pong


To be efficient, it's important that staff from outside the team can "lurk" (watch what is going on) without engaging the team across all three methods.

If other staff can't lurk -- they will either email you or ask for a meeting.

What I see all too often is desperate staff, who are over-worked because they are forced to use email and meetings -- tools which are very ill-suited to all three speeds of communication.

I'll discuss each of them in follow-up blog posts; I'll schedule them for Tuesday each week unless something else more interesting crops up.

I'm hoping to put this together in a book (current working title: "Bimodal, Trimodal, Devops and Tossing it over the Fence: a better practices guide to supporting software") -- sign up for updates about the book here:  http://eepurl.com/bMYBC5

If you like this series -- and care about making organisations run better with better tools -- you'll probably find my automated estimator of effort and duration very interesting.


Greg Baker (gregb@ifost.org.auis a consultant, author, developer and start-up advisor. His recent projects include a plug-in for Jira Service Desk which lets helpdesk staff tell their users how long a task will take and a wet-weather information system for school sports.

Wednesday, 11 November 2015

An Atlassian story

A little while back I was talking with two Daves.
  • Dave #1 is the CIO of a college / micro-university
  • Dave #2 is on the board of a small airline. 
Because I tend to get involved in non-traditional projects, they often ask me what I'm working on, probably out of amusement more than anything else. At the time I was building a service catalog for Atlassian (and now I have an awesome plug-in on their marketplace).

Neither had any idea of who Atlassian is or what it does, which was no surprise to me. I don't quite understand why an Australian company with $200m+ in revenue and a market cap in the billions which isn't a miner, telco or bank isn't memorable.

Still, the tools Atlassian makes are mostly used by software developers, and my circle of friends and acquaintances doesn't include many coders so "Atlassian makes the software to help people make software" isn't a good way of describing what they do.

Other than a brief stint at Google, I haven't been a full-time employee or even long-term contractor in any normal company this century, so instead I talked about what's unusual and different at Atlassian based on all the other organisations I've worked with. I talked about how the very common assumptions about the technologies to co-ordinate a business are quite different here.

Type of communication Corporate default
(aka "what most companies do")
What is generally done at Atlassian
Individual-to-individual Email or talk over coffee. HipChat @ the individual in a room related to the topic
Individual-to-group Teleconference / webinar, for all matters big or small. A comment in the HipChat room. Or sometimes Google Hangouts and HipChat video conference if it's something long and important.
Reporting (project status, financials) Excel document or similar Confluence status page or JIRA board
Proposal Word document or Powerpoint presentation Confluence page
Feedback on proposals Private conversation with the person who proposed it, or maybe on another forum page somewhere else on their sharepoint portal. The discussion in the comments section of the confluence page.

And yeah, my secret superpower is to be able to narrate HTML tables in speakable form. There was a lot of "on the one hand... on the other hand at Atlassian..."

Note that the Atlassian column is all public and searchable (in line with being an open company), and the "default corporate column" is not. Also, in the Atlassian column, you opt-in to the information source; in the "traditional company" column, the sender of the information chooses who to share it with.

Why is this interesting? Because the Atlassian technologies and the Atlassian way of doing things is an immune system against office politics.

In order to get really nasty office politics, you really need an information asymmetry: managers need to be able to withhold information from other managers in order to get pet projects and favourite people promoted, and for others to be dragged down by releasing information at the worst possible moment when the other party can't prepare for it. (Experience and being middle-aged: you see far too much which you wish you hadn't.) When information is shared only with the people you choose to share it with, that's easy to do.

At Atlassian, it's not quite like that. Sure, there are still arguments and disagreements. Sometimes there is jostling for position and disagreements about direction and there are people and projects we want to see happen. And not every bad idea dies as quickly as it should. But because other interested parties can opt-in as required for their needs it's a very level playing field and ---

And that's where Dave #1 cut me off, shook my hand and said, "Wow. Thank you. That's exactly it. That's EXACTLY it."

Dave #2 just nodded sagely. "Yes," he said, and then again more slowly: "yes."

Summary: Atlassian sell office-politics treatments.

Greg Baker (gregb@ifost.org.auis a consultant, author, developer and start-up advisor. His recent projects include a plug-in for Jira Service Desk which lets helpdesk staff tell their users how long a task will take and a wet-weather information system for school sports.