# The Turing Way - Core Staff delivery plan

## Bi-weekly meetings

:::info
**Sessions in June & July:**
- Thursday 08 June
- Thursday 28 June
- Thursday 13 July
- Thursday 27 July ()

**Join Zoom Meeting**
https://turing-uk.zoom.us/j/99448423769?pwd=NkkzZ3JjL2J3R3BJRmFHcVFtWm45dz09

**Meeting ID**: 994 4842 3769
**Passcode**: 429581
:::

**Who can join?**
This call is joined by *The Turing Way* Core Staff:

* Kirstie Whitaker
* Malvika Sharan
* Anne Lee Steele
* Alexandra Araujo Alvarez
* Arielle Bennett (subject to her availability)

Delivery plan will be developed in Github and our first session will determine the issues and board to be created.

_Reference of what we should have:
https://github.com/orgs/alan-turing-institute/projects/111/views/1_

## To Review Pre-Meeting

Previous references:
- Survey about status for governance
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfQoINlmgyaXVEvMRxtco9pocCe4ShpJzNxA_02UZPnHHP8hQ/viewform
- Response sheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/1/d/13nfoqibv3W5AZbZdE9ZljYk4znD7N2JL9igeRLiBHVw/edit?resourcekey&usp=forms_web_b#gid=297806593
- Etherpad from May community call: https://pad.sfconservancy.org/p/ttw-may2023-communitycall
* Pom 1 (05 June 2023): Kirstie, Bastian, Cami and Jessie - notes from this time?
- :zipper_mouth_face: State of governance document 1.0 (not for github)
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Z_r0G6dmtlw0icQ_ctkhLG_QxZDhuRZaSTSkGvAVK6w/edit
- :zipper_mouth_face: State of Governance Draft 2.0 (not for github): https://docs.google.com/document/d/18DvwnQ88Bwo_5QVHNdGBrKf2gQH1-1wqzTrDvGSQ874/edit#heading=h.us68mis3l1s5
- Decision making tasks (WIP): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1lDnbSU0_jYB-qVpOj7mMAynvvMERwxpFAeWbq7FoHaM/edit#gid=1084162211
- Community Audit: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MnvhHFQeiX6eL3IpqC1CaSiNu3tAIEDIUVaRldai5do/edit#gid=0
- Slide deck Governance - May 2023: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Nj5qjKUGAd8hAzTQ7f4_ab_wiSlWurIQduzp23Mj1Xg/edit#slide=id.g218db849916_0_115
- Next meeting: 29th of June

## Check-in

[ Anne ]

**What are your priorities and interests for this discussion?**
* [name=Alex] Understand our leadership styles and start the governance overview
* [name=Anne] Governance is definitely the priority from my end - and share some documents (all works in progress!) about how decision making has happened before. Really want to get a steer from folks here about what to prioritise, and talk should how shifts (if any!) need to be made;.
* [name=Arielle] tackle 1.0 priorities and especially look at governance and decision making processes in the project
* [name=Kirstie] This is my first project focused meeting for The Turing Way in a few years so I'm keen to understand ways of working and see how I can fit in without being too much of a bull in a china shop!
* Related though is to see how we can set up governance for The Turing Way to better facilitate participation for TPS team members without swamping or speaking over volunteer community members
* [name=Malvika] Clear responsibilities (likely RACI style) and decision-making process for different levels (basic framework that applies to WG + core).

## Agenda

We've decided to focus on the 1.0 sections and spend time to reprioritse the other sections. We will be joining the TPS meeting at 14:30.

:hourglass_flowing_sand: **Timing:**
---

[ Anne ]

| Duration | Activity |
| ---- | -------- |
| Start | 👋 Welcome |
| 05 mins | Check in |
| 20 mins | 1.1 Governance main challenges - Discussion |
| 20 mins | 1.2 Understanding our Decision making processes |
| 20 mins | 1.3 Proposing a Community-Lead Strategy for TTW|
| 10 mins | 2.0 Key Strategic Decision: 2.1 New Website
| 10 mins | 2.2 Independent Github
10 mins | 2.3 Reviewing previous core team tasks|
15 mins | 2.4 Reviewing Community Calls
10 mins | Wrap up - Review task list for next session. should the github be open?

### Format:
* Adheres to TTW Code of Conduct
* We will keep to time (Ale & Anne will keep us on track!)
* What we don't get done here, we'll move to the next meeting

## 1. Governance

### 1.1 Governance main Challenges

[ Alexandra ]

Based on the pre-meeting readings and conversations at Coworking meeting and Collaboration Cafe, there are 3 main challenges about our current Governance:

| Challenge 1 | Challenge 2 | Challenge 3 |
| -------- | -------- | -------- |
| **Frameworks** | **Strategy** | **Culture**
| - Guidelines for WG to make decisions (Decision trees) |- Long-term Structures | - Differences & clarity about paid and volunteers team members
| - Guidelines to onboard members and structure for growth (Mountain of Engagement) | - Short-term Structure | - TTW Funding approaches (paying non-Turing members)
| - Guidelines for engagement (Personas & Pathways) | - Separating strategic & operational responsibilities | - Who has the power to make decisions?

- Is there anything missing from these challenges?
- What is most important to prioritise?
- What is this interaction between the community & this framework?
- How much should this group develop vs how much this group empower/enable community to develop framework?
- "When to lead, when to step back"
- Difference between the Core staff and community members - fewer differences between volunteers and TPS members
- Who are the right people to lead the TTW?
- Design the project needs and then map who can lead them

#### Notes
- Clarification: Part of job description is to have a visible contribution as a part of your objectives for the year. 10% is noted in [Ways of Working document](https://github.com/alan-turing-institute/the-turing-way/blob/main/ways_of_working.md) as a means of making this explicit.
- MS: What do we mean by frameworks, guidelines, culture, & strategy?
- KW: Yes, because culture feeds back into strategy & frameworks.
- KW: What is the difference between us in the room, and leaders in the community (volunteers)? I want there to be fewer differences between volunteers & paid.
- 1) Being paid to work on TTW (full time staff)
- 2) TPS Staff (community members of TTW)
- KW: How can we have TTW be lead by people that are good for the framework of TTW?
- MS: Agreed. When we add them into the core team, we had the idea that these folks will lead the working groups. It goes back to framework/guidance.
- KW: Yes, and they don't have skills. In TPS, there are lots of people who haven't contributed to open source community.
- KW/MS: People don't have the skills, even though it was expected.
- KW/MS: We want processes to be defined in an imperfect situation, as there have been a lot of
- ALS: In these two categories (there's staff vs non-staff), but sub-categories in each side
- Types of contributors
- Paid Turing staff
- RAM
- CM
- PM
- Programme Leads?
- Other TPS members?
- Volunteer Leader
- Communication for onboarding Previously informal & 1:1, now needing to happen at scale
- MS: How can we focus on the different types of contributions? Pathway before role, or role before pathway?
- KW: Can we design what the roles & what the project needs, in order to have a sustainable community?

Framework vs expectation.
- Do we provide guidelines for expected responsibilities?
- ALS: Mapped feedback from core team: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1T7rx6Kvsj7OsXkFMjOGRgNlqobGTpMaJD8fL-OFMBVc/edit#gid=0

## Working group roles

- Chairs
- Deputy chairs
- Contributor pathway
- Chairs to prioritise goals and priority
- Role of Staff
- CM to be the direct POC for resource allocation
- CM and PM to provide resourcing
- What else?

Anne's comment:
- Doesn't see this as a community led, but community informed
- What does leadership looks like? Are we community-led organisation?

Malvika
- We cannot support priotities but we can define frameworks to empower the community
- Leadership is needed in every open source community

Kirstie:
- How is the funding allocated and how transparent we should be. Clarify the reasons how we can take decisions

Arielle:
- The community is asking for a governance document, they might not be happy writing it but would like to comment on it
- Funding-wise, TTW is funded by The Institute and therefore some guidelines should follow some of the Turing best practices.

### 1.2 Understanding our decision making processes currently

[ Anne ]

We currently *do* have structures, but there are a lot of shifts that need to be made in each of these.

1. Pathways and Personas
2. Mountain of Engagement
3. Decision Trees
4. Community Calls & Events

### 1.3 Proposing a Community-Lead Strategy for TTW

[ Alexandra ] - We might not be ready to go to this point at this session yet. --> dates might change

These dates

Proposal to create a Community-led consultation of main t. Raise these topics with the community via Collaborations Cafe and documented through Etherpad.

Next steps:
- Document template per topic
- Agree on the dates (the ones here are only a provocation)

| Day | Topic |
| ---- | -------- |
| 21 June 2023 | Mision, vision and scope|
| 5 July 2023 | Guiding principles and priorities |
| 19 July 2023| Operationalising Principles |
| 08 Sept 2023 * | New Governance Document Launch |

_*The Turing Way Core team meeting_

## 2.0 Other Key Strategic Decisions

### 2.1 New Turing Way Website

[ Alexandra ]

- Review design: [Alexandra will share the design](https://www.turing.ac.uk/research/research-projects/turing-way-new-design)
- Next steps, present the option available at core staff meeting, on the 08 June 2023
- Do we accept it?
- Should we hire a UX expert to design the content?
- [Superbloom](https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/15ZvSg4zn-BKHn4nl7v3W4ULXqp5p98mrvjE7Urb8G6Q/edit#slide=id.g21f48f54580_0_92): Very good feedback from Alden. "Their heuristic approach was very good, with specific take-aways to work on.
Budget reference: 32 hours of consultancy to support UI/UX design work on the scivision project. $150/hour, $4800
- Only the science writer, the same person working on the Practitioners Hub
- [Stuart Gillespie](https://www.linkedin.com/in/stuart-gillespie-oxford/), a freelancer science writer recommended by Comms could start asap.
- Will a new url be purchased or is it a Turing url?
- We could buy the one we like (vote on names?) and redirect it to our Turing Institute website

### 2.2 Github independent organisation

[ Alexandra ]
- Is it achievable?
- If it is -->
- what are the steps?
- when should we have it?

### 2.3 Reviewing previous core team tasks

[ Anne ]

- Switching to ReadTheDocs (from Netlify)
- **Status**: Stalled
- Organising the Github Repository - Github organisation vs new chapter
- **Status**: Stalled
- All-Contributors-Bot - updating for new translation roles
- **Status**: Ongoing
- Emerging interest groups:
- **Status**: Ongoing
- Research infrastructure roles: Not official
- Accessibility: transitioning into WG
- Ethical AI: Not official
- Environmental Sustainability: New partnership emerging with Environmental Data Science Book
- Membership to Core Team
- **Status**: Ongoing
- Account permissions
- **Status**: Ongoing
- Infra WG wanting Github team - not possible under ATI Organisation
- Translation & Localisation team wanting to use main org for translation - not possible under ATI Organisation

### 2.4 Reviewing Community Calls

[ Anne ]

#### Co-working sessions on Mondays
- Idea 1: No change. TTW staff and volunteers work on ad-hoc tasks for TTW
- Ongoing issues around attendance, etc.
- Idea 2: TTW Staff WG Coworking. Required for core team staff, and reserved
- Applicable if membership in WG is mandatory for TTW staff team
- Idea 3: Transitions into TPS Weekly stand-up, mandatory for TPS

#### Collaborations Cafe
- Proposed shift: Shift in how introductions and onboarding are done in the pomodoro
- **Feedback**: Verbal introductions are great (but too many people), not enough space & scope for onboarding during call, too many people to be effective
- >= 8 people
- No verbal introductions - just written check-ins.
- If you are new (first time at Collab Cafe), raise your hand. Sent to ongoing onboarding/welcome room.
- If you are invited by TTW member directly, go to their room.
- Rooms proposed by attendees
- < 8 people
- Verbal introductions are possible
- Same as above
- Proposed shift: Ongoing onboarding/welcome room
- **Feedback**: Newcomers would benefit from a separate room for onboarding, without being overwhelmed by the big group
- Proposed shift: Shift pomodoro format for calls, with uninforced & enforced breaks that allow people to join around each 1hr mark.
- **Feedback**: Too much time spent on introductions, enforced breaks interrupts working flow of meetings and groups, people join at hour-mark (Hour #1 or Hour #2), Need to encourage cultural shift of breaks,
- Proposed shift: Currently "community chats" take place as ad-hoc events, or in community collaboration cafes. These calls can be split from
- **Feedback**: It's great to have a discussion in the main room, but I have FOMO. It's too much going on in the call.

#### Proposed format
| Time | Activity |
| ---- | -------- |
| 10 mins | Introductions and Needs for Rooms |
| 20 mins | 🍅 1st Pomodoro session |
| 5 mins | ☕️ Break - **not enforced** |
| 20 mins | 🍅 2nd Pomodoro session |
| 10 mins | ☕️ Break - **enforced: 1hr mark** |
| 20 mins | 🍅 3rd Pomodoro session |
| 5 mins | ☕️ Break - **not enforced** |
| 20 mins | 🍅 4th Pomodoro session |
| 5 mins | 👋 Wrap up: celebrations, reflections and future directions |
| 5 mins | 👋 Close |

Other suggestion:
Should we consider moving the Core Team meetings (from Sept onwards) and Fireside Chats to Thursdays (as Malvika will no longer work on Fridays?)

:::info
**MAY NOT HAVE TIME FOR BELOW: MOVED TO NEXT MEETING **
:::

## 1.5 The Turing Way Communications

### 3.1 Communications channel
Activities/ Tools we have running:

- Twitter
purpose:
benefits:

- Newsletter (once a month)
purpose:
benefits:

- YouTube
purpose:
benefits:

- Mastodon
purpose:
benefits:

what is the most relevant communications tool TTW has? and why?

- should we consider other platforms?
- should this be raised with the core team?
- do we have the capacity to explore other options?

### 3.2 Fireside Chat

Fireside Chat Series 2023 are here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1C-VZvmFL4PnSBsv_G9ZD3dwjIYLno3NyL7oHvbplnWs/edit#gid=513475183

- June: [Sustainability chaired by Alejandro Coca](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_VaWq51PlsxMhkctkM7fJ8YvQI3qbs5Qgd21Rk7aoUQ/edit#heading=h.hmjj4rapmv7o)
- July
- August
- September

### 3.3 The Turing Way talks / conferences

By June 2023 we have participated in as many talks as all 2022. Add report

- Policy to cover expenses?
- Policy to encourage the participation of all team members - feeds into Challenge 2.

### 3.4 Nominations to apply or waiting for response

Add the list

## 4. The Turing Way Practitioners Hub

The Turing Way Practitioners Hub updates the information of the project here:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BSOhSDNbXENkn7zLFddzq-k4KmXu3Iv4oJxzq-gm3Dc/edit#

https://github.com/alan-turing-institute/TTW-Practitioners-Hub

## 5. Additional Project Tasks:

- Citation records, following a Slack discussion:
https://the-turing-way.netlify.app/index.html#citing-the-turing-way
https://github.com/alan-turing-institute/the-turing-way#citing-the-turing-way
https://theturingway.slack.com/archives/C014KE9A9LM/p1685808541180019x

- Release form: Very relevant for our Fireside Chats and record activities

- https://theturingway.slack.com/archives/C05AL40QZEZ/p1686033787130869So, I think I heard @Malvika Sharan say that our community norm was that the creator of the PR was allowed/encouraged to be the one that hits merge (after review/approval), but who has permission to do that?
I recall inviting the PR-er to merge in the past and them telling me that it looked like they didn't have permission...