A proposal for the F2F

Title: [xdi] Groups - Poseidon project file for UCD diagrams   (XDI_UCD_poseidon_project.zuml) uploaded

Hello all,

I'd imagine that like last year's F2F we'll need to be making a 
lot of decisions. I'd like to propose using a particular tool to help 
speed/capture those decisions. Not sure of the name, but I call it a decision 
wheel. Steve Cisler invented AFAIK. Below is a pasted description of the tool. 
To see a quick vote on whether to use it or not, I'd propose everyone respond to 
this message with a simple message body with a simple +1 (For), -1 (Against), or 
0 (Ambivalent). I'll tabulate the results, or Marc can for impartiality :) 
(Trust me, I'm not THAT tied to the tool).

My quick pattern for using this:

Name: Decision Wheel Consensus

Context: A F2F group with a whiteboard, or online group with 
blackboard capability, needs to make several decisions.

Forces:

..Decision time is limited

..Number of decisions can be discussed at once

..Shared vision must be captured

Solution:

..Pick a moderator

..Draw a center for the wheel

.. For every decision to be made, create a decision axis

     .. draw two spokes in opposite directions 
from the center, ideally in a different color for each decision

     .. Label the spokes with the quality that 
needs deciding (color, centralization, attributes Vs elements)

     .. Label one spoke with the value at one 
end of quality spectrum (all elements)

     .. Label opposing spoke the value at 
other end of spectrum (All attributes on single element)

.. For each member have them plot on the decision axis where their 
views are, and make a brief case for why

.. Once all members have gone, let any member that wishes change 
their plot points, and briefly state why

.. Repeat until for each axis a consensus has been reached by 
tightly grouping plot points, or until no member wishes to change their 
mind.

.. If no member wishes to change their mind, then the topic needs 
discussion, or tabling until further information can be added.

Result Context: For each decision axis a group plot point has been 
created and a decision made, or a range of plot points have been captured and 
the decision has been tabled until after further discussion/new information.

 

 

Tool description follows: 

Steve Cisler described the use of a spoked circle as a graphical 
decision aid

(see figure below). The circle represents the "space" of decisions 
that must be made, while the endpoints

of the spokes represent the two possible extremes of each 
decision. In his paper on "Community

Networks: Past and Present Thoughts." Cisler describes how the 
spoked-circle approach was used by the

Silicon Valley Public Access Link project. The upright spoke, for 
example, might be labeled "system

architecture" and the location of the small circle on the spoke 
near the "distributed" endpoint depicts the

decision to use a distributed architecture instead of a 
centralized one. A point on the middle of a spoke

would indicate an intermediate position between the views 
represented by the endpoints.

There are no stringent requirements as to how to use the tool. 
Simply identifying the spokes can be an

important first step, as the spokes clearly show which decisions 
are to be made. It may not be critical to

determine the exact location of the decision. In some cases, a 
group may decide to postpone a decision,

but it is a group decision, nevertheless, that ultimately must be 
made with others in the group. If a

difference of opinion hasn't been resolved — for 
example, whether an online resource should be free to

use or whether there should be fees — the organizers could say, 
"We're still trying to resolve this. Which

approach do you think is best?" The 
tool can also be used as a way to explain compromises or transitional

circumstances by showing the current point in relation to the 
direction along which the developers plan to

proceed. For example, when the system is launched it might be 
deemed necessary to charge users a small

fee, but ultimately the system would be expected to be free to 
use. It might also be necessary to begin

with text-only displays, but with a commitment to move to more 
advanced graphical displays later.