Q to Chris: measuring progress on your goals

[martin f krafft]

Chris,

In your platform, you speak against "vague promises" and instead
propose concrete metrics of success or failure. I think that's
great.

The four areas you identified as your main foci, however, do seem
rather broad and general. What metrics have you identified that
would allow you to measure your success in making "a meaningful and
lasting impact" during your tenure?

Thanks,

[Chris Lamb]

Martin,

Post by martin f krafft
In your platform, you speak against "vague promises" and instead
propose concrete metrics of success or failure. I think that's
great.

You are right and correct to point out that my platform does not spell
out or identify specific markers for success.

I was hesitant to include them; whilst it might appear hypocritical to
suggest that such markers are useful and then not list any (!) I think
it would have have been (and remains) premature to try and formulate
them without doing more research and, moreover, consulting the project
at large, at least to some degree. The goals of the DPL should probably,
be somewhat aligned with the project!

(For example, it would be too early to define success/failure for "Debian
outreachy" given that the stakeholders/budget/etc. is unclear and there
are many people who yet to express their valuable thoughts on such a
programme.)


Regards,

[martin f krafft]

Post by Chris Lamb
(For example, it would be too early to define success/failure for "Debian
outreachy" given that the stakeholders/budget/etc. is unclear and there
are many people who yet to express their valuable thoughts on such a
programme.)

I guess it depends whether you are setting goals and then work to
achieve them, or you're assessing the means available and formulate
a achievable metric as a checkpoint. Both are valid. I personally
think the latter lends itself to underperformance, while the former
obviously is no good if the goals are unreachable.

Thanks for your response, anyway. I think it'd be great to have
specific metrics attached to goals, whilst assuming a stance that
doesn't frame failure to meet metrics as bad. IMHO it's always
better to declare failure and try again than to chug along turning
a blind eye to the fact that you'll never get there.

[Chris Lamb]

it'd be great to have specific metrics attached to goals, whilst
assuming a stance that doesn't frame failure to meet metrics as bad

This is an excellent point, although I must point out that in my
experience "embracing failure" is a very difficult mindset to truly live
by given how close tied it can be to one's ego and insecurities. :(


Regards,

[martin f krafft]

Post by Chris Lamb

it'd be great to have specific metrics attached to goals, whilst
assuming a stance that doesn't frame failure to meet metrics as bad

This is an excellent point, although I must point out that in my
experience "embracing failure" is a very difficult mindset to truly live
by given how close tied it can be to one's ego and insecurities. :(

In what ways do you think leadership could make a difference here?
--
.''`. martin f. krafft <***@d.o> @martinkrafft
: :' : proud Debian developer
`. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduck
`- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems

"they that can give up essential liberty
to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- benjamin franklin

[Chris Lamb]

Post by martin f krafft

in my experience "embracing failure" is a very difficult mindset to truly
live by given how closely tied it can be to one's ego and insecurities. :(

In what ways do you think leadership could make a difference here?

Whilst I was actually only speaking for myself (!), you ask a good
question. Any community can always benefit from trying new ideas or
solutions -- doing things in the way they have always done isn't
necessarily optimal and could just be boring.

A leader should also try and change the tone of the conversation when
it steers into "well, we've always done it this way..." to at least
solicit other ideas, even if they aren't attempted that time, or ever.

They can also subsequently ensure that — if it doesn't work for whatever
reason — then that doesn't result in the person being ostracised or
looked down upon by others. Lacking a fear of that, I am sure more-
spontaneous ideas will arise by themselves.

We should all be experimenting a lot more, perhaps at the expense of
throwaway solutions that don't have all the proper structure initially
in place. In my experience, insisting that experiments or demos be
"production-ready" from their initial release dampens enthusiasm far
more than intended...


Regards,