Working Group: Application Process Track

Reps
#21

Meeting Notes - 2016, February 23, 12:30 - 01:30 UTC

Attendees:

  • Arturo
  • Geraldo Barros
  • Lourdes Castillo
  • Richard Armuelles

Agenda and Notes:

  • Introduction - why are you interested in this working group?
    • I want to improve the Reps application process
    • Make it easier to understand for new applicants
    • Identify people with skills that could benefit the program.
  • Goals of this working group
    • Get Reps organized in groups related to their specialization/interests
    • Reps aligned with mentors on their field of expertize
    • Reps working directly with functional areas of their expertize
    • Grow specialized Reps for different areas
  • Have we missed any goals?
  • Have we missed important questions?
  • Let’s identify major milestones
    • Identify which are the major groups that can be created for Reps
      • ??? Resources Management
      • ??? Mentoring
      • ??? Learning
      • ??? Development
    • Elabore a plan to update Mentors and align them with the new groups
    • Investigate if a Mentor shuffle would be necessary to align mentors with reps of the same specialization group
      • Could improve the individual Rep development on their area of interest if his Mentor is knowledgeable in such area.
    • Design a new criteria based on a community curriculum
      • Vouching in bug should be improved
      • Reps should select their Specialization group at their application and Mentor should be assigned accordingly
    • Define responsibilities for each specialization group
      • Does each groups has a different kind of responsibility? one more than another?
  • Let’s define a timeline for the major milestones
    • TBD
  • Immediate next steps
    • [end of this week, Arturo] Organize a meeting in a more flexible timezone to increase participation 18:00 - 19:00 UTC
#22

regarding yesterday’s meeting, I have a question, if a model is chosen where each reps are involved in a specific area or areas, that involves the mentor in charge must know this area in order to properly orient. But there is a downside, as there is currently a ratio of 10 reps for each mentor (I guess this may vary) this under the current model of the program. With a change to this new model, there may be cases where there are no mentors for certain tasks in similar time zones, I think it is unsustainable to maintain the process of mentoring for example between reps of America with mentors from Europe and other continents and vice versa.

I feel to perform something like this should be done from the inside out, involving first the current mentors and encouraging experienced reps to mentoring (possibly with a program leading to the reps to prepare for briefly) and then those who have little time within the project as well as new applicants.

#23

Isn’t this out of the scope of this group? There is a Working group just about mentoring.

#24

As it says, it’s an investigation, no action is defined, it’s to see if Mentors from an specialized group should mentor Reps from the very same specialization group.

For example a mentor with great experience in the L10n field should mentor Reps interested into joining a similar specialization group.

As Mentors are assigned during the application process to interview the applicant, it isn’t totally out of the scope and in fact it may need to have a cooperation between the Mentoring WG and Application WG.

Also everyone who is reading our meeting notes its welcome to give feedback! Even if you couldn’t attend to the meeting your input its appreciated.:smile:

1 Like
#25

Resources track won’t need mentors :wink:

#26

Also note that my understanding is that first you join the Reps program and then a specialization.

This way the process to join Reps should be flexible enough to welcome any core/trusted mozillian and then he can join a specialization or stay in functional.

For example Resources track will have an additional application process to join.

1 Like
#27

@nukeador it’s a great idea!

#28

Agreed; but we need to recognise that people applying to be a Rep may well not be a ‘clean sheet’ but could be already committed to contributing in one or more areas.

#29

Hello Guys,
Here is our new doodle poll : http://doodle.com/poll/z7y9swarcc5quxdt
Kindly fill this so that we can schedule our next meeting. Lets take the next step to make this process simpler for everyone!
I you have any doubt feel free to ping me!
@mkohler @setiawan @anivar @shahidfarooqui @rtsayles @geraldobarros @Spike1 @thephoenixbird

#30

Coming late to this discussion, but beign in the mentorship Working Group, I’m interested on this. until now, I agree we assign mentors at application process time, but maybe is time to change this. Maybe there could be people working in the application process and after someone is accepted, we assign a mentor regarding her track selection.

What do you think?

#31

Interesting idea, Guillermo. I’m pretty sure we have mentors that have more skills in one or another specialization. I think that could work out pretty well.

In any case, this would need to be coordinated with the mentoring working group :slight_smile:

#32

Yes, I’m on that group, so part of what I’m thinking right now is the best starting point for a mentorship relation. PArt odf that discussion is what is the focus of the mentorship relation, functional area or personal development? More on that in the other working group soon :slightly_smiling:

#33

Hi All,
Thanks for your inputs! We have scheduled a meeting this Saturday at 3.30 PM UTC. It will be great if you all can join. Will use the same Remo vidyo group.

Will send an email and discourse reminder. See you tomorrow!

#34

hey Umesh, has the meeting happened? If yes are there any meeting notes that can be public?

#35

Here is the last meeting notes:
Meeting Notes - 2016, March 12 , 03:30 - 04:30 UTC

Attendees:
Umesh
Sumanth
Guillermo

DIscussion:
Check for the most active mentors!
Group of people to make a team for application process.
Should we say no to someone in the process.
Functional team task to be assigned to move his application process.
Function team vouch after task completion and review .

Investigate if a Mentor shuffle would be necessary to align mentors with :
Mentors activity commitment.
We would change the already existing relationship if we do a shuffle.
It should be independent so that we have more focus on personal development.

Reps Form:
An automatic email about the Reps maybe.
He should already know before applying for Reps maybe through wiki.
We can add a question in form “Have you read the Reps Wiki ?”
Recommendation from not only Reps but also from functional areas should be encouraged.
Limitation area/region wise.
Local community can decide the limit of reps area/region wise.

1 Like
#36

Hi Guys,

We are preparing a draft of the application process. Will put that by tomorrow for your review. Hoping to get some inputs :slight_smile:

1 Like
#37

this is awesome Umesh,
question: is there a future meeting planned or are you still working on the draft ?

1 Like
#38

For reference this is the document.

1 Like
#39

Hello Reps,

Council will work this weekend to finalize this draft, please submit your feedback on the document (or here) so we can process it :slightly_smiling:

#40

Added comments to the document.

I suggest that we also have something like a review/check process to all Mozilla Reps every 6 or 12 months.