Participant Feedback
NMFS Feedback
THEMES from the feedback we've received:
Things We've Done Well |
Things We Could Have Done Better |
Things We Are Unclear About |
|---|---|---|
The Wiki has been very successful |
Had budget allowed for it, more face to face meetings would've been good |
We are unclear on whether the business plans provide the proper level of detail needed to give to a software developer. |
The ACTUAL FEEDBACK we've received:
Karen
1. How has the process helped you in understanding the procedural directive?
a. Larry was a great leader through this whole process
b. I use this team as a model for my other projects
c. The right people were present
d. We had a clear task with consistent progress.
e. The process helped boil the procedural directive into a cookbook
like recipe - easy to follow and step by step.
f. ThinkTank was great.
g. The wiki was very effective.
h. This has been a great experience.
2. Was the process helpful in developing useful tools to help you comply with
the procedural directive (the business plans)?
a. The business plans have been a life saver
b. I think it's an effective repeatable process for future projects
c. I think we can build this process into future projects.
3. Does the business plan template provide enough detail for you to be able
it to give to an engineer/architect to help build your solution?
a. I'm not sure - maybe need some more examples
4. What when well, and what could have gone better with the remote
facilitation?
a. WENT WELL
i. The Process
ii. The Face to Face Meeting at the Beginning
iii. ThinkTank
iv. The Wiki
1. I can find everything that I want.
2. It is great to work collaboratively
b. COULD HAVE GONE BETTER
i. More time face to face
5. What when well, and what could have gone better with using the wiki as a
collaborative working space?
a. WENT WELL
i. Everything was perfect for me
b. COULD HAVE GONE BETTER
Susan
1. How has the process helped you in understanding the procedural directive?
a. Having the group review and affirm the work I've done has been very
beneficial.
b. It has help crystallize the procedural directive for me.
2. Was the process helpful in developing useful tools to help you comply with
the procedural directive (the business plans)
a. Again, the affirmation of my business plan has been very helpful.
b. The leadership of the group has been very effective
3. Does the business plan template provide enough detail for you to be able
it to give to an engineer/architect to help build your solution?
a. Maybe - I'm not sure, but I don't think so.
4. What when well, and what could have gone better with the remote
facilitation?
a. WENT WELL
i. Very well organized
ii. Great Facilitation - Thanks Steve
iii. Larry was a great leader
iv. It is important now that we Capture Leaderships Attention to
help get the E-Sig through the approval process.
b. COULD HAVE GONE BETTER
i. Video Conferencing?
5. What when well, and what could have gone better with using the wiki as a
collaborative working space?
a. WENT WELL
i. Both the Wiki and ThinkTank were very good.
b. COULD HAVE GONE BETTER
Tom
1. How has the process helped you in understanding the procedural directive?
a. The process served a greater benefit for those designing programs
and pilots - as a legal person I see the procedural directive quite
clearly.
b. ThinkTank was very good in breaking down the steps.
c. Effective Steps
d. A repeatable process for future projects.
e. Very thorough
2. Was the process helpful in developing useful tools to help you comply with
the procedural directive (the business plans)?
a. The business plans are good, but could use more detail -
specifically around the risk assessment section
3. Does the business plan template provide enough detail for you to be able
it to give to an engineer/architect to help build your solution?
a. Maybe.
b. NOTE - I don't think that General Council needs to have this much
involvement in future projects, though it was very good to be
involved in this one.
4. What when well, and what could have gone better with the remote
facilitation?
a. WENT WELL
i. The wiki was awesome
ii. ThinkTank helped a lot.
iii. Participation was good, but could always be improved.
iv. Steve's experience was critical.
v. Larry was a great leader
b. COULD HAVE GONE BETTER
i. Video Conferencing
ii. More face to face time
5. What when well, and what could have gone better with using the wiki as a
collaborative working space?
a. WENT WELL
i. Both the Wiki and ThinkTank were very good.
b. COULD HAVE GONE BETTER
Bob
1. How has the process helped you in understanding the procedural directive?
a. Everyone involved has helped a lot.
b. The process has made clear the procedural directive in an easy to
follow process.
2. Was the process helpful in developing useful tools to help you comply with
the procedural directive (the business plans)?
a. The business plans are good, my main concern is around the signing
ceremony and that there is true attribution to the signer.
3. Does the business plan template provide enough detail for you to be able
it to give to an engineer/architect to help build your solution?
a. I don't think so, but I'm not the best person to comment on this.
4. What when well, and what could have gone better with the remote
facilitation?
a. WENT WELL
i. ThinkTank was very cool.
ii. Remote facilitation was great.
iii. The wiki was very convenient
b. COULD HAVE GONE BETTER
5. What when well, and what could have gone better with using the wiki as a
collaborative working space?
a. WENT WELL
i. Both the Wiki and ThinkTank were very good.
b. COULD HAVE GONE BETTER
Dayna
1. How has the process helped you in understanding the procedural directive?
a. It has helped dramatically.
b. I now understand the procedural directive.
c. The methodology of the sessions helped make the whole thing easily
digestible. It was a great process.
2. Was the process helpful in developing useful tools to help you comply with
the procedural directive (the business plans)?
a. The business plans are a great template. They are going to help me a
lot with my work.
b. I specifically appreciated the risk assessment work we've done.
c. The ThinkTank sessions were very helpful as well.
3. Does the business plan template provide enough detail for you to be able
it to give to an engineer/architect to help build your solution?
a. I think so, but I'm not the best person to talk to. A few people who
might know more are:
i. Joe Albert - VMS West Coast, 206-562-6135
ii. Colpo - Pacific States E-Logbook Development - 503-595-3100
4. What when well, and what could have gone better with the remote
facilitation?
a. WENT WELL
i. ThinkTank was great.
ii. The Wiki was critical to our success.
iii. We were very organized and stuck to our agendas.
iv. I was very impressed
b. COULD HAVE GONE BETTER
i. More time dedicated by the team members
ii. More that 1 hour sessions, 1 hour felt rushed.
iii. More face to face time would have been nice.
5. What when well, and what could have gone better with using the wiki as a
collaborative working space?
a. WENT WELL
i. Both the Wiki and ThinkTank were very good.
ii. A new experience for me.
iii. They were critical to the success of the group.
b. COULD HAVE GONE BETTER