community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sharon Gardner" <>
Subject FW: Teams and Leads - where leadership lives (sermonette warning)
Date Mon, 20 Jun 2011 16:56:10 GMT

Apologies, please ignore last email, inadvertently replied to wrong message.


-----Original Message-----
From: Sharon Gardner [] 
Sent: 20 June 2011 17:45
Subject: RE: Teams and Leads - where leadership lives (sermonette warning)

Hi Ross,

Great, thanks, will submit another PAC just before Berlin (next week).


-----Original Message-----
From: Ross Gardler []
Sent: 17 June 2011 23:20
Subject: Fwd: Teams and Leads - where leadership lives (sermonette warning)

I thought I'd share this excellent "Sermonette" posted by Dennis Hamilton on
the new incubator projects dev mailing list. I think it's a
great post illustrating some very appropriate and useful observations from a
newcomer to The Apache Way.

I know I found it educational, I hope you appreciate it too.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Dennis E. Hamilton <>
Date: 16 June 2011 19:27
Subject: RE: Teams and Leads - where leadership lives (sermonette warning)

I think we should take Greg literally on this.

There has been more discussion, and I see us coming together.  And there is
work for us to do in fostering leadership and having a successful and
fulfilling project.

 - Dennis


I know, in my case, this will take some awkward and uncomfortable
transformation of how I see myself in the context of coordinated activities.
 I'm already seeing, on the PPMC, that it takes something to learn to
function by consensus inspired by shared commitment rather than other,
often-personal considerations.  I say that it is mutual commitment that
carries the day every time.  (Everyone is here because they want to be,
whether or not it turns out to be what we were

Also, a crucial feature, and I see it reflected in subsequent discussion on
this thread, is that participants take *ownership* of the project.  (I don't
mean possession or having it be property.  I am not sure how ownership
translates here.  It is the term I know for
this.)  It is our project.  That's also uncomfortable for some (certainly
for me), because it means making ourselves responsible for the outcome and
doing so willingly.  It is a feature of teamwork that all of the team own
the team results as their own.

And for all of this, we must trust each other to govern ourselves and trust
the process to work rather than give in to whatever fears we might have
about how things might go.  (That is something this has in common with
democracy.)  Team-mates do that, families do that.
Sometimes communities and nations manage to do that.

It is also uncomfortable that we have no common history to rely on.
Misunderstandings will occur often. We do not know each other very well, if
at all, and are learning how to collaborate as a new organization involving
a different mix of players than may have existed in the past.  We will
doubtless shed some blood and tears together before we learn that it can all
work out and is working out (whether or not to our liking).  It is the
(unarticulated) mutual commitment that carries us through, just as it
happens when there is friction in successful families.

I also notice something else in my exposure to the "Apache Way" in this
short time.  There is considerable attention on how we train ourselves and
work to foster leadership in others.  It is as if, no matter who comes and
goes, there can always be a sufficient group of participants having both the
commitment and the preparation to carry on the project *and* continue the
cultivation and development of more participants.  It is that the project
succeed, no matter who the participants are.  And participants have a
satisfying and fulfilling experience so long as being here aligns with their


I've been in training exercises and leadership programs of one variety or
another in the 50+ year course of my career and personal-development
efforts.  One characteristic that I have seen demonstrated is this:
leadership arises and moves among the participants of a group effort as the
activity progresses and as discussions proceed.  It is not about "leader"
but leadership and that it is not fixed in individuals but in a response to
a perceived opportunity, attention on some issue, at-hand experience, and so
We all nurture leadership in how we sustain the movement of the effort

I think those who have worked in volunteer software teams and other
volunteer activities have seen this work (and have seen it not work when
there were "leader" issues).  It also works in organizations where teams
have their own informal way of working and solving problems below the
attention level of management.  It might happen without being noticed apart
from the team-mates having developed a noticeable satisfaction in working
together.  (Recall, in your own experience, that it often did not start out
that way.)

When I become too attached to my self-perceived role in something, I often
remind myself of this (though I have doubtless forgotten the accurate
quote): "The spirit cares that there be flying, not who the flyer is."  On a
Yoga DVD that I exercise with on occasion, there is this phrase that always
makes me smile: "willful intent without attachment to the results."

[OK.  I promise to resist posting sermons.  This seemed important, because
of the importance that we all contribute leadership without having leader as
some fixed role.  Maybe it doesn't need to be said.]

-----Original Message-----
From: Christian Grobmeier []
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 01:42
Subject: Re: Teams and Leads (was: Proposed short term goals)

> I read, there is no single vision on how PMCs should run a project and 
> the communities they host. So I think the community can 
> create or better bring in its own customary constitution even it's 
> hosted by Apache.
> is a little bit different from other Apache projects.
> That makes sense to gover it in a different way.

I agree that OOo might need some other things as other projects. I also
agree with the freedom a PMC has inside the ASF.

But before rules are established: the ASF is a meritocracy.

[ ... ]

I think there is need to name "workforces" like "translators". They are -
imho - pretty similar to components in commons. A workforce does its work on
a specific mailinglist. So, translators should have their own mailinglist
were they are not bothered with technical details.

What Greg wanted to express (or what I think he wanted to express) is, that
every committer in every "workforce" can vote and raise his voice in the
matters of the other workforce. This not really likely to happen but might.
For example, a dev guy can vote against a decision in the translator
workforce. On the other hand, every PMC working mainly on the "translator"
list might veto against a technical decision.

Ross Gardler <> Programme Leader (Open
Development) OpenDirective
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG -
Version: 10.0.1382 / Virus Database: 1513/3715 - Release Date: 06/20/11

View raw message