fineract-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Myrle Krantz <mkra...@mifos.org>
Subject Re: Jira Workflow
Date Fri, 01 Jan 2016 15:12:55 GMT
Just a little corrective to your perception of my intention:  I did not
raise this concern as a defense to my voting suggestion.

Greets,
Myrle


*Myrle Krantz*
Solutions Architect
RɅĐɅЯ, The Mifos Initiative
mkrantz@mifos.org | Skype: mkrantz.mifos.org | http://mifos.org
<http://facebook.com/mifos>  <http://www.twitter.com/mifos>


On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 4:05 PM, Ross Gardler <Ross.Gardler@microsoft.com>
wrote:

> Your observations are good ones. Cultural awareness is very important.
>
> The "trick" that I've found to work is to speak and act in a way that
> encourages participation. Take the time to send a few sentences indicating
> that *EVERYONE* has a voice here and that their voice is of equal weight to
> everyone elses.
>
> Voting is not a mechanism that brings consensus. As others have said it
> creates divides. There are winners and losers. Furthermore, if the only
> person who sees the inherent flaw in the proposal is someone without a
> binding vote how can they make a difference in a vote in which their vote
> doesn't count and even if it did it would be one against many.
>
> Better is to make it clear that anyone with a concern should raise it.
> Then ensure that concern is discussed and addressed to the satisfaction of
> the whole community.
>
> The way to make this happen is not to create rules about how decisions are
> made. It's to create a culture of sharing and respect. A culture in which
> listening and doing is more valuable than talking and defining. It's about
> accepting "good enough" is an excellent contribution while incremental
> improvements that take us from "good enough" to "even better" are equally
> valuable.
>
> You are absolutely correct to worry that this is more difficult in some
> cultures than in others. You should continue to do so. Call for specific
> input from the community as a whole. Ensure you leave space for people to
> contribute how *they* choose to do so. Basically actions within the
> community speak much loader than words in a policy or process document.
>
> With that in mind, does anyone here have a feeling for what the right
> balance is between process and policy for this community?
>
> Ross
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Myrle Krantz [mailto:mkrantz@mifos.org]
> Sent: Friday, January 1, 2016 2:48 PM
> To: dev@fineract.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Jira Workflow
>
> I'm actually most concerned about this aspect of making this an Apache
> project.
>
> I can't find a fully politically correct way to say this, so to the extent
> that I'm replacing individuals with stereotypes, I apologize.  I do know
> that people vary from their cultural norms.  I don't know my fellow
> contributors very well. I'm asking this in full recognition of my
> ignorance, hoping that people who know more will correct me.
>
> Some of our contributors come from cultures with a low power distance and
> some come from cultures with a high power distance (US: 40/100, Germany:
> 35/100, Netherlands: 38/100, India 77/100)+.
>
> The Apache approach seems to assume that all participants view themselves
> as equal, or at least have a realistic view of how their personal merit
> allows them to contribute to a discussion.  But it is possible that those
> contributors who come from a high-power-distance culture, might allow
> themselves to be cut out of a discussion by a gradient of power.  Indeed, I
> haven't seen many objections coming from our Indian colleagues to what
> we've been suggesting. Even though they are more likely to have a
> customer-contact informed opinion.
>
> From my American perspective, I believe we need to find a way to encourage
> more active participation in these cases.  At the same time based on my
> reading, I'm not sure that colleagues who come from a high-power-distance
> culture even want a level playing field.  I'm pretty sure it is not
> possible to impose a level-playing field if it's unwanted.
>
> So the questions are:
>
> * Is this even true? Are our Indian colleagues (or anyone else)
> withholding important reservations? (My source could just be wrong.)
>   * Is this really going to be a problem?
>     * Is there a way to solve this? Or at least ameliorate it?
>
>
> Happy New Year from Germany,
> Myrle Krantz
>
>
> + Source "Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind" Geert
> + Hofstede
> and Gert Jan Hofstede pages 43-44
>
>
> *Myrle Krantz*
> Solutions Architect
> RɅĐɅЯ, The Mifos Initiative
> mkrantz@mifos.org | Skype:
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=mkrantz.mifos.org&data=01%7c01%7cRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7c9ed96061934f43c39c4108d312ba93b5%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=BE%2fKBTIg2NNgLVwATGg5zMrFWB77RqCPpqX%2bGMU%2bK5c%3d
> |
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fmifos.org&data=01%7c01%7cRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7c9ed96061934f43c39c4108d312ba93b5%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=H8V6JqQ3H3zB9F73A8726jutKqQVHDvI3IUnW195s2s%3d
> <
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2ffacebook.com%2fmifos&data=01%7c01%7cRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7c9ed96061934f43c39c4108d312ba93b5%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=9dvCR8tKj53N0m8q7b13A8yA3l0z8V6M59jLkZH0Wy4%3d>
> <
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.twitter.com%2fmifos&data=01%7c01%7cRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7c9ed96061934f43c39c4108d312ba93b5%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=Oxxo2M8RnRRF4iuW66z0kui0GunjG3bzntXZ0KsCmOI%3d
> >
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Ross Gardler <Ross.Gardler@microsoft.com>
> wrote:
>
> > +1 - no leaders around here, just people doing the work. An ASF
> > +project is
> > "led" by whoever is active, that means lots of leaders at any one time.
> > Those "leaders" are always answerable to the community as a whole.
> >
> > This might often seem like it is "nit-picking", it's just a language
> > thing in most cases, especially when those doing the work have the
> > full (silent) support of the community as a whole. However, if there
> > is ever a time that the people doing the work appear to be heading in
> > the wrong direction the flat structure of an Apache project becomes
> > extremely important. For this reason language is very important.
> >
> > Ross
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Greg Stein [mailto:gstein@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Friday, January 1, 2016 3:45 AM
> > To: dev@fineract.incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Jira Workflow
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 9:17 PM, Terence Monteiro <
> > terence@sanjosesolutions.in> wrote:
> > >...
> >
> > > the discretion of our
> > > (El Capitan) Markus and the consent of our benevolent champion Ross
> > > and fellow Mentors, start the year in earnest. What say?
> > >
> >
> > We are all peers. No Capitan, no Champion, no Mentors.
> >
> > Speaking for myself, I won't be a *participant* in the community, but
> > will pop in as a guide. Decisions are best made by all of you. I can
> > help with describing mechanisms and process (or how to avoid that!).
> >
> > Happy New Years!
> > -g
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message