These guiding principles enhance cooperation, respect, and efficiency in the FOCUS group's standard-setting efforts. Implementing these rules will help create a more effective and harmonious working environment.
-
Proposal-Driven Objections: If you object to a proposal, you MUST suggest a concrete alternative. This could involve changes to the existing pull request (PR) or submitting a new PR. When presenting an alternative, you MUST also provide clear reasoning, highlighting the pros and cons of both the original proposal and the alternative. If the PR’s owner is not willing to incorporate your suggestions, be prepared to submit your own PR. This ensures that objections are constructive and geared towards progress.
-
Timely Objections: Bring up any objections at the earliest opportunity. Waiting until the last moment to present a significant issue ("11th-hour objections") disrupts the process and is viewed as uncooperative. This behavior will not be tolerated, as it undermines the spirit of consensus and collaboration.
-
Structured Communication: Request your turn to speak during meetings to maintain order. This respects everyone's chance to contribute and facilitates a more organized and efficient discussion flow.
-
Punctuality and Respect: Arrive on time for meetings, which start two minutes past the hour. Respecting others' time is crucial and helps maintain a disciplined schedule for all participants.
-
Focus on Essentials: Our efforts concentrate on standardizing key aspects that promote interoperability, enhance security, and add long-term value to the specifications. Your needs and intentions should align with these core principles as we strive for consensus to advance collective interests.
-
Inclusive Participation: Encourage and respect contributions from all participants, regardless of their experience level or organizational affiliation. Diversity of thought and inclusivity lead to richer discussions and more robust standards.
-
Constructive Feedback: Offer specific, actionable, and positive feedback. To maintain a respectful and professional environment, critiques should target ideas and processes, not individuals.
-
Confidentiality and Transparency: Respect the confidentiality of the discussions when required, and strive for transparency whenever possible to build trust and accountability within the group.
-
Commitment to Action: Act promptly upon receiving a notification that an action item has been assigned to you. Diligently following through on commitments and decisions made during meetings is crucial. This level of accountability fosters trust and reliability among group members, ensuring that our collaborative efforts are efficient and effective.
-
Continuous Improvement: Be open to revising processes and rules as the project evolves. Continuous improvement of our practices is vital for adapting to new challenges and enhancing efficiency.
-
Provide Data to Underlie Your Point of View: Ensure your positions and objections are backed by data and unmistakable evidence. This approach promotes rational discussions and well-grounded decisions.
-
Avoid Repetition in Restating Your Point of View After Contrary Opinions: Once you have clearly stated your perspective, refrain from repeating it unless new information or insights are added. This helps in maintaining the efficiency and relevance of the discussion.
-
Build Incrementally Where There is Consensus: Focus on areas of agreement to incrementally develop standards. This method encourages progressive achievement and reduces the friction associated with contentious issues.
-
Willingness to Halt and Reset: If discussions reach a standstill due to fundamental disagreements, be prepared to pause and reassess the situation. This readiness to reset can prevent entrenched conflicts and promote a more flexible and adaptive approach to consensus-building.
-
Avoid relitigation: If decisions have already been made earlier in the TSLC process, avoid re-litigating these unless new information / data comes to light that may have led to the decision being different. Conversely, if open decisions were identified earlier in the SDLC and flagged as blockers for some future step, aim to get data needed to address these in a timely manner prior to the deadline for that step being reached
Note: requires key decisions and rationales to be documented to we can refer back to them if needed