Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- projects:inclusive_decision_making_process [2019/07/17 12:52] – created aimeejulia
+++ projects:inclusive_decision_making_process [2019/07/19 15:35] (current) – aimeejulia
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ====== Inclusive Decision Making Process ======
+===== Assumptions for this model: =====
+  * Only members participate in the decision making process
+  * Concerns / ideas / fears are addressed, members feel heard and equal in the team
+  * Individuals can delegate their vote to other members where they do not feel competent to make a decision
+  * Individuals can call for 3rd party advice where there are not enough competencies in the group
+  * Members want to be open about how decisions are made
+  * Members hold the ideals of the group in mind when decisions need to be taken
+  * Members want to learn from our experience by documenting the process
+  * Members are open to consider the facts and evidence presented when voting
+===== Voting Scale & Flow Chart =====
+{{:projects:idmpflowchart.png|}}
+===== Voting Delegation Flow Chart =====
+{{:projects:idmpdelegationflowchart.png|}}
+===== SWOT Analysis =====
+==== Strengths ====
+  * Documents concerns, comments, fears and ideas - can be referred back to when needed
+  * Members feel confident that their concerns and fears are addressed before a decisions is made
+==== Weaknesses ====
+  * It may take some time to address everyone's concerns
+  * Self identification of competencies may lead to overestimation of one’s competency to make technical decisions
+==== Opportunities ====
+  * Adaptable model, success criteria can be changed as needed by the group
+  * Room for alternative proposals and amendments to proposals by members before final decision is made
+==== Threats ====
+  * Malicious intent could sabotage decision making process built on trust
+  * Missed opportunities if there are time constraints on decisions making
+===== Use Case =====
+==== How do we pick producers / suppliers for our shop? ====
+  * Name of person making proposal: Person A
+  * Time frame for initial vote:     4 weeks
+  * Proposal: Our criteria are organic and/or regional - based on decision already made in this meeting. Now we need to define what this means in practice so that the person/s responsible for making contact with suppliers & producers knows which products we want to stock in the shop.
+  * Defining Regional: 100km radius or 150km radius includes some parts of Poland or 190km radius this includes more parts of Hamburg. Additional option: perhaps we should add to the criteria that we would like to go as local as possible ie less than 25km radius.
+  * Defining Organic: with certificate and/or without certificate based on trust
+==== Initial Vote ====
+{{:projects:idmpvoting1.png|}}
+=== Fears / Concerns / Comments / Ideas ===
+A: **Confirmation that the suppliers we have contact with are within the 150km radius** would be nice but should not stop the decision. 190km would be already have a greater environmental impact which I would like to avoid.
+B: I am afraid that if we set the radius limit too low (below 190km) we won’t be able to find enough suppliers / producers - but I do not know this to be true unless a list of producers is available. Before the final vote **I would like to see the list of producers in the 100km and 150km radius.**
+C: 190km would be already have a greater environmental impact which I would like to avoid. **I would like more information about how many suppliers we would have in above 150km and below 190km** to be able to make a more informed decision.
+D: I think we have enough suppliers in the 100km, other larger options would carry increased cost and environmental impact however if this isn’t true I would be open to hearing more about it.
+E: I feel that our preferred radius (25km) is much too small **in addition to more info about how much suppliers we have there I would like to propose an additional option for 50km preferred,** this would be inclusive of agricultural areas like Plau am See where we already have contacts. I also feel negative about making the area too large for environmental impact reasons and increased costs due to transportation and because I believe we have enough suppliers in the nearby areas (150km). **For organic status we should document how many/which members trust the supplier and status should be revised once a year.**
+F: **I do not have enough information about the producers we have to know where they fall on the map,** in general I would prefer if the radius is as low as possible. Idea: we can have a map in the shop with pins pointing to our suppliers and preferred radius.
+=== Initial vote analysis ===
+At initial vote submitted we can see that people’s concerns have triggered some tasks for the product team to provide more information for defining regional - this has to be completed before a final vote can be taken.
+==== Final Vote ====
+{{:projects:idmpvoting2.png|}}
+===== By-products for this decision making process =====
+Suggestions & Ideas - group members are invited to submit suggestions and ideas linked to the topic they are voting on.
+  * Eg. Idea: we can have a map in the shop with pins pointing to our suppliers and preferred radius.
+This is can be a quick vote item for the marketing team, once a list of suppliers is already provided by the product team or it can be added to the idea pot until someone has time to work on it.
+  * Eg. For organic status we should document how many/which members trust the supplier and status should be revised once a year.
+This will need to be reformulated as a question to the group for a decision to be made. Options to vote for could include: how often the status should be checked, how to document endorsement of non certified suppliers etc.
+====== FAQs ======
+===== When is a vote successful? =====
+A vote is considered successful when an option has only 5 & 4 score values. In case of multiple options the one with the highest total score is chosen.
+===== What happens if after the final vote there is still no decision (still have 3 scores votes)? =====
+In that case the group / person making the proposal can go back to the drawing board, taking into account the documented fears / concerns and make a new proposal, starting the process from the beginning or abandon the proposal altogether.
+===== What if all the options are good for me? =====
+In that case you can vote all options as 4 in the initial vote and than pick your favorite as 5 in the final vote. In cases where all options are voted as 4 and one has a 5 score vote the option with a 5 score vote will go through. **Use your vote wisely in the interest of the group and in the spirit of finding a solution. If you feel that you are not competent to make this decision you can delegate it to another member of the group.**
+===== What happens when not all members have submitted their vote until the deadline? =====
+The group can set a criteria for example the vote is still valid when 75% of the active members have voted the vote still goes through. In general if a member knows that the have no time they should delegate their vote to another active member so as not to stall the process.
+===== What if I want to put forward alternative option/s? =====
+You should not only provide the options but also as much information as possible about them. The alternative option/s will be then included in the final voting round unless an appropriate option has already been chosen by the group at the initial round.
+===== Why do I have to submit a comment if I vote 3 or below? =====
+The process is focused on reaching an agreement in the quickest time possible, this would not be possible without expressing and addressing members concerns.