My experience, a long time ago when I was an AD, was that we needed to
add to the conflict list that the chair supplied.
Further I don't think we can simply look at this from the perspective of
the logical connections between works items. We need to also take into
account the WGs that the attendees need to cover as part of the day to
day work package that they do.
The more I think about it, a registration survey might well be a better
input database than the chairs estimate. Perhaps we also need to go to
electronic session registration rather than the blue sheets so that we
can look at actual attendance. Then we know about draft contribution
which helps build a more complete picture, and we know who spoke up on
each agenda item. We are the organization that enabled, perhaps even
created, big data, perhaps we should be using it to make our meetings
more productive?
- Stewart
On 25/02/2019 08:10, Tim Chown wrote:
Hi,
It can also help if WG chairs try to regularly review and minimise their conflict lists wherever possible, so the scheduling team / software has more room to fit things in. Sometimes you see quite long conflict lists that aren't strictly needed.
Tim
On 25 Feb 2019, at 07:47, Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2/24/19 10:34 PM, Stewart Bryant wrote:
That survey says that 62% of people who responded had a conflict.
But if you look at the responses to Q13 ("Which
sessions?") the only sessions mentioned consistently
were spring/bier and detnet/{several things}. FWIW
I've noticed that in session requests some chairs are
asking to avoid things they've got people who'd prefer
not to miss and others are asking to avoid things
where they've got people who absolutely must be at
both. I'm not sure that we're asking the right
questions, on the one hand, and answering the right
questions, on the other.
While our tooling has changed and there have been a
few other adaptations, I do think it's an issue that
we're approaching how we meet pretty much the same
way we did 25 years ago, despite massive improvements
in remote participation tools and the increase in
the use of virtual interims, distributed authoring
tools, etc.
Melinda
--
Melinda Shore
melinda.shore@xxxxxxxxx
Software longa, hardware brevis
