I've put a blog post together with my thoughts on what I think the Agile Alliance Australia should be [http://stateofflux.com/2010/01/29/ what-the-agile-alliance-australia-should-be/]. I'd like to run the discussion from the blogpost here so it reaches the broadest group of interested people. I'm sure you guys will have an opinion!
I'm going to be at the Melbourne A3 meeting on Tuesday night. I'd love to have the broad discussion here on the mailing list, but if there is something you'd like to tell me in person, then please find me on Tuesday night.
Finally, I believe both Sydney and Perth have had city meetups. I'd love to know how they went and if there are any lessons we can learn from those meetups.
For memberships, what are the direct benefits that companies/ individuals will receive from paying a membership fee that would otherwise not have or have access to via alternative zero cost means?
Whilst I understand the reasons stated on the blog post for the need for money, I have found many types of paid memberships do no bring value back to what is being paid. I find it hard to justify the cost, especially when trying to get my company to pay for membership.
Chris
On Jan 29, 1:04 pm, Mark Mansour <m...@agilebench.com> wrote:
> I've put a blog post together with my thoughts on what I think the > Agile Alliance Australia should be [http://stateofflux.com/2010/01/29/ > what-the-agile-alliance-australia-should-be/]. I'd like to run the > discussion from the blogpost here so it reaches the broadest group of > interested people. I'm sure you guys will have an opinion!
> I'm going to be at the Melbourne A3 meeting on Tuesday night. I'd > love to have the broad discussion here on the mailing list, but if > there is something you'd like to tell me in person, then please find > me on Tuesday night.
> Finally, I believe both Sydney and Perth have had city meetups. I'd > love to know how they went and if there are any lessons we can learn > from those meetups.
For memberships, what are the direct benefits that companies/
> individuals will receive from paying a membership fee that would > otherwise not have or have access to via alternative zero cost means?
All members should get a significant discount to any A3 sponsored event. I would think that an individual's discount to any annual event be at least the cost of the membership - this way A3 get's money up front to run events and individual members get that money back once the event is paid for. As for corporates, they are going to get a brand they can associate themselves with, which should be valuable for them.
Having a paid membership is not a "done deal" or a "mandatory" thing. It just opens up more options for the A3. Some people will find the concept of having A3 as a brand that people want to be associated with, for money, as distasteful.
Whilst I understand the reasons stated on the blog post for the need
> for money, I have found many types of paid memberships do no bring > value back to what is being paid. I find it hard to justify the cost, > especially when trying to get my company to pay for membership.
So how to we make it so it is worth while?
> Chris
I put up the post to state my position and to generate a conversation. It's great you've got an opinion and are prepared to talk about it. We need more of this. We also need people to take their opinions to a natural conclusion with implementation ideas. Got any? :)
> On Jan 29, 1:04 pm, Mark Mansour <m...@agilebench.com> wrote: > > I've put a blog post together with my thoughts on what I think the > > Agile Alliance Australia should be [http://stateofflux.com/2010/01/29/ > > what-the-agile-alliance-australia-should-be/]. I'd like to run the > > discussion from the blogpost here so it reaches the broadest group of > > interested people. I'm sure you guys will have an opinion!
> > I'm going to be at the Melbourne A3 meeting on Tuesday night. I'd > > love to have the broad discussion here on the mailing list, but if > > there is something you'd like to tell me in person, then please find > > me on Tuesday night.
> > Finally, I believe both Sydney and Perth have had city meetups. I'd > > love to know how they went and if there are any lessons we can learn > > from those meetups.
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Agile Alliance Australia" group. > To post to this group, send email to > agile-alliance-australia@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > agile-alliance-australia+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<agile-alliance-austra lia%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/agile-alliance-australia?hl=en.
Good article, Mark. I'm new to the AAA so excuse me if some of my points have been covered before.
My comments:
- The board of AAA should be small. The way to reduce workload on the board members would be to co-opt volunteers (from within or outside of the board) to take on specific projects.
- I think the current proposed membership structure/rates are sound. I agree that there needs to be benefit to an individual for membership. For example, if there were a nominal charge for a local chapter meeting, then members would get in free.
- Is there a plan to formally incorporate the AAA as an association? This requires a body/committee in each state/territory that it's incorporated in and could get unwieldy quite quickly.
- If no formalisation of local chapters exists then there needs to be, at least, a nominated representative for each local chapter who could be (but doesn't have to be) on the board.
Thanks for a carefully thought out positioning statement.
I have some thoughts & comments I'd like to throw into the mix:
My feling is that the primary purpose of the A3/AAA should be to "promote the takeup and adoption of software development approaches based on Agile princilpes and values (a-la-the manifesto) by individuals and organisations across Australasia" (I'm New Zealand based) or something of this nature. Providing access to individuals and knowledge/mentoring/discussions to assist with the attainment of this goal.
I'm not so sure about the A3 running an annual conference - there are already a number of Agile focused conferences across Australia and NZ - adding more to the mix will reduce the numbers at any single event and actually detract from the networking and sharing that happens. I would rather see the A3 having a presence at all the events and providing a common point of view. (Full disclosure - I work for Software Education and we run some of these conferences).
The A3 should be a place for local groups to come to for advice and assistance, the centre of a network of contacts and (perhaps) provider of funding for venues, speakers travel etc. Just being another "user group" won't add much value and again will probably detract from the existing groups/events (attention dilution), but being a central place to come to for help and advice could be of significant value to potential members.
I am unsure about running online discussion groups etc - there are already lots of them out there. The A3 might provide links to groups & discussions that members have found interesting and useful.
As for membership fees, they might be hard to gather from orgaisations and individuals. I am currently a member of two professional bodies and four other organisations, some of whom require annual payment just to be allowed to remain recognised - why should I pay more money to belong to yet another group? The value proposition would need to be really good for that.
As for the relationship with "the" Agile Alliance - they ty to keep out f the hair of local groups, but they do have a programme that offers funding for assisting local groups to run events. We could at least tap into this.
These are my thoughts - I look forward to reading others'.
Unfortunately I can't get to the Melbourne event this week - I am sure there will be lots posted about it.
Cheers
Shane Hastie, MIM, CBAP Chief Knowledge Engineer Software Education Associates Ltd DDI +64 4 924 1270 From Australia 1800 145 952 Switchboard +64 4 568 7806 NZ Mobile +64 21 590 255 Australia Mobile +61 450 604 413 Web www.softed.com
Learn with the experts
Join us for our 14th Annual Software Development Conference, SDC 2010 – Business Analysis Gets Agile! Whether you’re looking for inspiration and motivation or for practical tools and techniques you can put to use right away, look no further! Call now to register your place or check out www.softed.com for more details.
I agree with most of that blog post - especially the stuff about being a "grassroots" agile organisation.
I'm mixed about running conferences - I agree we have some big conferences already happening, but I'd love to see more small, affordable conferences, like the "ignite" events or other unconferences. If folks are balking at paying a $50 membership fee, what about $2000 conference fees? :-} Such conferences may be fine for senior employees of big corporates, but not particularly useful for the majority of developers.
If membership fees are a problem, possibly the A3 could have something like a "associate" membership, that is very cheap (or free) and gets you no rights, but gets you into the community, onto mailing lists, etc.?
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Mark Mansour <m...@agilebench.com> wrote: > Hi Chris,
> For memberships, what are the direct benefits that companies/ >> individuals will receive from paying a membership fee that would >> otherwise not have or have access to via alternative zero cost means?
> All members should get a significant discount to any A3 sponsored event. I > would think that an individual's discount to any annual event be at least > the cost of the membership - this way A3 get's money up front to run events > and individual members get that money back once the event is paid for. As > for corporates, they are going to get a brand they can associate themselves > with, which should be valuable for them.
> Having a paid membership is not a "done deal" or a "mandatory" thing. It > just opens up more options for the A3. Some people will find the concept of > having A3 as a brand that people want to be associated with, for money, as > distasteful.
> Whilst I understand the reasons stated on the blog post for the need >> for money, I have found many types of paid memberships do no bring >> value back to what is being paid. I find it hard to justify the cost, >> especially when trying to get my company to pay for membership.
> So how to we make it so it is worth while?
>> Chris
> I put up the post to state my position and to generate a conversation. > It's great you've got an opinion and are prepared to talk about it. We > need more of this. We also need people to take their opinions to a natural > conclusion with implementation ideas. Got any? :)
> Mark
>> On Jan 29, 1:04 pm, Mark Mansour <m...@agilebench.com> wrote: >> > I've put a blog post together with my thoughts on what I think the >> > Agile Alliance Australia should be [http://stateofflux.com/2010/01/29/ >> > what-the-agile-alliance-australia-should-be/]. I'd like to run the >> > discussion from the blogpost here so it reaches the broadest group of >> > interested people. I'm sure you guys will have an opinion!
>> > I'm going to be at the Melbourne A3 meeting on Tuesday night. I'd >> > love to have the broad discussion here on the mailing list, but if >> > there is something you'd like to tell me in person, then please find >> > me on Tuesday night.
>> > Finally, I believe both Sydney and Perth have had city meetups. I'd >> > love to know how they went and if there are any lessons we can learn >> > from those meetups.
>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Agile Alliance Australia" group. >> To post to this group, send email to >> agile-alliance-australia@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> agile-alliance-australia+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<agile-alliance-austra lia%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/agile-alliance-australia?hl=en.
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Agile Alliance Australia" group. > To post to this group, send email to > agile-alliance-australia@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > agile-alliance-australia+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<agile-alliance-austra lia%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/agile-alliance-australia?hl=en.
-- Kornelis Sietsma korny at my surname dot com kornys on twitter/fb/gtalk/gwave www.sietsma.com/korny "Every jumbled pile of person has a thinking part that wonders what the part that isn't thinking isn't thinking of"
On Jan 31, 8:41 am, Andy Kelk <andyk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Good article, Mark. I'm new to the AAA so excuse me if some of my > points have been covered before.
We're all new here :)
> My comments:
> - The board of AAA should be small. The way to reduce workload on the > board members would be to co-opt volunteers (from within or outside of > the board) to take on specific projects.
Yep, sounds logical.
> - I think the current proposed membership structure/rates are sound. I > agree that there needs to be benefit to an individual for membership. > For example, if there were a nominal charge for a local chapter > meeting, then members would get in free.
I wouldn't want to impose a price, but significantly discounted would be the hope.
> - Is there a plan to formally incorporate the AAA as an association? > This requires a body/committee in each state/territory that it's > incorporated in and could get unwieldy quite quickly.
Yep. Let me expand on what I said in the blog post. I'm thinking that we only need incorporation if we need money and we only need money if we need to do something big, and the only really big thing I can think of is to run a national conference. At least at this stage of the game.
Does anyone else have opinions on this?
> - If no formalisation of local chapters exists then there needs to be, > at least, a nominated representative for each local chapter who could > be (but doesn't have to be) on the board.
A representative structure is a possibility. I haven't through through the implications but it is definitely one option and I'm not immediately against it. Anyone else got an opinion?
> My feling is that the primary purpose of the A3/AAA should be to > "promote the takeup and adoption of software development approaches > based on Agile princilpes and values (a-la-the manifesto) by > individuals and organisations across Australasia" (I'm New Zealand > based) or something of this nature. Providing access to individuals > and knowledge/mentoring/discussions to assist with the attainment of > this goal.
I'd really like the local chapters to do that. I think they have better access to the community. I want A3 to support the local chapters in doing that (in whatever way support means).
> I'm not so sure about the A3 running an annual conference - there are > already a number of Agile focused conferences across Australia and NZ > - adding more to the mix will reduce the numbers at any single event > and actually detract from the networking and sharing that happens. I > would rather see the A3 having a presence at all the events and > providing a common point of view. (Full disclosure - I work for > Software Education and we run some of these conferences).
Can you list them?
I would like a conference that we can all, as a community, rally around. If there is an A3, then I'd like this to be the place where the AGM is held and the board is elected. Last year Agile 09 served this purpose.
> The A3 should be a place for local groups to come to for advice and > assistance, the centre of a network of contacts and (perhaps) provider > of funding for venues, speakers travel etc. Just being another "user > group" won't add much value and again will probably detract from the > existing groups/events (attention dilution), but being a central place > to come to for help and advice could be of significant value to > potential members.
I don't see A3 as a user group. I think the local chapters are the user groups. I just want the A3, if they have the resources, to support the local chapters.
I see support as: * a centralised place for co-ordination (like if there are international speakers, when big issues are announced, etc) * (given we have $$$) provide funds to local chapters to run events that promote agile (and it's adoption)
> I am unsure about running online discussion groups etc - there are > already lots of them out there. The A3 might provide links to groups > & discussions that members have found interesting and useful.
I'll point to the ruby community. They have consolidated their mailing lists to "rails-oceania" which has greatly solidified the community. They are a great example of a thriving and vibrant community that strengthened with consolidation of resource and kept the local chapters as their focal points. (they don't have a body like the A3 as a central point but they've co-ordinated their efforts online)
> As for membership fees, they might be hard to gather from orgaisations > and individuals. I am currently a member of two professional bodies > and four other organisations, some of whom require annual payment just > to be allowed to remain recognised - why should I pay more money to > belong to yet another group? The value proposition would need to be > really good for that.
You have to chose what group is important to you. If you see that an agile body is the correct alignment for you, then great! It wont be for everyone. If you did join, then we do have to make it worth your while. I'm seeing mainly as discounts to local events and a national conference. You'll also be kept in the loop with events that occur that would contribute to your professional development. You can get this all for free by doing the legwork yourself, but hopefully A3 can save you the time and effort. You'll have to decide if that is worth paying for.
> As for the relationship with "the" Agile Alliance - they ty to keep > out f the hair of local groups, but they do have a programme that > offers funding for assisting local groups to run events. We could at > least tap into this.
I'm happy to ask them to help us spread the agile word, I just want to make sure the A3 is setup and run by locals who represent the local community.
> These are my thoughts - I look forward to reading others'.
Me too. Thanks for taking the time to get this all down Andy.
> Unfortunately I can't get to the Melbourne event this week - I am sure > there will be lots posted about it.
> Cheers
> Shane Hastie, MIM, CBAP > Chief Knowledge Engineer > Software Education Associates Ltd > DDI +64 4 924 1270 From Australia 1800 145 952 > Switchboard +64 4 568 7806 > NZ Mobile +64 21 590 255 Australia Mobile +61 450 604 413 > Webwww.softed.com
> Learn with the experts
> Join us for our 14th Annual Software Development Conference, SDC 2010 > – Business Analysis Gets Agile! Whether you’re looking for > inspiration and motivation or for practical tools and techniques you > can put to use right away, look no further! Call now to register your > place or check outwww.softed.comfor more details.
> I agree with most of that blog post - especially the stuff about being a > "grassroots" agile organisation.
I think that part is very important. Some companies are part of that grassroots (I just wanted people to understand that I'm not *anti* company).
> I'm mixed about running conferences - I agree we have some big conferences > already happening, but I'd love to see more small, affordable conferences, > like the "ignite" events or other unconferences. If folks are balking at > paying a $50 membership fee, what about $2000 conference fees? :-} Such > conferences may be fine for senior employees of big corporates, but not > particularly useful for the majority of developers.
I think there are room for both styles. I love the grass roots conferences too and they satisfy the geek in me. I love the more formal conference too as I get a chance to be introduced to new ideas an mingle with a wide group of people. Maybe I'm just easily pleased :)
> If membership fees are a problem, possibly the A3 could have something like > a "associate" membership, that is very cheap (or free) and gets you no > rights, but gets you into the community, onto mailing lists, etc.?
This is a detail, which I'm happy to discuss after we get the big hitters out of the way. Namely, what is the A3 going to look like?
> On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Mark Mansour <m...@agilebench.com> wrote: > > Hi Chris,
> > For memberships, what are the direct benefits that companies/ > >> individuals will receive from paying a membership fee that would > >> otherwise not have or have access to via alternative zero cost means?
> > All members should get a significant discount to any A3 sponsored event. I > > would think that an individual's discount to any annual event be at least > > the cost of the membership - this way A3 get's money up front to run events > > and individual members get that money back once the event is paid for. As > > for corporates, they are going to get a brand they can associate themselves > > with, which should be valuable for them.
> > Having a paid membership is not a "done deal" or a "mandatory" thing. It > > just opens up more options for the A3. Some people will find the concept of > > having A3 as a brand that people want to be associated with, for money, as > > distasteful.
> > Whilst I understand the reasons stated on the blog post for the need > >> for money, I have found many types of paid memberships do no bring > >> value back to what is being paid. I find it hard to justify the cost, > >> especially when trying to get my company to pay for membership.
> > So how to we make it so it is worth while?
> >> Chris
> > I put up the post to state my position and to generate a conversation. > > It's great you've got an opinion and are prepared to talk about it. We > > need more of this. We also need people to take their opinions to a natural > > conclusion with implementation ideas. Got any? :)
> > Mark
> >> On Jan 29, 1:04 pm, Mark Mansour <m...@agilebench.com> wrote: > >> > I've put a blog post together with my thoughts on what I think the > >> > Agile Alliance Australia should be [http://stateofflux.com/2010/01/29/ > >> > what-the-agile-alliance-australia-should-be/]. I'd like to run the > >> > discussion from the blogpost here so it reaches the broadest group of > >> > interested people. I'm sure you guys will have an opinion!
> >> > I'm going to be at the Melbourne A3 meeting on Tuesday night. I'd > >> > love to have the broad discussion here on the mailing list, but if > >> > there is something you'd like to tell me in person, then please find > >> > me on Tuesday night.
> >> > Finally, I believe both Sydney and Perth have had city meetups. I'd > >> > love to know how they went and if there are any lessons we can learn > >> > from those meetups.
> >> -- > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > >> "Agile Alliance Australia" group. > >> To post to this group, send email to > >> agile-alliance-australia@googlegroups.com. > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > >> agile-alliance-australia+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<agile-alliance-austra lia%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com> > >> . > >> For more options, visit this group at > >>http://groups.google.com/group/agile-alliance-australia?hl=en.
> > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Agile Alliance Australia" group. > > To post to this group, send email to > > agile-alliance-australia@googlegroups.com. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > agile-alliance-australia+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<agile-alliance-austra lia%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com> > > . > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/agile-alliance-australia?hl=en.
> -- > Kornelis Sietsma korny at my surname dot com > kornys on twitter/fb/gtalk/gwavewww.sietsma.com/korny > "Every jumbled pile of person has a thinking part > that wonders what the part that isn't thinking > isn't thinking of"
On Feb 1, 11:35 pm, Mark Mansour <m...@agilebench.com> wrote:
> Yep. Let me expand on what I said in the blog post. I'm thinking > that we only need incorporation if we need money and we only need > money if we need to do something big, and the only really big thing I > can think of is to run a national conference. At least at this stage > of the game.
Then it certainly makes sense to incorporate the A3 in a single state/ territory and to have that as the only incorporated bodies. Local chapters are then free to run how they want without formalising the structure for each one.
I think I liked the way that Agile2009 was organised in that the whole thing was handed off to a specialist company like Slattery to organise. Am not sure if any potential losses were underwritten by any of the sponsors in case they made a loss. However, given the attendance, I'd expect future events to be profitable. So, why would someone like Slattery need to involve the A3? I think that an A3 endorsement would increase the revenue from an event, conversely an A3 statement not backing an event would adversely impact revenue I'm sure.
I don't perceive a daily need for a national organisation, but it does feel right to me, operating the group in Perth that I have access to a wider group of people / experience should I need it. Interesting though that there is not a great deal of chatter on the A3 discussion board.... something we've managed to get going on the Agile WA board....
Sorry to not have any clear answers.... my view is that less is definitely more... BUT... I would really like an A3 conference! (or more importantly, I don't want all conferences to be run by software / education vendors).
On Jan 29, 10:04 am, Mark Mansour <m...@agilebench.com> wrote:
> I've put a blog post together with my thoughts on what I think the > Agile Alliance Australia should be [http://stateofflux.com/2010/01/29/ > what-the-agile-alliance-australia-should-be/]. I'd like to run the > discussion from the blogpost here so it reaches the broadest group of > interested people. I'm sure you guys will have an opinion!
> I'm going to be at the Melbourne A3 meeting on Tuesday night. I'd > love to have the broad discussion here on the mailing list, but if > there is something you'd like to tell me in person, then please find > me on Tuesday night.
> Finally, I believe both Sydney and Perth have had city meetups. I'd > love to know how they went and if there are any lessons we can learn > from those meetups.
I think once A3 is well established an endorsement by A3 would be a valuable thing to have for any conference, meeting or even publication for that matter. Especially if A3 has good membership from the Australian Agile leaders. Also, having a national body will only strengthen the presence of State based A3 chapters so I'm all for it.
I also feel that an A3 organised conference is a great idea, but would potentially be at the earliest in 2011 - maybe it shouldn't be a primary mandate for A3 right now.
As for membership, maybe that can be parked for now until some value can be derived from holding membership. Especially if we can get the meetups sponsored/catered. If we cant get sponsorship for each of the meetups then membership can cover catering and the venue when needed - non members can pay a nominal amount at the door to attend.
Perhaps that can get us started and we revisit the conference idea in a few months.
Just my two bits.
Cheers, Mark Henery.
On Feb 2, 4:17 pm, Mike Allen <mike_p_al...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> I think I liked the way that Agile2009 was organised in that the whole > thing was handed off to a specialist company like Slattery to > organise. Am not sure if any potential losses were underwritten by > any of the sponsors in case they made a loss. However, given the > attendance, I'd expect future events to be profitable. So, why would > someone like Slattery need to involve the A3? I think that an A3 > endorsement would increase the revenue from an event, conversely an A3 > statement not backing an event would adversely impact revenue I'm > sure.
> I don't perceive a daily need for a national organisation, but it does > feel right to me, operating the group in Perth that I have access to a > wider group of people / experience should I need it. Interesting > though that there is not a great deal of chatter on the A3 discussion > board.... something we've managed to get going on the Agile WA > board....
> Sorry to not have any clear answers.... my view is that less is > definitely more... BUT... I would really like an A3 conference! (or > more importantly, I don't want all conferences to be run by software / > education vendors).
> On Jan 29, 10:04 am, Mark Mansour <m...@agilebench.com> wrote:
> > I've put a blog post together with my thoughts on what I think the > > Agile Alliance Australia should be [http://stateofflux.com/2010/01/29/ > > what-the-agile-alliance-australia-should-be/]. I'd like to run the > > discussion from the blogpost here so it reaches the broadest group of > > interested people. I'm sure you guys will have an opinion!
> > I'm going to be at the Melbourne A3 meeting on Tuesday night. I'd > > love to have the broad discussion here on the mailing list, but if > > there is something you'd like to tell me in person, then please find > > me on Tuesday night.
> > Finally, I believe both Sydney and Perth have had city meetups. I'd > > love to know how they went and if there are any lessons we can learn > > from those meetups.
I'm a member of a developer organisation in the UK, ACCU (accu.org) which is structured along similar lines to being discussed here. Small central committee, organises an annual conference, relatively low membership fee. Has about 1000 members I think. Seems to work well - the conference is particularly well regarded.
On Feb 4, 9:49 pm, Mark Henery <mdhen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think once A3 is well established an endorsement by A3 would be a > valuable thing to have for any conference, meeting or even publication > for that matter. Especially if A3 has good membership from the > Australian Agile leaders. Also, having a national body will only > strengthen the presence of State based A3 chapters so I'm all for it.
> I also feel that an A3 organised conference is a great idea, but would > potentially be at the earliest in 2011 - maybe it shouldn't be a > primary mandate for A3 right now.
> As for membership, maybe that can be parked for now until some value > can be derived from holding membership. Especially if we can get the > meetups sponsored/catered. If we cant get sponsorship for each of the > meetups then membership can cover catering and the venue when needed - > non members can pay a nominal amount at the door to attend.
> Perhaps that can get us started and we revisit the conference idea in > a few months.
> Just my two bits.
> Cheers, > Mark Henery.
> On Feb 2, 4:17 pm, Mike Allen <mike_p_al...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> > I think I liked the way that Agile2009 was organised in that the whole > > thing was handed off to a specialist company like Slattery to > > organise. Am not sure if any potential losses were underwritten by > > any of the sponsors in case they made a loss. However, given the > > attendance, I'd expect future events to be profitable. So, why would > > someone like Slattery need to involve the A3? I think that an A3 > > endorsement would increase the revenue from an event, conversely an A3 > > statement not backing an event would adversely impact revenue I'm > > sure.
> > I don't perceive a daily need for a national organisation, but it does > > feel right to me, operating the group in Perth that I have access to a > > wider group of people / experience should I need it. Interesting > > though that there is not a great deal of chatter on the A3 discussion > > board.... something we've managed to get going on the Agile WA > > board....
> > Sorry to not have any clear answers.... my view is that less is > > definitely more... BUT... I would really like an A3 conference! (or > > more importantly, I don't want all conferences to be run by software / > > education vendors).
> > On Jan 29, 10:04 am, Mark Mansour <m...@agilebench.com> wrote:
> > > I've put a blog post together with my thoughts on what I think the > > > Agile Alliance Australia should be [http://stateofflux.com/2010/01/29/ > > > what-the-agile-alliance-australia-should-be/]. I'd like to run the > > > discussion from the blogpost here so it reaches the broadest group of > > > interested people. I'm sure you guys will have an opinion!
> > > I'm going to be at the Melbourne A3 meeting on Tuesday night. I'd > > > love to have the broad discussion here on the mailing list, but if > > > there is something you'd like to tell me in person, then please find > > > me on Tuesday night.
> > > Finally, I believe both Sydney and Perth have had city meetups. I'd > > > love to know how they went and if there are any lessons we can learn > > > from those meetups.
> I'm a member of a developer organisation in the UK, ACCU (accu.org) > which is structured along similar lines to being discussed here. > Small central committee, organises an annual conference, relatively > low membership fee. Has about 1000 members I think. Seems to work > well - the conference is particularly well regarded.
> On Feb 4, 9:49 pm, Mark Henery <mdhen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I think once A3 is well established an endorsement by A3 would be a > > valuable thing to have for any conference, meeting or even publication > > for that matter. Especially if A3 has good membership from the > > Australian Agile leaders. Also, having a national body will only > > strengthen the presence of State based A3 chapters so I'm all for it.
> > I also feel that an A3 organised conference is a great idea, but would > > potentially be at the earliest in 2011 - maybe it shouldn't be a > > primary mandate for A3 right now.
> > As for membership, maybe that can be parked for now until some value > > can be derived from holding membership. Especially if we can get the > > meetups sponsored/catered. If we cant get sponsorship for each of the > > meetups then membership can cover catering and the venue when needed - > > non members can pay a nominal amount at the door to attend.
> > Perhaps that can get us started and we revisit the conference idea in > > a few months.
> > Just my two bits.
> > Cheers, > > Mark Henery.
> > On Feb 2, 4:17 pm, Mike Allen <mike_p_al...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> > > I think I liked the way that Agile2009 was organised in that the whole > > > thing was handed off to a specialist company like Slattery to > > > organise. Am not sure if any potential losses were underwritten by > > > any of the sponsors in case they made a loss. However, given the > > > attendance, I'd expect future events to be profitable. So, why would > > > someone like Slattery need to involve the A3? I think that an A3 > > > endorsement would increase the revenue from an event, conversely an A3 > > > statement not backing an event would adversely impact revenue I'm > > > sure.
> > > I don't perceive a daily need for a national organisation, but it does > > > feel right to me, operating the group in Perth that I have access to a > > > wider group of people / experience should I need it. Interesting > > > though that there is not a great deal of chatter on the A3 discussion > > > board.... something we've managed to get going on the Agile WA > > > board....
> > > Sorry to not have any clear answers.... my view is that less is > > > definitely more... BUT... I would really like an A3 conference! (or > > > more importantly, I don't want all conferences to be run by software / > > > education vendors).
> > > On Jan 29, 10:04 am, Mark Mansour <m...@agilebench.com> wrote:
> > > > I've put a blog post together with my thoughts on what I think the > > > > Agile Alliance Australia should be [http://stateofflux.com/2010/01/29/ > > > > what-the-agile-alliance-australia-should-be/]. I'd like to run the > > > > discussion from the blogpost here so it reaches the broadest group of > > > > interested people. I'm sure you guys will have an opinion!
> > > > I'm going to be at the Melbourne A3 meeting on Tuesday night. I'd > > > > love to have the broad discussion here on the mailing list, but if > > > > there is something you'd like to tell me in person, then please find > > > > me on Tuesday night.
> > > > Finally, I believe both Sydney and Perth have had city meetups. I'd > > > > love to know how they went and if there are any lessons we can learn > > > > from those meetups.
I've got a few thoughts based on my experience organising events for the Australian Business Analysis Association (ABAA) a few years back.
1) Great to hear "certification" is not part of the plan for the Agile Alliance Australia - perhaps I'm a little cynical, but I generally see accreditation/certification (especially when talking about certifications for Business Analysis) as a money making scheme that provides minimal value to the individual. I'm much more interested in networking a knowledge sharing, so great to see your thoughts are focused on that for the AAA.
2) Getting people to come along to local events usually requires two things - interesting guest speakers/topics and food/drinks. So agree with your comments around money - you will need to consider discounts or free attendance for members vs. an event fee for non-members (say $20?) - this is really where members gain value over non-members.
Not sure how successful you'll be signing up companies, rather than individuals, but it's an interesting thought.
