Clarification of company membership

[Luke]

I work for a company that is likely to be 500+ employees in the not so
distant future. Yet of those employees only somewhere around 40-50
are ever likely to want to be part of the the alliance as we do much
more than writing software, we are a manufacturing company.

For us I don't see the $3000 as being onerous (I'll have to do some
fighting for it) but I can see other companies in a similar situation
seeing the the $3000 as being a difficult bridge to cross with the
financial controllers of their company. Especially with the
difference between 500+ possible joining and only 5-40 actually
joining.

I'd like to see some provision where a company can nominate the
category they fall in for number of members and they pay for that
category. It would make keeping a track of this a bit more work but
it does mean more companies will join.

I'd want as many companies to join this alliance as possible without
putting an impediment in their way.

[Peter Whitfield]

Looking at the current proposed subs, the crossover points where a
company sub would be more cost-effective are:

1-5 employees > 1 person
6-25 > 5 people
26-100 > 10 people
101-500 > 15 people
> 500 > 30 people

So for your example, if 40-50 employees would typically be involved
then it would be more cost-effective for the company to take a
corporate membership.

Perhaps, rather than having companies state how many participants they
want to support in their company membership, it would be simpler to
just let them decide whether to go with corporate membership or
whether to support individuals based on how many people would be
involved.

Cheers,

Pete

[Peter Whitfield]

Hi Mark,

I don't see this reply posted on the group so I assume you replied
directly to me.

Two thoughts here - one is that my suggestion was essential to leave
as is (which reflects the US rules) since I think this leaves the
option open for companies to support individual memberships if that's
more cost-effective for them.

On the topic of aligning to the rules of the US Agile Alliance -
whilst I agree that there would need to be a good reason to do
something different, I do think that the original flavour of the
discussion about AAA was to determine what made sense for Australia,
not simply to create a carbon copy of the US Agile Alliance.

Cheers,

Pete

ps. I'll post this whole message on the group so everyone can see the
whole thread.

On 05/11/2009, at 1:24 PM, Mark Mansour wrote:

As a general rule I'd like to copy the rules of the US agile alliance
unless there is a *very* good reason to not do so. I'd prefer we put
our energy into building something really usable for the agile
community (e.g. annual events, an online presence) rather than fine
tuning rules. I'm not against it, I just want it to justify the
effort.

--
Mark Mansour
ma...@agilebench.com
http://agilebench.com/


On Nov 5, 11:16 am, Peter Whitfield <peter.whitfi...@viz.com.au>
wrote:

[Steve Hayes]

Small point, but I'm pretty sure it's not the "US Agile Alliance" - it's the Agile Alliance, and it's global. The problem from our perspective is that most of the members and most of the activity is far from Australian shores.

It's not clear how the co-operation between the two bodies will pan out - at the moment we are independent bodies with the same objectives and similar structures. An email I received from the Agile Alliance is below.

It's up to us how close/separate we'd *like* to be, and then up to them whether they can accomodate us or not.

Steve Hayes

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

'Hello Steve,

The creation of "Agile Alliance Australia" has come as a bit of a surprise to us...  we have been discussing internally the formation of "affiliates" at the continental or national level, but haven't come to conclusions on exactly how to move forward in that regard.  The actions taken in Australia are a clear indicator that we need to prioritize this conversation.  Australia is not alone in the movement to create affiliates (for lack of a better word at the moment) worldwide.  

With that said, please understand that our intention is to work collaboratively to create structures so our organizations can work together.  We've been going down this road since 2001, and would welcome the opportunity to partner where possible.  Our mission statement is simple and clear:  "We support those who explore and apply Agile principles and practices to make the software industry productive, humane, and sustainable."

The Agile Alliance board has a committee to address issues of internationalization through chapters and "affiliates".  The chair of that committee is Tamara Sulaiman (cc'd on this email.)  Would you consider becoming a part of this committee?

We'd appreciate having a conversation with you!

Phil Brock

Managing Director

Agile Alliance

PH:  503.554-8230

FAX:  503.554-6622

"Share the passion to deliver software better every day."'

--

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-allian...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to agile-alliance-aus...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/agile-alliance-australia?hl=en.

-----

Steve Hayes

Cogent Consulting

http://www.cogentconsulting.com.au

http://iridescenturchin.blogspot.com/

twitter: steve_hayes

GTalk: steve.e.hayes

Yahoo: steve_e_hayes

Mobile: 0403 902 431

SkypeIn: +61 3 9005 6695

Measure your code quality: http://iridescenturchin.blogspot.com/2009/07/what-would-you-like-in-code-quality.html

Have more things to do than you have time to do them? Use http://www.runwayapp.com.

Runway - where your life takes off.

[Rowan Bunning]

Speaking of the global Agile Alliance, I have recently been in touch with Diana Larsen (chair of the Agile Alliance board of directors) about her plans to visit Australia in order to speak at SDC (http://www.softed.com/sdc/Default.aspx). Perhaps it is worth having a chat with her re the Australian Agile Alliance / affiliate organisation in person during March if not before.

Diana is planning to stay in Sydney from March 27 through March 31. She needs to head home no later than April 1.

In case anyone here would like to get Diana in to speak or run a workshop, here's an excerpt from an email from Diana.

"

I'm well prepared to speak, lead workshops, or consult about most things to do with:

agile team collaboration,

coaching/leading agile teams,

coordinating agile adoptions,

leading agile retrospectives,

starting agile projects,

the doing's of the Agile Alliance, and

the brain science behind female-male working relationships (also known as gender intelligence).

I could lead a half- or full-day public workshop on retrospectives or team collaboration skills as a fund-raiser for your groups or as an internal course for a company. If you'd like or need such a thing.

"

You can get in touch with Diana directly via: <dlarsen _at_ futureworksconsulting.com>

Cheers,

Rowan.

---

Independent Consultant and Certified Scrum Trainer (CST) - Software WithStyle - Australia & New Zealand

email: rowan....@softwarewithstyle.com | skype: rowanbunning | mobile: +61 (0)410 975 850

web: www.softwarewithstyle.com | blog: blog.softwarewithstyle.com | linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/4/666/69b

"To lead people, walk beside them. When the best leader’s work is done the people say, ‘We did it ourselves!'" - Lao Tse