Project Budget and Team Goals

[Matt Lipscomb]

On April 26 the budget was approved by the OSM board members.  A month later now, it would be great if we could provide this final budget and the OSM/PLT/CLT goals that we wrote to the community so they all can see what the final result of the long process was.  Any way to make that happen in the next couple of days?

[Paul Orwig]

Matt,

OSM finished up work on goals and tasks when we met after JAB on May 9th. Now less than two weeks after that, I have the task to consolidate the goals/tasks from all 3 leadership teams. I plan to have it done before the OSM board meeting next Tuesday morning.

Thanks.

paul

On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 9:45 AM, Matt Lipscomb <matt.l...@community.joomla.org> wrote:

On April 26 the budget was approved by the OSM board members.  A month later now, it would be great if we could provide this final budget and the OSM/PLT/CLT goals that we wrote to the community so they all can see what the final result of the long process was.  Any way to make that happen in the next couple of days?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Joomla Leadership" group.
To post to this group, send email to joomla-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to joomla-leaders...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-leadership?hl=en.

[Matt Lipscomb]

Thanks Paul.

I was unaware that OSM approved the budget without first completing their set of Goals (as the other teams - PLT/CLT had to do).  

That would mean that OSM approved it's own portion of the budget without setting any goals or priorities which leaves some accountability questions.

As a member of the budget committee I would like that to be reviewed by the Community Oversight Committee.  Not because I think that OSM would do anything *wrong* with the budget, but for a simple matter of fiscal accountability and so if it ever comes up later in the year, it can be said this was reviewed.

Thanks,

Matt

[Ryan W. Ozimek]

Hi Matt,

I think that’s a good point regarding double-checking our OSM budget line items.

I strongly encourage the Community Oversight Committee (COC), the budget committee, members of the PLT and CLT, and the community as a whole to review OSM’s portion of the budget and soon after these are published by Paul.  I think all inquiring parties will be satisfied by our work, and I think OSM can have a clear mind moving forward.

Cheers,
Ryan

----------------------------------------
Ryan Ozimek
President
Open Source Matters (Joomla's non-profit organization)
Email: ryan....@opensourcematters.org
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/cozimek

[Paul Orwig]

Hi Matt,

Just to be clear, there was never a requirement for leadership teams to define goals or tasks before the budget was approved, so it's not correct to say "as PLT/CLT had to do". Please re-read the directions on the goal setting document-they clearly state that the goals exercise was a request (not a requirement) to all teams as an aid in the planning process and also so that they could eventually be shared with the community.

Also, OSM did define all of its goals before the budget was approved, they just didn't add tasks to some of their goals to complete that part of the planning process.

Thanks,

paul

--

[Jacques Rentzke]

hi Matt

As a board member, I welcome anyone from any part of the organization to
review the budget.

As Paul pointed out, there were no requirement on us to have all the
*tasks* listed, We had our goals set, and to my knowledge, there were no
changes made to the line-item amounts that you and everyone else had
access too.

> As a member of the budget committee I would like that to be reviewed by the Community Oversight Committee. Not because I think that OSM would do anything *wrong* with the budget, but for a simple matter of fiscal accountability and so if it ever comes up later in the year, it can be said this was reviewed.

This is not the function of the Community Oversight Committee, but if
they want to take up that responsibility, I would not have any problem
with that.

Jacques Rentzke
Secretary of the Board
Open Source Matters, Inc.

On 2011/05/23 04:28 AM, Paul Orwig wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
> Just to be clear, there was never a requirement for leadership teams to
> define goals or tasks before the budget was approved, so it's not
> correct to say "as PLT/CLT had to do". Please re-read the directions on
> the goal setting document-they clearly state that the goals exercise was
> a request (not a requirement) to all teams as an aid in the planning
> process and also so that they could eventually be shared with the
> community.
>
> Also, OSM did define all of its goals before the budget was approved,
> they just didn't add tasks to some of their goals to complete that part
> of the planning process.
>
> Thanks,
>
> paul
>
>
>
> On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 7:12 PM, Ryan W. Ozimek
> <ryan....@opensourcematters.org

> <mailto:ryan....@opensourcematters.org>> wrote:
>
> Hi Matt,
>

> I think that�s a good point regarding double-checking our OSM budget

> line items.
>
> I strongly encourage the Community Oversight Committee (COC), the
> budget committee, members of the PLT and CLT, and the community as a

> whole to review OSM�s portion of the budget and soon after these are

> published by Paul. I think all inquiring parties will be satisfied
> by our work, and I think OSM can have a clear mind moving forward.
>
> Cheers,
> Ryan
>
>
> On 5/22/11 7:30 PM, "Matt Lipscomb"
> <matt.l...@community.joomla.org

> <http://matt.l...@community.joomla.org>> wrote:
>
> Thanks Paul.
>
> I was unaware that OSM approved the budget without first
> completing their set of Goals (as the other teams - PLT/CLT had
> to do).
>
> That would mean that OSM approved it's own portion of the budget
> without setting any goals or priorities which leaves some
> accountability questions.
>
> As a member of the budget committee I would like that to be
> reviewed by the Community Oversight Committee. Not because I
> think that OSM would do anything *wrong* with the budget, but
> for a simple matter of fiscal accountability and so if it ever
> comes up later in the year, it can be said this was reviewed.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Matt
>
>
> ----------------------------------------
> Ryan Ozimek
> President
> Open Source Matters (Joomla's non-profit organization)
> Email: ryan....@opensourcematters.org

> <http://ryan....@opensourcematters.org>

> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/cozimek
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Joomla Leadership" group.
> To post to this group, send email to
> joomla-l...@googlegroups.com

> <mailto:joomla-l...@googlegroups.com>.

> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> joomla-leaders...@googlegroups.com

> <mailto:joomla-leadership%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>.

[Matt Lipscomb]

@Ryan:  Thanks for responding to that.  It still did answer the original question, however.  Maybe I worded it wrong...  I'll try again.  My question was an inquiry based on why OSM approved the budget without meeting an integral step in the budget planning process.

@Paul:  From my understanding, the goals documents were an integral part of the budget process (and where the budget numbers substantially originated from) that you defined.  You did request these documents from the teams and even requested revisions of the same documents.  Maybe "had" was a poor use of semantics, but to be clear, I was under the distinct impression as a budget committee member and CLT member that these documents were necessary.  

@Jacques:  I agree that no requirement to have the tasks completely listed was ever inferred.  However, Paul did provide all three documents to the budget committee and OSM's *goals* were completely blank.  So I was under the impression that after this 5 month budget process that these goals would be defined (even if the tasks were not) prior to approval of the budget by the board.

The reason I requested the COC to review this is for transparency, accountability and oversight in this area so it cannot be ever said that "OSM put in budget items without anything to back the figures up."  Additionally, the COC has direct access to the private OSM Email list and oversight of OSM for board member appointments, removals and bylaw approval.  It does not seem illogical to me to request that this 3rd party review an issue of fiscal accountability.  I do not think that is too much to ask as a community member.  The best solution would have been to post these goals with the raw budget numbers for community discussion, but unfortunately that did not happen.  I hope to see it happen in the next budget process.

For the record, I don't think we (the budget committee) should have approved the budget moving to OSM approval without first ensuring that the process was better defined (goals, what parts went for community feedback, etc).  It would probably be a good idea to get some feedback from the COC about that as well as the members of it have substantial experience in managing the community and understanding the "temperature" of community feedback on important issues.

~Matt

[Paul Orwig]

Hi Matt,

As I mentioned in my previous email, OSM did define its 2011 goals before the budget was approved. COC members have access to the OSM email list thread (which was started on 3/22 and ended on 3/25)  with this subject line:      [Osm] Result from doodle: Our five goals

That email thread finalized OSM's 2011 goals as captured from a Doodle survey that had previously been voted on by OSM board members.

I am happy to forward that email thread to any COC members who may have deleted it from their inbox. Matt, I hope your concern about this matter can now be laid to rest.

As I also mentioned in my previous email, the goal setting process was requested, but not required. I am happy that all three leadership teams chose to follow the goal setting process. I believe that process was a success but there is certainly room for improvement, and as was published in the JPeople discussion about the draft budget last month, process improvements are planned for for next year including publishing goals for all leadership teams alongside the 2012 draft budget.

Thanks,

paul

--

[Matt Lipscomb]

Thanks for the details of the timeline Paul.  That, however, brings more questions for me rather than solves the originals ones.  The budget committee did not pass the the budget to OSM until 1 April, so the goal worksheet from OSM should have gone to the budget committee, and from the timeline you've presented on that, would have been able to be presented to the budget committee.  So the new question is, why did that not happen?  

~Matt

[Jacques Rentzke]

Matt, what is the problem that needs solving here?

Jacques Rentzke
Secretary of the Board
Open Source Matters, Inc.

[Paul Orwig]

Matt,

The reason that never happened because it was never a part of the budget committee's purpose to review and/or approve any goals. The purpose that the budget committee was formed for was to have a small agile group representing all three leadership teams together to quickly balance the project's overall budget.

paul

[Paul Orwig]

Hi all,

Each team's 2011 goals and tasks have now been published along with the final budget:

http://community.joomla.org/blogs/leadership/1452-2011-goals-budget.html

It was certainly extra work to define our goals and then publish our draft budget for community feedback, but I definitely think it was worth the effort. It is an accomplishment that we can all be proud of, and we also learned a lot from the process that will translate into improvements for next year and beyond.

Thanks,

paul

[Mark Dexter]

Great work, Paul! Mark

[Louis Landry]

Yep.  Thanks for putting in the effort.  Great stuff :-)

- Louis

Development Coordinator
Joomla! ... because open source matters.
http://www.joomla.org