keep JIRA for rankings: information in one place, everyone well trained → possible: different layout to have rankings not as prominent?
strengthen SIGs
have a SIG vote in JIRA (in addition to PO vote)
discussion and feature presentation in SIG meetings; through PO; can outline dependencies and has overview over capacity for own dev team→ asynchronous voting in separate tool (options see above); given and clearly communicated time period to vote
ranking within functional area through functional experts
questions to PC: is adding an extra tool an option? → needs payment, training, maintenace
devote specific percentage of dev time for technical/platform features (NFRs) → how much? → involve TC
open
member ranking vs. single institution ranking
present different options to PC/CC → decision there
would require more work for the POs to bring the Epics in better shape
How would the ranking process work for new Members?
Jira could be to much/to complicated for the newer Members
Jira is more a tool for the background info on the features but can be used in addition to a voting tool
Some Institutions would like to keep the Jira rankings for institutional uses like Dashboards, to keep track of the features
Have a different tool to prioritize the features to have it on a higher level, which is easier for newer members
Michelle in Chat:
there might also be individual issues in an epic that emerge as high priority, apart from the rest of the epic
Thomas suggests https://airtable.com/ for ranking (advantages: CSV import possible, visualization)
Summarize: No Ranking in Jira by institutions but have a prioritisation in another tool (give the institutions the chance to say what is important to them)