2022-09-13 Acquisitions Meeting notes



  • Alissa Hafele, Ann Crowley, Dennis Bridges, Dung-Lan Chen, Emily Robertson, Heather McMillan, Jackie Magagnosc, Jean Pajerek, Julie Brannon, Julie Stauffer, Kathleen Norton, Kayla Valdivieso, Kimberly Pamplin, Kimberly Wiljanen, Kristin Martin, Lisa Maybury, Lisa Smith, Lloyd Chittenden, Lucinda Williams, Masayo Uchiyama, Molly Driscoll, Nancy Pelis, Okay Okonkwo, Robert Heaton, Sara Colglazier, Scott Perry, Scott Stangroom, Shannon Burke, Steve Selleck, Suzanne Mangrum, Sven Thomsen, Tara Barnett, Winter White


Housekeeping - No meeting this Friday. Next meeting is 9/20 (Tuesday) 

Business -

    • Discuss workflow of noting Implementers Topics status
    • Discuss the display of EDIFACT export detail on PO and POL. The export history of a purchase order.
    • Continue to discuss Implementers' Topics - see Acquisitions/Resource Management Implementers

Discussion items

  • Housekeeping - No meeting this Friday. Next meeting is 9/20 (Tuesday) 

  • Discuss workflow of noting Implementers Topics status
  •  From Alissa Hafele to Everyone 12:02 PM  Should we just edit the wiki directly for these?
  • Dennis adds notes for what was discussed. Anyone can add to the implementers list. 
  • From Slack on Sept.9, 2022
    • just a quick note that I’ve added a status column to the implementers topics list. It occurred to me today that it would be valuable to have a better sense of the status of all of these discussions. I’ve updated them but it think it probably makes sense for the community to control the status (set the status of these moving forward). Maybe the convener or another representative appointed by the SIG group so that the community is deciding when the are satisfied with the outcome, rather than a product owner. Please share feel free to share your thoughts on this here. Perhaps we can have a little retrospective discussion of the implementers topics workflow on Tuesday as well. There is always room for improvement 
    • Dennis: We don't really have a formal process. It would be helpful to have a bit more structure. If you contribute anything please add your name. Especially for amending topics. 
    • If you want to add a topic to the Implementers page, you just need a Confluence sign in. 
    • Do not add detail to closed or discussed topics as your comments may get overlooked. Add details as a new topic and reference the previous topic. 
    • Dennis: Having a status on the topic is helpful, but would like to see someone else take ownership of the status of the topic. So who is responsible for the status, and are these the statuses we need. He isn't sure he is the one that should call it closed since the person that put it on there may not feel it is. 
    • From Robert Heaton to Everyone 12:18 PM
      I’m new! Are the topics in priority order, or chronological (or something else)?
      • Newer topics are at the bottom. So we go in order from the oldest to the newest. 
    • From Ann Crowley to Everyone 12:19 PM
      Could the person who entered the item update the status, then we know they are satisfied with the discuss and/or result
    • From Dennis Bridges to Everyone 12:21 PM
      I think that makes the most sense to me.
      Robert, I hope that was clear but they are NOT in priority order. These are just added in chronological order and they are discussed in that order. “First come first serve"
      However just because they have been discussed does not mean they are begin actioned.
    • Dennis: For the most part, a story or feature is usually created from these discussions. Generally he adds a 'call to action' notes for himself to remind him what still needs to be done. Once he has done it, he'll mark it as done. 
    • ex. no.18 was from July 2021, says it needs a JIRA created and shows in process. Something here to link it to the JIRA would be nice. 
      • Dennis: This is one that is still in the in between stage. There is a wiki page, there are some use cases here, but it does not yet have a JIRA and has gotten lost in this pile. 
    • Maybe a quarterly review of the status?
    • The person that added the title to the list would be a good one to keep an eye on the topic to add the updates.  
    • From Dung-Lan Chen to Everyone 12:27 PM
      Maybe we need different "in progress" one for discussion, one for action?  Due to priorities of what's being voted as important issues maybe?!

    • From Robert Heaton to Everyone 12:35 PM
      +1 more info will be right there in one of the columns--the status doesn’t need to cover it all
      From Julie Brannon (she/her) to Everyone 12:35 PM
      +1 to Kristin - the group has finished reviewing it and no further action is needed from the SIG
    • Dennis: Are there any other pain points with the Implementers topics?
      • Julie: There is no way to indicate a topic needs to be a priority
        • Dennis: How do we give it context for the importance?
      • From Robert Heaton to Everyone 12:38 PM
        Quarterly review could include a prioritization process
      • From Molly Driscoll to Everyone 12:39 PM
        Maybe some sort of way to "upvote" issues?
      • From Lisa Smith - Mich State to Everyone 12:40 PM
        I would love a shorter list, but not sure if that's possible!  I think I could miss a topic, and type in a repeat topic.
      • From Robert Heaton to Everyone 12:40 PM
        We may need to coordinate this list with that one?
      • Kristin: There is a prioritization working group that is looking into how to prioritize issues so she will will se what they are coming up with. 
    • Dennis: Sometimes there is more than one person that puts in a topic. Should we assign one person that is responsible?
      • Dung-Lan - I'll follow up with both to see if they will update the status. 
      • Here is the work of prioritization group: . It is predicated on an issue being in Jira, but using an external tool to prioritize.
      • Dennis: In JIRA there are multiple ways for capturing priority. Our list is not yet features, it's a list of questions, concerns or desired functionality. These are topics for discussion. If we capture votes here, it may conflict with other lists and imply that we will discuss certain topics in priority rather than going through them chronologically. 
      • Because of the other mechanisms for prioritizing, our group is just looking at how to get it into the que. 
      • Dennis: I think it's worth having types.  It would be helpful to know if an issue is a workflow type thing or other. We need to define what those topics are. 
      • From Dung-Lan Chen to Everyone 12:57 PM
        Addressing the existing logics in place and update/enhance them if needed would be separate from developing functions much needed that are not yet available in my mind.
      • From Robert Heaton to Everyone 01:01 PM
        +1 on “what kind of topic is this?” Maybe stack both tags into the status column?

Action items