2023-02-08 P&R Working Group Meeting Notes

Review and recommend tools for prioritization. If best option has a cost - draft a funding proposal for PC and CC.

Evaluation of different tools

Link to the recording where a subgroup of prio wg discussed different tools

Prioritization reporting: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OEK7vfO1QpUxMp2-12QwWzoZhVfzyW3ChUpg5H1-Je0/edit

Conversation regarding the prioritization process focused the desire to get two different rankings and the tool used to allow for ranking.

The two types of ranking recommended are:

• SIG ranking: allows the functional experts deeply engaged in the process to have a conversation and back and forth with the PO and submit rankings in their area
• Institutional voting: allows all institutions implementing or planning to implement FOLIO to vote. This replaces the current institutional rankings in Jira.

There was some discussion about whether the two different types of voting were needed and what the two votes represented. The group remained unsure.

• Different institutions may have multiple factions and allowing their SMEs to vote in their area could be helpful to have in additional to the institutional ranking.
• SIGs would bring functionality expertise.
• SIGs could also vote on more granular functionality and leave institutions to rank bigger issues.
• The POs could explain the dependencies in the SIG meeting.
• Institutional rankings would bring in a wider range of individuals engaged with FOLIO, including those not just attending SIG meetings.
• POs seem to want the institutional rankings, and continue to rely on the limited and sometimes outdated rankings in Jira.
• If we end up doing both, we need to ensure any process is not more onerous than it is helpful.

The team also discussed the tools. AirTable is the most expensive and most fully featured. SeaTable is a less functional version of AirTable. UserVoice has been eliminated from consideration. Miro is different and may be better for group activities to compare different issues. POs should already been familiar with Miro. AirTable overall, seems to be the preferred tool.

In addition to the SIG/institution ranking, we would like to make any developer priorities be more transparent and under considering in the prioritization process. For example, there is now an LoC tag in Jira indicating the issues critical for success at LC, which may influence the priorities. Funding agencies may set their own priorities, which need to be surfaced.

The team decided that an pilot project with a smaller group of features and a SIG would be worthwhile before we try to roll out wholesale changes. AirTable offers a free version which we can use for testing.

Martina will identify a small-ish group for a pilot with AirTable

Everyone will look at the current roadmap to find out what's been developed and what still remains.

Everyone will look at the FOLIO apps/development teams spreadsehet to understand where we have development resources. Jen will fill in some of the question marks for the technical modules and Sharon will review the SIG conversations to identify their major gaps.