Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 5 Next »

Date

Attendees

Absent

Goals

  • Round the table of work ongoing
  • Review of any blockers or issues
  • Any discussion items from the team
  • Upcoming work

Discussion items

ItemWhoDescriptionNotes on discussion
Work in progressJane

How do people feel they are tracking on the current priorities?

I would like a more detailed discussion on the steps needed to be covered in order to be delivering on the goals set for Sprint 17 to ensure we are all on the same page and that the work is covered.

Sprint Planning

 
PersonasJoe

Overall direction, blockers, an amount of additional work needed to finalize them.

  • When will this work be done and how?
  • Do we need more personas?
  • Anne, Sam & Paul have been discussing over the late few weeks
  • Current personas needs further improvement - these had only ever got to draft stage
  • It was delayed until after the research with students so they could be more informed.
  • Paul is happy to work with them as they are - he doesn't think we need goals for all of them.

TIMING: After the other testing

MORE PERSONAS: Add staff and business personas. Do this as a brainstorming session or do it in Confluence using commenting. Decision was for everyone to read the personas and then have a meeting with the WIP II Team

SHARING PERSONAS: We are creating web personas and we can share these but not develop them in conjunction.

RESPONSIBILITY: Paul will be responsible for this work but will be helped by the team as required. Joe needs to concentrate on development work.

User Research progressJoeWhat we learned, what could be improved, an amount of additional testing needed?

Paul recommends we discuss this next catch-up once notes are written.

The findings will be shared at the sprint review.

  • Anne will ensure that the publishing team are keep in the loop about any findings.

The team will need to discuss process improvements. In general the approach was good.

  • Participants didn't realise it would be just them - it would be good to ensure this is communicated next time.

 

Disparate sources of informationJoeToo many different sources of (research/analysis) information and data, sometimes with conflicting, inaccurate or undecided statements. Not clear what's the importance of different pieces of information we have, which should be followed and which is just informational etc. 
Faculty & Schools Website Structure - subject groupingsPaul

Subject groupings and maybe high level I/A if this will impact much. I am happy to lead the planning of how to get the subject groupings approved and would like to know who wants in on this work.

 
Staff ProfilesPaulI would also appreciate some timeline (from David?) on the staff profiles scope decision, as this is probably the most robust of the requirements areas at this stage and being both a part of F&S and CSP is in our priority domains for early attention. I guess this is also of interest because I want to deliver some benefit to the organisation sooner rather than later. 
Meeting on Thursday about  computer groupingsPaul and Joe(Created by Andrew) I had a brief catch up with Joe after the meeting yesterday and there were a number of interesting points that would be good to raise with the rest of the group 
  • No labels