BER-07: prefeasibility ‘N’ in scoring tab, ‘PF candidate’ in overview. Seems contradictory
JET-15: prefeasibility ‘N’ in scoring tab, status ‘in’ in overview, Seems contradictory
BER-09, BER-10, JET-16, UCC-02 in overview (yellow lines), not yet in scoring tab => work in progress? If you want me to do it, let me know
2 Likes
There are a few mistakes in the table, I think i went a bit fast when I first did it. Happy to go through it again more slowly and do corrections. @Lee : i put my name down for doing the corrections in the overview table, I’ll do the second (third?) check at the same time…
@lie: my name is down for "Set up and organise the “PF” sheet and “Set up and organise the “F” sheet” in the “starting task list”; that’s not relevant anymore, is it? I think it is tasks I said I would do, and then forgot about, very sorry about that…
I’m about half way down the table, so I may have other things later, but here are a few things I want to share/ask in the meantime:
- I have updated the fiche for AND -13 and AND- 32 with the info that we are putting it on hold and the reasons/ a link to the relevant posts. I think it might be good practice to keep an easy track of our decision somewhere, so I added a section to the fiche template.
If I understood the minutes, you wanted to move these fiches to a “on hold” folder, right? I created such a folder in the “still in” folder and moved them to there.
(Note : Somehow a copy of AND-32 was already under “sites discarded” from 15days ago. I don’t know if that should prompt a check on the sites that have been put on that folder as I don’t have a good oversight on this) - @Lee : I feel I read a post from you where you were requesting a change in the coding for some item in the overview table, but I can’t find that post anymore; it might have been about “PF negative from TB”? Do you know what it was about? Or did I dream that?
- AND 35 appears twice in the table. I have crossed off the line that should go but didn"t want to erase it without a double check. @Lee - can you erase it if you are ok with that?
- I’m not clear why we need the “discuss in meeting” column? We could just have “discuss in TB meeting” or “discuss in plenary” under “next action”, and either “TB” or “Team Reef” under “who”. It doesn’t matter too much, but I guess if we are trying to rationalise things, there’s no point having an extra column we don"t need…
- @els :
The sites are all in the overview table and scored already. Not sure if that happened in the meantime though?
/
Note: for efficiency sake, I have taken the liberty to do some things that I thought were ok, but let me know if I should have checked first for some items, I don"t want to mess with our process!
2 Likes
Hello Fiche Factory Fellows (@reef-building),
Here’s a new update …
Transition to the new file
-
The old file (“4. Screening the fiches”) has now been archived. If you need to look something up, you can always go to the former sandbox, which now serves as a back-up (see Fiche Factory > Documentation > Link to sandbox (internal link))
-
I copy/pasted the lines that were in yellow (i.e. the new ones) from the old file to the new one. This created new items in the file numbered 138-154. @Sarah @anon78992831 @Caro and everybody else who is involved: can you please have a look at “1. Overview” and “2. Scoring”, and correct and complete as you see fit?
-
I browsed through all the Edgeryders and Signal posts with questions about sites.
-
Most of them (Seb’s) about missing files have now been answered: so I copy/pasted the items from the old file to the new one, and changed the codes where necessary (i.e. by adding a letter to the code if it was a double).
-
There were 3 more sites left with a question, which I have now gathered in a new tab, called “5. Q&A & problem solving”. All have been solved, but if it was your question, you can find it there, and you are of course very welcome to gather further questions over there.
-
1. Overview
-
@Sarah @anon78992831 and @Caro (and anybody else who hears a calling), can you please have a look at the yellow cells in the 1. Overview tab, and correct or complete them?
-
@sarah, there is an “F sent” label in the “current stage” column (E) that is unclear to me. Can you clarify what this label means? And if applicable, should these sites be picked up in the “4. FS” tab?
-
I made an entry on colour coding in the “0. Coding” tab. Yellow highlight should mean “this needs correction”. If you need a colour to attract someone’s attention (I see cells with Seb’s name highlighted) can you please choose another colour and put in the coding tab?
2. Scoring
-
@Sarah @anon78992831 and @Caro (and anybody else who hears a calling) can you please have a look at the last lines (the ones copy/pasted from the old file) and correct or complete the data?
-
Ideally I would like to delete the S column on status, as this information should be in the Overview tab. @Sarah is this feasible?
3. PFS
I deleted the data here, because there have been so many changes, but it will be easy to copy/paste the data from the previous tab once it is stable.
What I would like to gather here, is what happened to the sites that got a “Y” in the scoring tab.
What I can’t fully square for example is that there are 42 sites that got a Y, but then the majority is flagged as “rejected”, and also that there are 31 files in the “Sites still in” folder. I guess the explanation is that some of the “M” sites got moved forward?
I don’t know how important it is to clean this up at some point, but I just wanted to flag it.
The other thing that I would like to resurface, is the sites on which we consulted the architects (even just by email). And then it would be great if we can copy/paste that information into the fiches.
4. FS
Finally I created a new tab for all sites that made it to the FS stage. This is where we keep data about our jewels, of which we currently have four. In this tab we’ll be able to keep track of the sites that are “on hold” (so no need for a specific folder), and if they are out, we can keep track of the detailed story.
“Discuss in meeting”
-
On the “discuss in meeting” column issue: we need a separate column, because otherwise we’ll lose information about the next action (column H). It also makes it easier to filter out the sites that we need to disucss. The encoding can be found in the “0. Coding legend”: TB = Team Building and PM = plenary meeting.
-
@sarah: I see you are keeping your document “discuss at meeting” up-to-date, which is great! But then I was looking for the information on AND-13 and AND-32, and I couldn’t find it. Are you deleting text, and if yes, can you please leave the archive at the bottom of the document?
Encoding new sites
We can do a demo at the next meeting, but this is the essence:
-
If you are using OpenOffice: select the “ID” column (or the “Site code” column) > click on Data (top) > choose “Sort” > choose “extend the selection” > click “OK” => this way you get an overview of which number you need to give the new one.
-
If you are using Excel: it sits at the top right “Sort & filter” > choose “sort A-Z”
Clearing a filter
If it looks like data got lost, it’s because there is a filter. Here’s how you can reset it:
-
In OpenOffice: go to Data > Filter > Remove filter
-
In Excel: go to “Sort & filter” > “clear”
3 Likes
Sorry, I missed a couple of posts …
Thanks for spotting that. I listed all questions in the “5. Q&A” tab.
Yes, grateful if you could take care of that!
It’s work in progress, but for now we first need a stable version of the “2. Scoring” tab.
Thanks for adding that info to the fiche! I think that’s really the one best thing to keep an overview on things.
Other than that I added both sites to the “4. FS” tab, and I posted a question about the necessity of an “on hold” sub-folder, but I don’t want to weigh in on that. Having only one copy of a fiche (with all the information) should matter though.
That’s still a thing. It appears a couple of times in column F (stage discarded). So my question is what does the label mean?
@sarah this may mean they could lost in the transition from old to new. Would you mind having a look?
Getting stuff done is great! When in doubt, don’t hesitate to select a new colour, and temporarily colour code the ones that you changed but which you may want to change back.
1 Like
It means that the architects said maybe and we said no…
Don’t mind either…
Not sure what you want me to do?
I checked and they are all there. So no action required.
1 Like
@Sarah I did some further juggling and I would like to delete some rows and lines, but I don’t want to do it without your blessing.
Feedback on the structure and the reasoning are also very welcome (from everybody of course).
As a general rule if the font colour is grey it means I would like to delete the column from that tab.
Scoring tab (2)
Here I would like to only keep the scoring related information. In the final column, instead of “pre-feasibility” I would like the question to be “move forward”. This is more accurate, since we now know that we can only send something for a PFS if we know that a plot is for sale.
The final question in this tab would then be “move forward?” yes or no. “Yes” means “we’ll look for the owner”. From there on we then move to the next tab, where we keep all this information on owners and prices.
PFS (checking) tab (3a)
Then I moved the entire data set to the “3. PFS” tab, which I would like to rename “checking”, because that’s what’s really happening at this stage of the Factory.
What I did is I filtered column G “reason discarded” for “after screening”, and then I striked through all these lines. With your blessing, I would like to delete these from this tab.
The blue columns are from the mother file, but the order is a bit different.
The dark orange columns are new ones, and I prefilled all the cells that I could based on the information that is in the other columns.
The final question in this tab would be “sent to the architects?”. If the answer is “yes”, then we move the site to the next tab (to be created, now called “3b”). This would then create a tab with only the few sites that we sent to the architects, and then we can make some space to encode their feedback.
Questions and action points
-
Can you please have a look at the above and see whether it makes sense?
-
In the Overview tab:
-
Can you please clean up the “Who” column?
- In my logic the name here should be the one of the person who is following that site, or the person who needs to undertake action. In that logic, it can’t be “TB” or “TR” (but it’s not very important).
- I changed the yellow highlights on “Seb” into green, because I like to keep yellow for things that need to be checked or corrected.
-
Is it possible that the “F sent” label in column E (current stage) needs some refinement (genuine question). Can it be that we need to split this in “F candidate” and “F sent”, with the latter meaning “the architects looked at it in depth”?
-
I highlighted in yellow all cells that seem to have a contradiction, or that need to be completed. Could you have a look when you have a moment?
- For most sites the contradiction can be found when checking all cells from the left to the right
- BER-03 is highlighted in yellow because it says “too small”, but then in the scoring tab it says 2194 m².
-
-
In the 3a tab:
-
Would it be a lot of effort to complete what is now column S “for sale”? If not, that would be very helpful, cause then we can move the “Y” lines to the next tab.
-
Idem for column U “sent to architects”
-
Column R “comments” seems to be a bit of a mixed bag. For now I have included it in tab 3a and removed it in the scoring tab. Does that make sense to you?
-
Conclusion
It’s quite a lot again, so thanks a lot in advance and no rush. If it can be helpful, happy to set up a call and stare at the screen together.
1 Like
i don’t know if seb allready mentioned this one: UCC-03 seems to have disappeared. It’s the fiche Angelika made recently based on online searching => I mentionned it in tab 5. Q&A.
I downloaded nextcloud on my pc, and have openoffice on my pc, so the ‘Sites overview’ file opens in openoffice.
When i change sth and want to save it, it asks to save a copy. I guess it’s because (my) open office doesn’t recognise/accept files with extension ‘xlsx’ => is it ok to rename it to ‘xls’? (I am a bit affraid it might mess up some things, so i would first save a copy in the sandbox)
Thank Lie, i am a bit lost for the moment with the excel tabs but i guess i will find my way. A simple question, how/where can I find sites that still need to find their owners? Merci !
@alberto can you please advise on this one? Is it enough to convert it to an “xls” or should it be an “ods”, and if it’s the latter, are there specific things we should pay attention to?
@anon78992831 I am really sorry for the chaos! It should be over relatively soon now.
The information on looking for the owners is in tab 3a, in columns O to T (the ones with blue text). If you want to make the table more readable, you can right click on a column and choose “hide”, or “show” if you want to revert the hiding.
1 Like
Hello Fiche Factory Fellows (@reef-building),
As you’ll see I made some further changes to the Overview tab. I was worried that the system that we had in place was a bit difficult to read, and also prone to errors, because we have to copy data from one tab to another.
What I did is I created extra columns in the Overview tab, where the essential data from each of the other tabs is automatically copy/pasted. So if you make a change in the “move forward” column in the “2. Scoring” tab, the information is automatically copy/pasted to the Overview tab.
This way, with the help of some colour coding, we can now easily read from the left to the right whether a site is still in or not, and if it’s not, at which stage it fell out.
One important weakness of this system is that it crucially hinges on all the rows being equal in all the tabs, which should be feasible but nevertheless something to be very cautious about. When we next talk I propose we attribute the responsibility for the coding to someone, so we avoid inconsistencies.
2 Likes
AFAIK Libre Office (not Open Office, which I thinkl was discontinued) handles .xlsx just fine. It just likes to give you the opportunity to continue your work in .ods. My advice: answer “no” and continue working on .xlsx.
1 Like
Hello Factory Screeners (@reef-building),
It’s not a big thing, but nevertheless something. Els has invested time to rename all sites, so as to make the naming uniform. This is important to be able to sort the sites alphabetically, so that we can see whether a newly spotted site is a double yes or no.
There is naming legend in the “0. Coding legend” tab (see also screenshot below). Could you please see whether you can integrate in your way of registering new sites? TIA!
2 Likes
Hi @alberto, it is OpenOffice that i have, and they still do updates, more for bug fixes than for new features.
When i change sth in the file and i do ‘ctrl-s’ it won’t save, it proposes to save a copy of the file , and i can save it under a number of extension, but not under ‘.xlsx’. (see screenshot)
So i guess i’ll need to download another software like AFAIK Libre Office to have this problem solved?
@Lee
Fyi, i just proposed to use a uniform way for addresses. I didn’t update the file yet.
I don’t mind doing it, but i want to wait till my issues with modifying the file in the desktop application are solved, as modifying the file online is quite frustrating
1 Like
Yes. And also for another reason: Libre Office is the “engine” of Collabora Online, which is what happens when you edit files on NextCloud via the browser. If you have LO on your machine and CO on the Nextcloud server, you minimize risk of clashes.
2 Likes
I’ve updated the file now ‘Avenue => Av., …’
1 Like
Hi team!
I’m back from my mini-break 
I’ve finished having a second look and correcting the “1. Overview” (hopefully I didn’t miss too many things, but it’s quite dense so there is still a chance I did…)
Also, here is my answers to Lie’s post (n°24):
General
-
@Lee : About the label “PF negative from TB”: I see you made a note next to it to explain what it means. So I’m assuming we are keeping it, and I’m deleting the 4th task in the to do list.
-
I missed the meeting so I am not clear about the workflow: when a site is scored positively, and we decide to send it to the architects, who does what next? Who changes the tab “1.Overview” to keep track of the new status? And how does the group gets to know that there is a new site that we need to look for the owner of? Also, what are colums E to H in tab 1 and how do they work? What are the 2 “PF” tabs? etc…
Would somebody be available to give me a guided tour on zoom?
I get the feeling that we should clarify the steps that happen following a positive screening (site scoring Y), because at the moment the table “1. Overview” doesn"t seem to be filled in consistently, and we are left with some sites with nobody taking care of the next step. I have taken care of filling in the info and the “next action” column for the moment (see below “new lines”), but it would be good if we can agree on how to proceed in general. -
New lines
Done, filled in “1. overview” based on “2. scoring”. I’m not sure if there was something else to do?
Overview
- F sent
This means that we sent the site to the architects so that they can carry out the feasibility study. So indeed, they should go to “4. FS” as well (done).
Regarding this “4.FS” tab, I’m not a huge fan of how it looks! 
I find it makes it quite uncomfortable to navigate. Do we absolutely need to keep all the empty lines? Couldn"t we just copy the relevant lines, along with their ID number? I sense that there is a system and it seems to be linked with the overview tab, but maybe we can re-arrange??
Scoring
For me, the only question here is whether this info has been included in the PFS tabs (3a. and 3b.), which I’m not responsible for (or am I? Maybe I missed something?? ). I’m not sure what else I have to check on that matter?
3. PFS
- Meaning of Y, etc…
Mostly the sites that got rejected were not for sale. Sometimes it was other reasons. But that should all be in the new file tab “1. Overview” now, let me know if you think there are some extra info missing
Not sure what you mean here? But…
… yes, I would say it’s not too important now! But let me know if you think it needs more looking into!
Looking through their emails is on my list of things to do but low priority… And I’m not actually sure when it will make “high priority”, I’m not sure if I will actually get round to doing it. I wonder if somebody else has some room to take it on?
“Discuss in meeting”
I don’t understand but fine!
Indeed I was deleting it, didn’t think it was useful. I have copy/pasted the list now, and we can do that after each meeting, so that we don"t loose info but keep the list up-to-date.
OH MY GOD MY HEAD IS GOING TO IMPLODE!! I think i’ve just spent 4 h on this! 
I’m really woozy, so what I wrote may not all be correct/readable/making sense… Happy to chat to clear it out if needed…