As you may have heard the lovely @Sophie_B would like to let go of the Coordinator’s role, which leaves the question of who will be taking over from her.
In my capacity of “Reefling like any other” (so not as the group’s Coordinator) but also in my capacity of “Reefling who has invested an arm and a leg in this project” I find it important that Team Building gets a Coordinator who knows The Reef kind of inside out, who is familiar with the different sociocractic tools and also someone who has the time and energy to take on the role of Coordinator. This is important to me because Team Building is a “make or break” Team and we are nearing a point where some people are starting to get worried about whether we are going to make it or not.
For the moment there are not a lot of people who meet those criteria, and so what I would like to propose to you is that I would join your Team for a couple of months. The objective for me would be to join for as briefly a period as possible, and to use the time that I am a member to share what I learned about sociocracy, and to support everybody as much as possible, so that in a couple of months somebody will feel confident enough to take on the role of the Team’s Coordinator.
Discussing this online may not be the most efficient thing, so here’s what I would like to propose:
I join your next meeting, and we do a round to see whether you can consent to me joining or not; (if you’d like to discuss this privately before that, please feel welcome to send me a message on Signal)
If you consent to this, I would like to facilitate the meeting. Not as part of my “dominate the world” plan (I do have one though - I’m just kidding), but because I have followed a one-year sociocracy training, and I figure it can be interesting to share a bit of what I have learned.
If we’d do that, what I would propose is that we co-create the agenda. This doesn’t need to take long, but it can be a quite effective tool to get to an agenda that brings together the collective intelligence, and which meets everybody’s needs.
There is the draft agenda from the last meeting already, so that’s a great starting point. What we could add to that - for everyone to bring to the round whatever they please - is a list of all the issues that you would like to discuss in the next 2-3 meetings. This could be strategic things, action points, organisational points etc. We’ll throw 'm all together, put structure in it, prioritize them and then start tackling them one by one.
Maybe give me a if you can work with this and/or let me know what you think in the post below?
I had a look at the agenda and added some ideas underneath, but actually I feel that some of it is rather urgent and should be added to the actual agenda.
How do we go about this? Will we co-create the agenda live? Are we gonna edit it before hand?
I’ll say my piece below about what I would like to see and why (not sure how to deal with this co-creating, sorry if I’m messing it up!)
I would suggest getting rid of one less urgent matter for now (the cobuyers question).
For the finding owners section, I don’t think it will actually take as long, because a lot of it will just be saying who takes what, and a quick feedback on whats ongoing, but I don"t think there will actually be much to discuss.
Also I would like to add at least 2 sections: one on searching online and one on our working process.
For the section about how to organise ourselves, I would like to add it because we have discussed it quite a bit lately, and we were thinking it could help us work more efficiently. If we decide to include it, in order to make the meeting most efficient, I thought I would summarize below some things that have been discussed here and there. It is only a conversation starter, everybody feel free to add to it.
Here it is:
When we screen a fiche, we need to keep a printscreen of the different usefull maps (cadgis, google earth, etc…). It would really help timewise when having to prepare a presentation.
We could simplify our fiche folder, as we now have the table to keep track of things, and as we are not actually moving the fiches! We could have 3 folders: new fiches, candidate for pre-feasibility and rejected. Screener 2 moves the fiche from new fiches to pre-F or rejected.
When we receive the results of a pre-F, the personn responsible creates a folder in the pre-F folder in “documents received from architects” and moves the fiche there, as well as the drawing and the other documents from the architects
We keep a record of the relevant sections of the architects’ email body (there is a lot of info in the actual email that is not available in the attached documents) in a document in the pre-F folder of each site. That way we also don"t have to look back into each and every email when we look for the info (that will also help for preparing the presentations) and we can easily get back to it. I guess the person answering the email could be responsible for that?
Some of the info that we have in the table should be added into the fiche (contact info, but mainly any useful extra information about servitudes, local rules or situation, neighbouring lands, etc…) so that it is sent directly to the architects when we send a fiche. Points to be discussed: what info to put in the fiche (it should be readable for the architects so we don"t want to clutter it)
Co-creating an agenda can be done by a couple of quick rounds. We can collect all the items we would like to discuss in the next 2-3 meetings, and then group them and prioritise them. It will take up some meeting time, but to me the time is not lost. If it works (no guarantees ), it helps everybody to get an overview, and to get a say in what to discuss and prioritise.
Right, so I gather we prioritise points for the next 2-3 meetings, including the current one? So we might get a chance to talk about the points I mentionned on frudat if everybody agrees, or else if we decide it’s not so urgent then we move it to the next meeting. Heart me if I’m right, correct me if I’m wrong…
Hey @reef-building, I have added the questions/remarks to the architects in the (haha!) “questions to the architects” document (at the very end). Please add to it I’d be happy to send that message at the beginning of next week, unless @Sarah would like to officially take over
Hi @reef-building!
Not everybody has done Le Program 2 (I hesitated sending a reminder, maybe I should have)…
I’m thinking of extending the deadline 2 or 3 weeks, what do you think?
In a period where concerns are raised about being slow to make progress, I would find it difficult to just extend the deadline by 2-3 weeks. We have a clear agreement on minimum commitment and responsibility, saying that we expect that everybody respects the deadlines for documents to be filled in. For me this is about being able to count on people to not stop our project in its tracks once things get really important. So I could live with 2-3 days if need be, but more I would find difficult.
Would you be ok to ping those who haven’t filled it in yet, and tell them that the deadline is today?
Hi @reef-building !
Two questions from our very successful plenary meeting:
3 F studies to send! Yay! Sophie not being here, who will do it? We haven’t really clarified who would be the other point of contact(s). I’m happy to do it if you want, but also don"t need to.
I think we may have other things to tell them, so I’ve started a list in our usual document, with the stuff we want to say in the email. @anon78992831 could you sum up here what you found out about Goffin and also add a reply (in french would be easiest) in the document? And do we want to ask for clarifications about what exactly we are looking for in terms of built square meters or are we clear enough with what we found out tonight? (@Lee can you share the document that you were looking at with Alberto? Is it the estimation? )
Do I have a mandate to go ahead with organising scouting days every 2 weeks, or do we want to talk about it in the next meeting first? I’m just thinking it would be good if people can block off dates in advance…
3F studies to sent to the architects: i don’t feel i can do this at this moment, so yes: go ahead (for me), the sooner it is done, the better. Thanks!
yes: i would also go for blocking agenda’s and maybe cancelling some afterwards if needed. Lee was also planning to write an extra post on scouting, but if i remember well that was on motivating people to do as much scouting as possible : individually and on the foreseen days, and was more linked to ‘we first need to have a view on where to scout next’, so would definately go ahead with the planning.
Let’s add a point on everything communication to the agenda of the next meeting?
That said, if I’m not wrong there was an action point left of asking the architects for their bill. So unless I missed something (I didn’t see anything in the mailbox) I’ll take care of that, so we can close the 2023 budget.
Exactly that.
It’s the financial estimation document indeed. I propose we first have a look at it (I’ll start a small thread), and then see where that brings us. Talking to Alberto yesterday we also figured that it’s probably a good idea to bring a Team Finance number cruncher to the work flow, once the feasibility studies have come in.
Indeed. The sites we sent out are all going to be over budget by about 1 mil, and one of them (maybe both) also implies reducing the number of units to carry that cost. So this will raise the cost of the site per square meter built. We need to find out by how much, so that we can make informed choices about how much we can offer for those sites.
It is. My point is that, if we have a good sense for the economics, we might be able to:
Discard sites that are obviously over budget at the pre-feasibility phase. All we need is two numbers that are on the pre-feasibility study: surface of the site and number of square meters vendable that the site supports.
If our numbers do not add up, review the criteria for a viable site.
- I’m just kidding), but because I have followed a one-year sociocracy training, and I figure it can be interesting to share a bit of what I have learned.
if you can work with this and/or let me know what you think in the post below?
