Changes to joint-strategy-subcommittee/2018-03-21.md. All files

joint-strategy-subcommittee/2018-03-21.md

new file mode 100644@@ -0,0 +1,193 @@+## Node.js Leadership Subcommittee++March 21, 2018++#### Present: +- Mark Hinkle, Executive Director, Node.js Board+- Sarah Novotny, Board Member, Google+- Tracy Hinds, Subcommittee Chair+- Ashley Williams, Individual Director+- William Kapke, Individual Director+- Tierney Cyren, CommComm Chair+- Todd Moore, Board Member, Node.js Chairman, IBM++* * *+##### Antitrust Compliance Notice++Node.js Foundation meetings involve participation by industry competitors, and it is the +intention of the Node.js Foundation to conduct all of its activities in accordance with +applicable antitrust and competition laws. It is therefore extremely important that +attendees adhere to meeting agendas, and be aware of, and not participate in, any +activities that are prohibited under applicable US state, federal or foreign antitrust +and competition laws. ++Examples of types of actions that are prohibited at Node.js Foundation meetings and in +connection with Node.js Foundation activities are described in the Node.js Foundation +Antitrust Policy. If you have questions about these matters, please contact your company+counsel, or if you are a member of the Node.js Foundation, feel free to contact Andrew +Updegrove of the firm of Gesmer Updegrove LLP, which provides legal counsel to the Node.js Foundation.+* * *++### AGENDA++- Review [decorum guidelines](https://github.com/nodejs/admin/blob/master/MemberExpectations.md) for meeting.+- Review action items from last meeting.+  - Sarah will revisit the questions regarding an individual not sponsored by a member company for selection to the Board +  - Mark and Ashley with Data collection:  +    - How many people are members in each year?  +    - How many voted?  +    - How many are contributors? +  - Tracy follow up with Sarah for agenda building after questions are revisited +  - Tracy send notes to Andy and Sarah for meeting notes review +- Attending meetings–in end of meeting review, should we also plan a short list of who should be invited as a guest to the next call? Ex: individual collaborator or corporate paying member representative who doesn’t sit on Board with relevant interest/expertise.++### REVIEW:++- We should know who makes up the individual membership base to know what role and+decision-making ability they should have(data analysis on members is a work in +progress to be looked at by Mark and Ashley). +- The existing individual membership program lacked a definition, a roadmap,  +had significant technical challenges to the membership system(insufficient +software systems), and has an unclear value to existing members. +- Further discussion on an individual not sponsored by a company having the +opportunity to be selected to serve on the Board +  +Proceed with session.++### Finish discussions from prior session (15 min)++- Do we believe that an individual who is active in the project and is not +sponsored by a member company should have an opportunity to be selected to +serve on the Board?  +  - <alternate framing>  Should there be additional reserved seat(s) +  on the governing board which do not require corporate sponsorship, but +  are selected a different way? +    - There are 3+ distinct groups from what we’ve seen with the User +    Feedback Initiative. It does not seem impossible for a single individual+    to represent all 3. Individual contributors/core (+ distributors), module+    authors, end users (+operational devops)+    - A vote for representation is an option for selection because perfect +    representation is tough. In a vote, Interest groups help decide who helps+    represent their interests. +    - There is an idea that a person who contributes, has meaningful engagement+    with the Node.js project, and regardless of sponsorship or not should be +    eligible for a board position through some selection method.+    - Required dependency: define meaningful engagement. +  - Y +    - Two comments as yes. Initiatives of the project for a non-corporate-sponsored+    member to represent at the Board level and have action taken on. Make sure it is+    in alignment with what the Board is working on. Funding education and community +    efforts. Getting support for collaborators(especially ecosystem) through programs+    created and funded by Board. Diversity and inclusion work–holding leadership +    accountable for project goals when members behave counter to that goal. Working+    with proposal champions to work on initiatives instead of expecting folks to work+    on their own and then present it to the Board.  +  - N +    - No nays were provided. ++### NOTES ++#### Do we agree with the original intent of last discussion? +These seats which did not require sponsorship–do we believe that we still want this? ++Is the Board just the governing portion of the foundation and the organization of money +and marketing? Everything else happens out in the community or project? ++This tends to be how Boards operate. Don’t usually drive initiatives outside of fundraising.+Board was chartered with minimal coverage over the project to allow for freedom of project+governance. There were pieces of governance that weren’t working at some point at the +creation of the individual membership creation that was intended to be fixed by having +representation at the Board level to be empowered to help effect change when the project +was stalled with some administrative challenges.++Changing governance has historically been a long and tedious process and can be slow to change.++The Board wants to enable project work and minimize barriers. Legal and monetary risks are +the biggest considerations. If the main goal is to provide resources, we need to make this +easier. Communicate what the resources are. Analyze if they are providing value. Make changes+to improve this. They should also be well-defined. What does being on the Board mean? What do+they do?(in detail that a non-corporate-sponsor would understand) The members of the Board +through their relationships can source when there is a resource problem and get people to +help contribute. ++#### When there is a need for resources on the project side, who is responsible to help? +Who is responsible for documenting this communication channel to help? +The Executive Director can be a conduit for this. The Individual Membership Director+cannot address some of this because it requires other roles or information is such +that is isn’t supposed to be shared. We need communication out that shares what activity+is happening at the Node.js Foundation. The Executive Director can do this. Helps +communicate value of this role to the community. Executive summaries help as a medium +to point to for leaders to communicate out appropriate level of content. Set timeframe +for release. Mark will offer a monthly State of the Union for the Medium blog for the +Node.js Foundation. We’ve seen it work differently in other organizations. Tends to be +people who are deeply aligned with the work at hand. ++Board members did not put process around the selection process. There was misalignment +and expectation around what the role should look like. Pre-vetting system? In the +Node.js community, there’s a perception of insiders. It could further the insider +system perception. We need to come up with a way to address this. ++With Kubernetes, we considered a limit on who could run for the seat or who can vote. +They set the vote to anyone willing to spend $100 on the vote. You set the pool who +can vote to anyone who has made a pull request or issue comment in the last year in +the project. Another possibility was looking at the leadership group of the TSC and +CommComm and asking them to identify 3-5 nominations with a set of criteria for +selection by the Board.++From a methodical approach–We had this existing process. We don’t think it worked well+for X reasons. We believe that if we change Y, we will have a different result. ++#### Should the Board have a broader purview(ex: for inclusivity or community work)? +It has historically been contained to be respectful of the agency of the project. The prior +structure was to address perceptions that existed at the time that may no longer be a +need to be met. This limited scope of power for the board doesn’t seem to have +percolated into the project who feel disempowered *without* board representation.++Provide content and Q&A opportunities for the Board and leadership of the project to educate+collaborators on what they are able to do. Empower and provide agency to them for this. +Board Directors at Collab Summits would be great. Blogposts. ++#### Wrap-up: There should still be seat(s) on the Board that are non-sponsored seats. ++#### Next meeting:+- With consensus from both Board and project leaders, we need to: +    - Define seats as non-sponsored-member directors +        - If not representative, what role? +    - Define expectations of seats +    - Define selection process +        - prevetting(Y/N) +        - if Y, define criterion that empower community with bottoms up approach(from project)+        to avoid perception of Board control +- Do we expect any individuals not sponsored by a member company on the board --  +    - To represent a synthesized community view point in the best interests of the broader project? +    - communicate community concerns? +    -  Drive consensus in the community around board topics? +    - Other expectations? +        - <comments> +- Do we believe membership election is the best method to choose those representatives? +    - Y +        - <comments> +    - N +        - <comments> +    - Alternate proposals? +        - <comments> ++- Contribute to draft of proposal for future of Individual Membership from represented positions (20 minutes)  +- Drive to proposal +    - Expectations (15 minutes) ++- of Board +- Project expectations for Executive Director +- Expectations of Foundation + OSS Project relationship +  +**End meeting with request for redactments.** No requested redactments. Will revise for Andy’s review.++#### Who should be invited next meeting?(or make sure they are there because of stakeholding)+Michael Dawson+Myles++#### ACTION ITEMS++- Follow up for Board report(Tracy, Sarah, Ashley) +- Message silver/gold members with questions about how they are feeling about representation(Mark). Do we ask individual members the same? +- Provide monthly State of the Union for Medium publication