"Collect TPG-related capacity enhancement needs" from whom? TPG's current customers in WMF; potential customers in WMF; leadership in WMF; movement input?

I thought this goal had been scaled back to just producing an inventory of skills available, and not doing anything formal on the needs/demand side.

@JAufrecht my inclination is to start as small as is reasonable, so something like "Collect TPG-related capacity enhancement needs from teams at WMF". This could be something as simple as an email to wmfall asking anyone on a team at WMF that works on projects or plans activities to add any TPG-related skills that they want to learn to a wiki page. Based on what we learn from these initial inventory activities (both the listing of our skills and the inventory of needs), we could then think about what additional scope or scope reduction for mentoring activities might make sense in the future.

@ksmith reviewing our email thread on the topic and the subsequent review of the goals sandbox doc by the team, my understanding was that the idea of 1.) a list of our skills and 2.) a list of demand for skills were the agreed upon outputs for this goal.

However, this Epic as written describes "mapping and matching" activities ("Map and match TPG skills with capacity needs"), and an assessment piece ("We have assessed what mentoring opportunities are viable given TPG skills and capacity enhancement needs"). These activities do feel like scope creep from the original proposal, but the goal output of two lists without any further analysis felt a bit unsatisfying to me as I was writing this, so I proposed these "value add" pieces :-) To clarify, this would be an internal analysis of what we learned from assessing our own skills and the needs at WMF, not enacting or even developing a mentoring plan yet.

@KLans_WMF: If we have the list of demanded skills, and make them columns (or rows), and we have a per-TPGer inventory of skills available, and each TPGer is a row (or column), then the blank columns (or rows) would expose the gaps "for free". It wouldn't catch scaling problems, where only one of us has a skill that is needed by 200 staffers, but that could come in a future quarter.

@ksmith that sounds like a nice lightweight way to do our mapping. It would be valuable for us to see areas where there is greatest need (that match our skills) and where gaps are, and it would be valuable to people needing help to see exactly what we could offer. I agree that any next steps or analysis could be a future quarter's work, if needed.

@ksmith @JAufrecht I have attempted to capture both of your feedbacks in the task description.

I have also added one additional item to definition of done: "Retro of what we learned from this quarter's effort."