Asynchronously brainstorm, agree on, and document a set of values to guide the newly formed Tech Docs Team.
| Status | Subtype | Assigned | Task | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Resolved | apaskulin | T339310 Initial build out of team practices | |||
| Resolved | apaskulin | T339175 Define team values |
TODO: Determine the use cases for having team values. In what specific instances would we need these, and how would we apply them? Otherwise, this is an empty exercise. I don't want to create a list of amorphous values that are just nice to read, I want to have a minimum viable set of them that is directly relevant for and applicable to our work.
Good points!
I want to have a minimum viable set of them that is directly relevant for and applicable to our work.
I agree with this.
In what specific instances would we need these, and how would we apply them?
I was thinking along the lines of:
Here are my rough notes about the values I've been thinking about:
We held a discussion with the team for which we pre-prepared our thoughts on use cases for values and values we like in a Google Doc. I then synthesized our discussion into a set of values published to Office Wiki. I expect these to evolve our time, but here is the initial version for transparency:
Team values guide the way we work. Our team goals represent what we want to achieve; our values represent how we achieve those goals. We use our values to determine how we communicate, how we resolve conflicts, and how we manage our work. Along with team goals and organizational priorities, values help us prioritize what we work on and when.
The experiences and needs of people are at the heart of our approach to our work. We value empathy, compassion, and kindness, and their different forms: diversity, inclusivity, and commitment to accessibility. We strive to make documentation accessible to the widest group of people possible. We value multilingual communication and strive to make our documentation internationalized whenever possible. We seek a broad range of perspectives when collecting feedback and conducting user research. We prioritize editing for inclusive language.
We ask for and give feedback often. We invite people into our work. As a functional team, we are mindful of the tendency to become siloed. We strive to work in small, incremental changes, making our work easier to understand and review. In contrast to transparency, collaboration is active.
We work in the open. We use public collaboration tools as much as possible. We strive to move information out of Google Docs and onto wikis. We use Phabricator to communicate about our work, and we open tasks to represent most of our work. In contrast to collaboration, transparency is passive.
We describe things as they are, not how we would like them to be. We inform; we do not convince. We base our work and decisions on data. We test our assumptions early and often, and we conduct user research whenever possible. We strive to communicate plainly and unambiguously.
We are reliable and trustworthy. When someone requests our help, they can be sure we will do our best to provide it. We are honest and straightforward about what work we can and will do. We use kind honesty when we communicate. We trust each other to act with good intent and to provide honest feedback. We strive to create an environment of psychological safety, both internally and externally. We propose bold changes even if they are difficult to discuss or implement. We challenge how things are done in an effort to improve ourselves and the outcomes of our work. We stand by our values, and we support each other in working courageously.