Re: Spreadsheet to aid agenda planning

[Bob Hinden <[e-mail]>]

Marco,

In the w.g. I co-chair, we use a google sheet for this, it allows easy collaboration between chairs.   You can see this at:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_cp-Ny2toj1YfCmQ3nS5xs6wW9jsSi0iMpALG9IxIEc/edit?usp=sharing

We first setup the time of the session(s), and the duration of the session(s).

Then we add requests to the “Requested” section with title, draft, presenter, and requested time.  This allows for seeing how much time has been requested vs. time in the the session.  Also space for our notes/comments/etc.

Then we move items to the “Session” section.    The colors are Green for w.g. document, Blue for documents with active discussion, and Yellow for new documents.

We also have a section for w.g. documents, useful to see if we missed anything.

This works well for us.  Feel free to copy or modify for your own use.

Bob


> On Sep 8, 2021, at 1:55 PM, Marco Tiloca <marco.tiloca=[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> During a WG Chair training session this week, we also discussed approaches for planning a meeting agenda, especially for WG sessions at main IETF meetings.
> 
> Some suggested me to share on this list about a pretty frugal "tool" I mentioned, that I've been using for a while, i.e., a simple spreadsheet.
> 
> Not fancy at all, but I found it helpful for "simulating" the agenda slots and their duration all in front of me at a glance, while quickly and easily adjusting the duration of agenda slots to fit the overall time budget.
> 
> So, please find the spreadsheet attached to this mail. The "How likely?" green/yellow/red indicator is just a qualitative, aggregated estimator of factors that influence an inclusion in the agenda, e.g., a topic's urgency/priority or chances to actually have updates to present/discuss about a (resubmitted) draft.
> 
> Admittedly, this may just be an overkill for some WGs, depending on their current workload, patterns, dynamics and so on. However, it was pretty useful to early devise the sessions for the CoRE WG in the last few IETF meetings, and then adjust and refine the plan as things evolved towards an eventual agenda.
> 
> Hope this helps!
> 
> Best,
> /Marco
> 
> --
> Marco Tiloca
> Ph.D., Senior Researcher
> 
> Division: Digital System
> Department: Computer Science
> Unit: Cybersecurity
> 
> RISE Research Institutes of Sweden
> https://www.ri.se
> 
> Phone: [phone]
> Isafjordsgatan 22 / Kistagången 16
> SE-164 40 Kista (Sweden)
> 
> <agenda_planning_template.ods>