Change Management Meeting Attendance

[joshinplano]

Greetings everyone!

I wanted to post regarding a problem I am having at work concerning our weekly Change Management review meetings. We have been having declining attendance in these meetings, and we are trying to figure out how to increase it.

We currently require someone from each Technology group to come to the meeting and speak to their upcoming changes (if they are flagged for review). If they do not show up to the meeting, we generally just read the change summary and move on - and allow the change to be approved and completed. My issue with this is that the team making the change was not their to discuss it, and therefore we do not know any impact it may have on customers or other teams in Technology, opening ourselves up for potential Incidents and/or Problems.

We do send out an attendance report on a weekly basis following the meeting, however this report is sent via email and generally disregarded. This creates a situation where there is little accountability for ensuring participation in the meeting.

My team is split in how to proceed. Some members think that we should continue the way it is, and ask for Director level support in getting attendance (this has been tried already and failed). Other think we should go as severe as not approving the Change if they do not show up to the meeting, however this could have adverse impacts as some potentially important Changes could be denied.

Any thoughts or ideas on how to increase accountability while not impacting our ability to conduct Changes dramatically?

[ARoll]

i think that this is a common issue for most organizations. When you stated that the push from management was attempted and failed, how exactly did they attempt? was it just an email sent that was disregarded?

A few approaches that may help to bolster your attendance:

1) Have your directors actually attend the meetings. One positive way to demonstrate upper management support is there involvement. i do realize that this can be very difficult as director level and above time is very important, however involvement in the process and support of the process needs to be demonstrated. Allow them to see first hand that the teams that report to them are not showing and allow them to delegate down to have their teams show.

2) Make a policy that for your cab membership of standing membership. I.E. certain members will be required to be there and if not a replacement person must be there to represent them. Tie this policy in with reviews/core responsibilities. Make a point also while reviewiing requests to call on these people specifically so that they are feeling engaged and apart of the process.

3) if all else fails, then where your team is split is the unfortunate path will need to take. if the proper persons are not present to evaluate a request, how can it properly be approved? Reserve the right to "reschedule" a request if a proper evaluation cannot be performed. This can allow for a bottom up, developers, and top down, system managers, to lean on those teams to attend so that requests can be properly reviewed and approved. if a request has not been authorized/approved and it is implemented anyways, its unauthorized and should have its own repercussions.
_________________
Adam
Practitioner - Release and Control
Blue Badge

"Not every change is an improvement, but every improvement requires a change"

[joshinplano]

Thanks for your response.

Our previous method of reminding management of low attendance was to review trends in our weekly attendance report, and contact the appropriate managers by telephone and inquire what the problem is, etc. and remind them of the meeting. The problem with this is that it is cyclical and never ending. One week it may be one team, the next week another, and teams generally improve attendance for awhile and then it falls off again. It isn't very sustainable, not to mention that it requires a lot of effort for our team to contact them.

As for Director participation, this is something that many of us that run the CAB have requested from our Director, and he has made some effort to increase this to no avail. He has attended a couple meetings, then he quit going as well.

[ianmc]

Joshinplano,
As a former EDSer I’m surprised that one of Mr. Perot’s companies allows such indifference – I always said that allowing beards was the thin end of the wedge.
ARoll has given excellent advice, but there may be one or two small things you could do which may make a difference.
First, assuming that you chair the meetings, keep an iron grip over proceedings. Most meetings last three times longer than necessary. If members of the CAB know that they can get a decision and be back at their desks in a few minutes then they may be more inclined to participate.
Second, make sure you have a separate time code for all the time spent compiling, reviewing, and following up attendance matters. When your manager sees how much time is devoted to unproductive work, s/he may take action. Of course, if your manager’s attitude is as bad as the Director’s then you really can’t expect anyone else to care either. Perhaps it is the Management that needs to change first.

Regards
Ianmc

[joeblough]

unfortunately, you are not going to succeed until you have management's buy in. It seems like the directors just do not care or are incompetent in managing their teams.

I would suggest picking out people who fail to show up. The follow up email after the meeting is very important. Make sure it goes to a larger audience, with the list of participants who were in the meeting. And be consistent in calling people who fail to show up. Follow up with an email to them with their director CCed.

Once these individuals realize that they are being noticed missing from the meetings, they will actually start to show up.

[joshinplano]

[joshinplano]

[Phoenix]

If a change request is not properly represented it should be deferred until the next meeting. This is the way we handle it. Why risk putting something into production that has not been properly reviewed. What is the risk of doing that?