Compare commits
5 Commits
5680cb604a
...
c6b6be0971
| Author | SHA1 | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|
| c6b6be0971 | |||
| 019c176b00 | |||
| 9d8ef270f1 | |||
| 4519c6653b | |||
| da13419183 |
9
content/ai.md
Normal file
9
content/ai.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
title: "AI Usage"
|
||||
date: 2025-03-18T12:51:08+02:00
|
||||
draft: False
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
No content on this website is the product of genAI, unless it is specifically mareked as such (e.g. to showcase bad code).
|
||||
|
||||
Some people might vouche that this site is written by a human, you can check the status with [human.json](https://codeberg.org/robida/human.json).
|
||||
94
content/notes/commitments.md
Normal file
94
content/notes/commitments.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
title: "Commitments"
|
||||
date: 2025-12-18T20:30:00+02:00
|
||||
draft: false
|
||||
subtitle: "It's frustrating to work for organizations that don't manage to get something online. How to fix that?"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
In the past I have worked with various non-profit association, helping them with their IT. I have amd mixed experiences
|
||||
how productive and rewarding that was. After two particularly bad experiences I have decided I need a change,
|
||||
specifically I need more **commitment**.
|
||||
|
||||
# The problem
|
||||
|
||||
The main problem boils down to indecision and missing capacity/priority. As an example: A group wrote an extensive
|
||||
google doc, detailing about 15 pages on a website that is to be created. After implementing this in a few weeks (mainly
|
||||
due to necessary changes of already outdated information) a section of the website was ready for final approval, another
|
||||
one was in a Proof-of-Concept phase. This was finished in September. Since then, I repeatedly asked for review so the
|
||||
site could go live.
|
||||
One person reviewed parts, but wanted another person to give feedback as well.
|
||||
Now, end of December, the finished section is still not live. I refuse to put more work in until the existing work is
|
||||
reviewed.
|
||||
|
||||
# The solution
|
||||
|
||||
Tackle such projects, like I'd tackle a project in my day-job: Define stakeholders, a timeline and force decisions when
|
||||
necessary. Demand commitments.
|
||||
|
||||
## Scenario 1: Basic Website
|
||||
|
||||
I believe the most common first step for organizations is to set up a website and be reachable via e-mail. For a first
|
||||
website there need to be the following things:
|
||||
|
||||
* Homepage with short description and one Call-to-Action
|
||||
* Imprint
|
||||
* Data privacy statement
|
||||
|
||||
A typical process to set up such a website should be
|
||||
|
||||
* **Kick-Off call**: Discuss basic content and style elements, clarify technology, cost and timeline
|
||||
* **Basic implementation**: The developer will set up a website with the basic style elements and sections for the
|
||||
content (not filled with real text yet)
|
||||
* **Content generation** The organization provides text for the website
|
||||
* **Implementation**: Content is added to the website by the developer
|
||||
* **Testing**: The organization checks the result, the dev will make minor adjustments
|
||||
* **Go-Live**: After confirming a successful test, the website will go-live
|
||||
|
||||
In order to keep risk low, the time between Kick-Off and Go-Live should be planned to last not longer than 6 weeks.
|
||||
Otherwise, there is a risk that one side puts in a lot of work that is then not rewarded with a Go-Live.
|
||||
|
||||
Here are some other commitments, one could think of:
|
||||
|
||||
| Organization | Developer |
|
||||
|-----------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------|
|
||||
| Provide text within two weeks after basic implementation | Provide basic implementation within two weeks |
|
||||
| Take not more than one week for testing | Make minor tweaks within a week |
|
||||
| Provide actionable items when test result hinders Go-Live | Document infrastructure |
|
||||
| Define central person for functional questions | Only implement what others could also maintain |
|
||||
|
||||
## Scenario 2: Joining an existing IT team
|
||||
|
||||
Another common scenario is joining an existing IT team. I've been on both sides of that process and here is how I think
|
||||
it should work
|
||||
|
||||
* **Welcome call:** Who is everyone, who is responsible for what, how is the team organized? Define a first task that
|
||||
the
|
||||
new person can reasonably do. The smaller, the better.
|
||||
* **Technical onboarding:** Create admin users, invite to password manager, put SSH keys on server
|
||||
* **Getting started:** Newbie starts the task, knows who to ask when they need help - someone needs to be available to
|
||||
answer questions, otherwise frustration and mental overload will settle in soon
|
||||
* **Integration in regular work** Newbie is assigned responsibilities and part of the group
|
||||
|
||||
Ideally documentation already exists for the new person to learn. If not, this is a great opportunity to add it! If the
|
||||
Newbie has a question: Answer the question in detail and past the answer in your documentation. It will benefit you in
|
||||
the future, I promise!
|
||||
|
||||
So this seems reasonable right? But there are many ways to fuck it up.
|
||||
|
||||
### Reasons for failure
|
||||
|
||||
* **Missing access:** This is something I have experienced time and time again. From data protection concerns to trust
|
||||
issues, the problem was always power: Existing admins did trust the newbies with the power they have. And that is the
|
||||
core problem: if someone has access, they can mess up things. Even the most experienced admins. That's why you should
|
||||
have backups and written agreements on data protection. If you don't then your existing admin is more of a threat than
|
||||
the newbie.
|
||||
* **Unclear processes:** So often it's unclear how decisions are made, whome to communicate a downtime, and so on.
|
||||
Newbies are overwhelmed because they don't know what to do, existing teams are annoyed by newbies because they "don't
|
||||
fit in"
|
||||
* **Missing capacity:** When you onboard people, this will take extra effort. There must be time made for that, you need
|
||||
new people to succeed. If you don't do onboarding right, the new person will never become part of the team, will
|
||||
eventually leave and your team will shrink more and more until it fails.
|
||||
|
||||
# Conclusion
|
||||
|
||||
New contributors are valuable. Don't waste their time, don't let them feel helpless. Then you will succeed.
|
||||
@@ -141,7 +141,6 @@ def sync_rescue_org_to_twenty(rescue_org: RescueOrganization, base_url, token: s
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
#
|
||||
|
||||
# The Company, Business Model and Paid Features
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -184,7 +183,5 @@ Here is a short list of features I missed and their place on the roadmap if they
|
||||
|
||||
* **Compose & Send E-Mails**
|
||||
Planned [Q4 2025](https://github.com/orgs/twentyhq/projects/1?pane=issue&itemId=106097937&issue=twentyhq%7Ccore-team-issues%7C811)
|
||||
* **Foreach loops in Workflows
|
||||
** [Q3 2025](https://github.com/orgs/twentyhq/projects/1/views/33?pane=issue&itemId=93150024&issue=twentyhq%7Ccore-team-issues%7C21)
|
||||
* **Conditions in Flows
|
||||
** [Q4 2025](https://github.com/orgs/twentyhq/projects/1/views/33?pane=issue&itemId=121287765&issue=twentyhq%7Ccore-team-issues%7C1265)
|
||||
* **Foreach loops in Workflows** [Q3 2025](https://github.com/orgs/twentyhq/projects/1/views/33?pane=issue&itemId=93150024&issue=twentyhq%7Ccore-team-issues%7C21)
|
||||
* **Conditions in Flows** [Q4 2025](https://github.com/orgs/twentyhq/projects/1/views/33?pane=issue&itemId=121287765&issue=twentyhq%7Ccore-team-issues%7C1265)
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -6,12 +6,12 @@
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
<ul style="list-style-type:none">
|
||||
<ul class="notes-list" style="list-style-type:none">
|
||||
{{ if (.Pages.ByDate.Reverse) }}
|
||||
{{ range .Pages.ByDate.Reverse }}
|
||||
<li class="block">
|
||||
<h2>
|
||||
<a href="{{ .Permalink }} " style="color: whitesmoke;"> {{ .Title }} </a>
|
||||
<a href="{{ .Permalink }} " style="color: whitesmoke;"> {{ .Title }} <i class="fas fa-link"></i></a>
|
||||
</h2>
|
||||
<small style="color: whitesmoke;">{{ .Date.Format "2006-01-02" }}</small>
|
||||
{{ if .Params.subtitle }}
|
||||
|
||||
10
static/human.json
Normal file
10
static/human.json
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
|
||||
{
|
||||
"version": "1.0.0",
|
||||
"url": "https://hyteck.de",
|
||||
"vouches": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"url": "https://notfellchen.org",
|
||||
"vouched_at": "2026-03-18"
|
||||
}
|
||||
]
|
||||
}
|
||||
Submodule themes/hugo-nederburg-theme updated: 76bdd0605d...e85c6217c4
Reference in New Issue
Block a user