- Assist in development of vendor transition strategy
- Move to value oriented requirements
Attendees:
Chris Reinartz (Federal)
Corinne Smith (PM3II)
Lynn Blair (PM3II)
Randolph Anagho (LACE)
Marc Santini (LACE)
Pain Points
- Not enough insight/clinical backround into how users engage with the healthcare system, neither does policy team.
- HCD must be reactive to policy making understanding customer needs/pain points a moving target.
- Can HCD be present for policy formation at some stage?
- No insight into the why of policy until its already solidified. (potential org agility solution) Can that be addressed?
- Policy contains implementation details, constricting solution development (or does it?) Can that be addressed?
- Inadequate time for discovery for implementation and impact
- SMT is shorthanded, Chris has no bandwidth for engagement in program operations
- Operational inefficiencies caused by team specialization
- Lack of/ambiguous documentation
- Enterprise tech decision and timelines are “provided” without regard for policy deadlines or other program delivery pressures
- Lack of “breathing room” for dev teams and innovation
Desired Outcomes
- Adequate time for discovery
- Users understand the changes and how it affects them
- What users can/should do differently to improve scores
- Better resources and data real-time to show users how scores are calculated
- What services are impacted? The cost impact for specific services and care types. (Need validation/clarification from Chris)
- A solution for counting/scoring of incomplete measures (Measure categories, required completion, incomplete submissions not accepted) is implemented so incomplete entries are not negatively impacting users
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Better management of tech debt, reduction of security patches
- Clarity on work required to meet deadlines and policy implementation (FPdM?)
- Delivery Predictability
- Reduced dependencies between teams to accelerate delivery
- Inclusion in roadmap discussions for enterprise tech changes
In Scope for QPP Engagement
Recommendations for Chris
- Investigate testing practices to find opportunities to reduce patches/ tech debt
- Potential redistribution of devs to leads for other programs
- Impact analysis of work
- Value stream mapping/alignment (operational and development)
- Increase Practice discipline
- New jira project to align to LACE standards
- Work item hygiene
- Workflows
- Traceability
- Documentation
- Scrum across the board
- Implement/revisit/revise social contracts
- Value driven, non-implementation specific requirements
- Role responsibilities training (lace courses and “encouraged” attendance)
- Start doing the I&A workshop
- Revive the I&P iteration
- LACE Observation of refinement meetings (team & program)
- New jira project to align to LACE standards
Investigative actions for PM3 Team:
- Investigate the how/if the solution is constricted by policy (or Steven)
- Teams working on lower priority work where the time spent could be better used.
- Do other programs model measure changes before implementation?
- Is anyone doing an impact analysis of not meeting policy deadlines
Positives:
- Appetite for reflection/innovation
- Competent HCD team with access to users
- Chris will take Lynn and Corinne’s recommendations on program operations
- Vendor transition provides an opportunity for a “Clean Break” on some practices and behaviors
Attendees:
Chris Reinartz (Federal)
Corinne Smith (PM3II)
Lynn Blair (PM3II)
Randolph Anagho (LACE)
Marc Santini (LACE)
Discussion Focus: Improving Product Management Practice
- Chris will discuss with Nora about the LACE engagement with her on helping understand the roles and responsibilities of a Product Manager
- Policy teams not engaged in the delivery process (rarely have tech and policy folks in one room)
- Policy team has to understand how those policies are implemented
- They might be an opportunity to structure development practices better especially on refactoring
Outcomes: The LACE/PM3 Program Leadership team will draft a roadmap for improving and streamlining the product management process and present to Chris.
Attendees:
Nora Ramos-Michael ()
Corinne Smith (PM3II)
Lynn Blair (PM3II)
Randolph Anagho (LACE)
Marc Santini (LACE)
Discussion Focus: Meet and greet with Nora to introduce the LACE and services.
- The meeting started with a warm welcome and introduction
- The LACE Team presented its services and how they can be useful
- Nora shared their background and role
- Both sides discussed potential collaboration and the intent of this coaching engagement
- Meeting ended on a positive not to meet for further discussion
Outcomes: The LACE/PM3II will meet with Nora weekly for now to understand more about her current role and responsibilities
Attendees:
Nora Ramos-Michael ()
Corinne Smith (PM3II)
Lynn Blair (PM3II)
Randolph Anagho (LACE)
Discussion Focus: Follow-up meeting with Nora to understand more about her role and responsibilities.
- Nora explained the existing product management process on how features are refined and shared with teams
- She mentioned that features are initially refined in a smaller group with the product manager and policy folks before involving Product Owners in the larger meeting (Feature Definition)
- The LACE team emphasized the significance of including Acceptance Criteria in feature refinement for clarity and alignment
- The LACE inquired about the process of transferring requirements from program refinement to Product Owner
- Highlighted the importance of understanding the chain of custody for effective handoff
Outcomes: The LACE/PM3II will meet with Nora to start coaching and training on Feature authoring
Attendees:
Nora Ramos-Michael ()
Corinne Smith (PM3II)
Randolph Anagho (LACE)
Discussion Focus: This meeting was focused on introducing the concept of feature authoring including defining what a feature is, understanding the DoR and DoD for features.
- Discussed the fundamental definition of a feature as a piece of functionality that provides value to the end-users or customers
- Emphasized the importance and value of using acceptance criteria and how we can intergrade policies constraints in our features
- Explored the concept of DoR, which outlines the criteria a feature must meet before it is ready for development
- Discussed how a well-defined DoR helps prevent misunderstandings and ensures that features are actionable
- Covered the DoD, which defines the acceptance criteria that must be met for a feature
- Highlighted the role of DoD in maintaining quality and consistency in feature delivery
Outcomes: The LACE will meet with Nora next week to continue coaching session on Feature Authoring
- LACE Observation of Key Program Ceremonies
- Author value driven feature backlog in new project
- Coach PBR with Value driven features
- Provide product owner/requirements authoring training/workshop
- Identify issues with documentation
- Understand Steven's requirements process
- Evaluate knowledge transfer elements and recipients
- Is the FPdM trying to absorb ALL of Steven's knowledge (technical, architectural, product) or just focusing on understanding the product?
- Train FPdM on role responsibilities and practices of product management
- Acquire 2024 policy docs (as are relevant to QPP)
- Create new Jira project
Next Steps:
- Lynne & Corinne to draft a timeline to be reviewed during next sync with LACE
- LACE to meet with Lynne & Corinne on Tuesday, 02/13 to review prior to SMT Sync in the Afternoon