\uD83D\uDDD3 Date
\uD83D\uDC65 Participants
...
...
\uD83E\uDD45 Goals
Conclude with a decision on how to structure SysInt for the future
Proposals
Continuing with SysInt as usual
Harder to recruit from
If a team member is interested, would have to do multiple subteams
Most people leave for a specific subteam/join a specific subteam as well
Usually members do work relevant to the other subteam they’re on
Concerns:
No real technical work to be done, most of the work is as a subteam member with some degree of coordination on other people’s projects - almost an unglorified PM
Flight Test Coordination - almost a role for Ops team
Representatives from each subteam, report to SysInt lead or Exec/Technical Director
Have primary and secondary projects, which ones are primary vs secondary are defined by directors w inputs from subteam leads
People continue to do technical work but aid on cross-functional projects as required
Act as project lead across subteams
Just report to technical director
SysInt as a team wouldn’t exist anymore
Subteam leads would continue to support team members
Entails expanding scope of PM to be more cross functional
Directors drive large, comp-critical projects (manage PMs)
Subteam leads provide guidance to PMs and understand situation, report to Directors and are involved to their subteam side of the project
Concerns:
PMs sidestep leadership structure
A lot of PM positions, what entails whether something sits in on this sync and what doesn’t
What would be done with regards to Nathan and Andy re Ardupilot and Controls?
Can’t perfectly fit into mechanical due to the broad scope of things in mech and motors/props/Ardupilot doesn’t fully fit into that
Add directly to System Architecture team and report to tech/exec directors, can continue being a part of another subteam
System Architecture Team
Choose System Architecture team consisting of subteam leads, SMEs, and technical/exec directors
Have them be very active general members first, have a decent amount of experience on subteam first
Should be Senior IC level of involvement
SMEs example would be Nathan for motor selection, etc.
\uD83D\uDDE3 Discussion topics
Item | Presenter | Notes |
|---|---|---|