Offsite process take aways

Good
- Use of video camera to zoom in on writing on the board
- "Shift and Share" sessions to get cross pollination. Included sign up list, and two rotations.
- On Day 2 Design Team redid the grouping
- Everyone had to be there all three days (did hurt when people left)
- Used a number on the back of people's badges for random assignments
- Limited number of chairs to exactly the number of people supposed to be there. Expectation set that all seats were to be filled.
- Handheld mics for recap sessions. Should have had 3 mics instead of two.
- Used paper stuck to large magnetic sheets for transferring information from the white board to the results area.
- Turned back to the team and asked them what sessions are needed in the afternoon, but seeded with suggestions.
- At the right times asking for volunteers, at other times assigning people ahead of time
- Fines to charity for people caught using cell phones/laptops
- Name tags all three days
- Tradeshow format for sharing info (1 plenary, smaller audience ask questions and shift)
- Using 3 people to generate boring definitions and present them
- IKEA example about not knowing what it is until you're done.

Could have been better
- Should have used wireless lavaliere mics
- Used better LCD screens with HDTV so slides were readable
- Started breakfast half an hour earlier than start time. Should have publicized real start time and stuck to it?
- Eating in shifts without enough food meant those that played by the rules didn't have enough to eat.
- Squares listing all the previously generated requirements were taped to each other (hard to remove)
- Paper attached to magnetic sheets involved permanent marker, hard to adjust. Ended up being lots of small writing with bad handwriting.
- Should have said the purpose of the current activity for things that will not change.
- Nametags should always use black bold print
- Should have directed people to find terms that they know something about, and then grab other folks.
- IKEA example also goes better when you know where it's going
- Reference material never seemed to make it into the sessions (Master Feature list, etc.)
- Use cases weren't locked down enough for a real basis of conversation. Too dense. Should have been simplified ahead of time.