Wed 23 Apr 2014 10:16PM

Valnet Software

ST Simon Tegg Public Seen by 50

Current Status of collaboration: (feel free to edit)

The backend is almost fully developed and API based. The frontend needs work

Josh has suggested using Valnet within Enspiral for 'lead routing'. Clarity around who has brought in leads, who has invested time into developing client relations and speccing projects etc might benefit from Valnet's capabilities.

There are plenty of devs in Enspiral with frontend skills. Apart from providing feedback this is likely to be the main area of collaboration.


Bob Haugen Wed 23 Apr 2014 10:21PM

Clarification: I don't want to give people false expectations.

The backend is almost fully developed. A lot of it has been refactored to make it easier to turn into APIs, but we've only done a couple of actual experimental APIs so far. We create an API when somebody wants to use it.

We think valnet backend - Enspiral frontend could be a dynamite collaboration. For example, the Guerrilla Translators, one of our other upcoming user groups (and also a worker cooperative) loves Trello, partly because of the nice UI. Maybe we could have three-on-a-match! A party!


Bob Haugen Wed 23 Apr 2014 10:35PM

Learning Loomio: any way to edit my comment? Lynn says three-on-a-match is a very obscure reference. It's from back when I was a smoker...ancient history, fortunately for my longevity.


Lynn Foster Wed 23 Apr 2014 10:56PM

Suggestion: Maybe a few of us can do a working session on lead routing. As we mentioned, we are swapping different groups' databases in and out of our dev/staging environment. Not a problem to start a new one, and we'll figure out how to coordinate the time sharing.

This will help you guys get very concrete about what is there and what is not. And it will help us to understand your requirements and any modifications we might need to support them.

We just put together a draft guide on setup for Valnet (aka VAS, aka OVN-OS), and we can debug that a bit too. I put in the link (at least I think I did the markdown right :) ) - but this is not to say you have to look at it now, it is a bit overwhelming, based on Sensorica's more complicated scenario.


Simon Tegg Wed 23 Apr 2014 10:57PM

Thanks @bobhaugen.
There currently isn’t a way to edit a comment, and yes heaps of people request this feature. We actually have this feature ready to merge in, and I suspect its going to happen. Check here for the great ‘editing comment controversy’ of 2013 if you’re interested :).


Bob Haugen Thu 24 Apr 2014 2:11PM

Simon, Josh, other Enspiralites: can you see your lead routing processes in this previous discussion?

You might have to squint a bit.


Joshua Vial Thu 24 Apr 2014 5:18PM

I think the best bet is to talk to Tracey in Enspiral Services about what tasks she does that are repeatable, definable and we could put small bounties on.

What do folks think of a strategy of stubbing processes with artificial bounties as a way of defining the processes and eventually weaving them into a full value network.

I read through that doc - looks interesting but more about negotiating internal contracts than external ones from my point of view.


Bob Haugen Thu 24 Apr 2014 6:39PM

@joshuavial - if you mean the conversations for action doc, the first diagram is cribbed from a CRM system, heavily modified. It's meant to capture the formation of all types of agreements for action, but the discussion really was focused on external relationships. Not sure why that did not come through. Must be badly explained...


Bob Haugen Thu 24 Apr 2014 6:45PM

P.S. "What do folks think of a strategy of stubbing processes with artificial bounties as a way of defining the processes and eventually weaving them into a full value network." Most process boundaries are more-or-less artificial, in that you are carving reality into joints, and you have to pick where to cut.

We're talking about how to carve up those flows now, in between a pile of other work and another pile of distractions, but we'll get there. At this stage, I would prefer to get a free-floating set of stories about what is going on before starting to carve. Better for our understanding. Form of stories does not matter, but the more specific, the better.


Bob Haugen Fri 25 Apr 2014 1:43AM

Oops. @joshuavial somehow I translated bounties into boundaries. In either case, no problem playing with ideas.


Lynn Foster Fri 25 Apr 2014 2:19AM

I like the idea of talking to Tracey, the closer to the source the better. And I'm fine with anything from raw user stories to some analysis of processes. (Note: the software supports the whole value stream I-P-O pattern we talked about, but also straight non-production logging which doesn't create any output or even have a process. It also supports processes that follow a general or specific recipe (are repeatable), or processes that you just define on the fly.)

@joshuavial - I didn't quite understand "stubbing processes with artificial bounties" - but it does make me wonder what different ways you would like to value work. And are there other things you would like to account for or value in the lead routing function?

The suggestion of lead routing is interesting. I think Bob is thinking about getting into some serious pre-commitment functionality, maybe contact management system stuff, which we don't have a lot of right now. Not that it is a bad idea, just there might be tradeoffs with getting something working quickly in order to validate we have a basic fit. But then, I don't know yet what you are thinking would be useful to you in the lead routing area.

Sorry if this is too rambling.... lots to think about, lots of things we need to learn from each other...

Load More