We need copy for "Before we begin" section to explain basic logistical information about the form.

Information to be included (not complete) -

1. Timeout duration
2. How to save, access saved drafts
3. How long will it take to fill the form

Note - We can do this towards the end once we have finalized all the features that would be going into the release.

We want to ensure ADMs complete the process in time. To do so we have to decide on the timelines for filling the form, having the validation meeting and signing off. We also need to decide on the cadence for reminders.

Decisions

1. What is the deadline for

   • ADMs to fill the form for validation meeting
   • signing off after the validation meeting

2. When should reminders be sent for each event

   • If automated, what should the timeline be, e.g. 5 days before deadline, 2 days before deadline
   • if manually done, who is responsible for sending the reminders

Draft a new PIA for SL Review based on who will access and see the data collected.

User Story
As a product owner of Digital Journeys, I want to add 3-4 new low-complexity forms to the platform to increase the usage rate of the tool by the BC Public service and we have more digital journeys within the tool

Tasks
TBD

Acceptance Criteria
When the product owner has signed off that a final list of possible forms has been identified

P.S.- following up with some links to documents related to previous analyses we have done

• Create the script for UX testing

• Finalize list of ADMs to test with

• Conduct UX Testing session with ADMs

We need to confirm data constraints for the following fields to ensure we have the right form validations setup -

1. Basic information

• Employee#
• Ministry
• Position title
• Work City
• Branch
• Division
• ADM name
• Supervisor's name
• Supervisor's title
• Supervisor's email address

This issue is a kind reminder that your repository has been inactive for 181 days. Some repositories are maintained in accordance with business requirements that infrequently change thus appearing inactive, and some repositories are inactive because they are unmaintained.

To help differentiate products that are unmaintained from products that do not require frequent maintenance, repomountie will open an issue whenever a repository has not been updated in 180 days.

• If this product is being actively maintained, please close this issue.
• If this repository isn't being actively maintained anymore, please archive this repository. Also, for bonus points, please add a dormant or retired life cycle badge.

Thank you for your help ensuring effective governance of our open-source ecosystem!

https://teams.microsoft.com/l/entity/26bc2873-6023-480c-a11b-76b66605ce8c/_djb2_msteams_prefix_1497954006?context=%7B%22subEntityId%22%3Anull%2C%22channelId%22%3A%2219%3A582486d5bfaf4a52848dd0f2aa8a945c%40thread.tacv2%22%7D&groupId=1b1e011a-9926-44b6-8638-92bc3f9e5435&tenantId=6fdb5200-3d0d-4a8a-b036-d3685e359adc

User Story
as a forms designer in the digital journeys program area, I want to test the finalized front-end of the form with end users to get their feedback

Tasks

• reach out to previous testers if they are interested in testing the new form with us

• finalize list of UX testers

• Conduct UX Test sessions

Acceptance Criteria
When UX testing has been conducted and all findings from UX testing is rolled up as tickets for mat/pat MVP

User Story
As the project team, we need to make sure all members are inside this repo and can access this ZebHub board.

Tasks

• Invite everyone in the project team to the DJ Program Area Repo

• Followed by sharing a link to the Zenhub Board

Acceptance Criteria
When everyone in the project team can access this Zenhub Board and everyone can be assigned to this ticket!

This will no longer be needed after the change in scope to an ADM led process

Considering one of the goals is to encourage meaningful conversations between senior leaders & supervisors about their careers, is it better to have supervisors put their feedback without seeing senior leader's answers.

Notes from discussion on Aug 25

1. Supervisors will give more honest & thoughtful feedback, instead of saying they agree.
2. If the supervisors think differently than the senior leader, that will become apparent and spark an interesting conversation.
3. However this is not usual, and might lead to difficult or awkward situations without proper change management.

This will no longer be needed after the change in scope to an ADM led process

Questions to answer -

1. Do we need to ask senior leaders if they are interested in an executive position? Does opting-in imply that they are?
   • Does it make sense to divide the process into 2 parts & have a conversation in the middle if most people are expected to fill the entire form as they would be interested in the executive role if they have decided to opt into this process.
2. If so, the only relevant question is for readiness. Should we ask this question right after they opt-in?

Notes from the discussion on Aug 22 -

1. Initially the senior leader review process included all band 4 leaders. There were a lot of them and they might have had varied career aspirations. However, now if Band 4 are included, it will only be nominated Band 4 employees.
   • It might be reasonable to expect that everyone onboarding is aiming to be in an executive role, the only thing that varies is the degree of readiness. They have have different strengths/weaknesses.
   • Therefore, the only relevant question we should ask is that if people are opting in, how ready are they. We should ask this question right in the beginning of the form, especially if we have different questions to ask based on readiness.
2. Has the strike changed the scope of the SL review process. What considerations do we need to have?

The scope has changed with the new ADM-led process.

Questions to be answered -

1. Who owns the distribution of the SL review form to all ADMs that need to have access to the form?
   • How will it be distributed?
2. Who owns the communication - sending reminders for deadlines or other announcements during the SL review process?

Once the Senior Leader Review form is complete & we are ready to start the SL review process, we need to distribute the form to all the senior leaders.

The following decisions need to be made before we can do that -

1. Who owns the distribution of the SL review form to all Senior leaders that need to have access to the form?
   • Is the Digital Journey Team responsible for distributing it to the Band 5/6 & nominated Band 4 employees?
   • Will the digital journey team provide the link/URL and the SHR teams in each ministry will be responsible for distributing it in their teams?
   • Is there another team that will coordinate this? If so, how?
2. Who owns the communication - sending reminders for deadlines or other announcements during the SL review process?
3. How will the communication happen?
   • Emails?
   • Page in a myHR?
4. Will the link to form directly take SLs to the form? How would they submit a new form if they have to?

User Story
As a Digital Journeys admin, I want to be able to view a number of how many submissions there currently are in the system (since August 2 launch) to report to executive and understand completion rates. We want to know

• those completed submissions (see BP, Alison, Nicole)
• and ones in progress (see Simen to access the number in the tool)
• by ministry
• Reporting current requested by Aleesa (for Indy) every Thursday end of day

Acceptance Criteria

• Access to the dashboard is where the total number of telework submissions is displayed
• Access for Hasan, Stella, Meghan, others
• Access to the dashboard granted by BP (Request has been sent to Steven Jones)
  As an interim step, please send email requests to Simen (for those in tool), as well as Alison B or Nicole Benbow

User Story
As a forms designer i want to receive a finalized version of the form with all the questions and type of fields associated with these questions to start building the front-end version of the form

Tasks

• finalize a mock-up of the forms questions, their field types, and options for response.

Acceptance Criteria
When the checklist item has been made and after getting sign-off from product team, we can close this ticket

This may no longer be required after change in scope to ADM-led process. ADMs will be able to choose whoever they think is ready.

We want to include a small set of (but not all) Band 4 senior leaders in the review process. To do so we need to make a decision on the following -

1. Who makes the decision to nominate? What is the criteria for nominating a Band 4 employee? Is it a decision made by the SHR team in a Ministry or is the decision made individually by an ADM/Supervisor?
2. How do they nominate?
   • Do they send an invite to a Band 4 employee after the review process starts in Nov?
   • Do they provide the digital journeys team a list of employees before the process starts?
   • Can we nominate someone after the SL review process starts in November. Is there a deadline to nominate?
3. Can we finish the nomination within the mid Nov timeframe? Is this MVP?

User Story
As a user, I need clear information on filling out the mat/pat form on the careers and myHR page so that I am not overwhelmed with questions

Acceptance Criteria
When the content on myHR has been reorganized and signed off by the program area and the content team

Notes/Tasks

Miscellaneous Ideas

• Create a checklist of items to be done before going on leave
• Hold monthly seminars to explain Mat/Pat Leave

Section - Confirm Eligibility

• Currently, the only deciding factor is appointment status. Only auxiliary without benefits do not receive allowance from BC gov. This is not reflected clearly in the content.

The scope of this story has changed, now only ADMs need to fill the form. Also see #15, might be a duplicate.

Notes from UX Sessions-

1. Time/deadlines need to be communicated
2. Encourage people to consult people who have worked closely with the senior leader or to have a conversation with the senior leader
3. Ensuring eligible senior leaders know about the process so that they don't feel excluded.
4. Making it clear that this is an iterative improvement over the previous process & we are still working on resolving the issues with previous SL review initiatives.

Action items -

1. We need to decide where this communication will sit.
   • Do we need a page on Careers & MyHR website
   • Do we need to include it in the emails sent
   • OR is the "about the review process" section in the form enough
2. We need to start drafting the copy

We want to ensure the following in all communications around the senior leader review process -

1. We want to be transparent about the review process. Those who will go through the review process & even those who are not eligible yet to go through review process should clearly understand the process.
   • We also want to be transparent about how this data will be used. Will i get an advantage in being considered for an ADM role? Is this just to get comprehensive feedback from my supervisor & other ADMs? Is this just to get targeted learning development programs?
2. We want to ensure senior leaders understand the value of going through the review process.
3. However, we also want to ensure they understand that this is a completely voluntary process. It is not necessary to go through the review process to apply for an ADM/DM position at a later stage.
4. We also want to ensure both senior leaders & supervisors understand the timelines before which they need to complete the form, have the conversation and sign off

To achieve this the following ideas have been proposed -

1. A landing page before the SLR form is accessed
2. An FAQ page
3. A popup/banner message the lets people know if they are ineligible to go through the review process.
4. The email they receive with the link to the landing page

Action items -

1. We need to decide which of these ideas we will implement for MVP
2. We need to start drafting the copy

All tickets & issues related to the BA exploration of the SL Review Project.

We need to decide the data retention policy for the forms -

1. How long do we want unsubmitted drafts to be retained for ADMs to view after the deadline
   • what actions should they be able to do after deadline? (view, edit, submit)
2. How long do we want submitted forms to be retained for ADMs to view after the deadline

Is a potential solution to revoke access of all ADMs after deadline?

Do we need a validation meeting?

If so - How do we record the decisions & feedback from the validation meeting?

Decision made Sep 16 -

• ADMs accountable for how they want to present the info
  • They can print pdfs or present it on the screen during the meeting
  • They can also log in to digital journey portal & show the form online
• BI teams creates aggregate reports using spreadsheet

Options -

1. ADMs open up forms flow for each senior leader during the meeting and answer the question about readiness & add comments.
   • might be a lot to do during the meeting
2. Delegates decided by ADMs are given access to open up forms flow and add this data during the meeting
   • might be too difficult logistically to maintain the list of delegates and if they don't show. up on the day etc
3. ADMs/someone at the meeting records all data in an excel sheet that is later put into ODS/forms flow
4. ADMs accountable for their own notes in the meeting and are asked to go into formsflow after the meeting to fill in this info
   • we can perhaps make the default selection for readiness the same as the supervisor rating, and they only need to change, add feedback if it is different.
5. Pen & Paper notes later transcribed into Formsflow after the meeting.
   • might open up data security issues

This epic will cover all the tickets/issues related to creating the front-end of the form in Formsflow

All tickets related to the triage tool on Gravity.

All tickets related to phase 1 launch of Mat/pat form will be in this epic

We need copy for the "About the review process" for Senior Leaders to understand the SL review process

Notes from UX Sessions-

1. Time/deadlines
2. Encouraging people to consult people who have worked closely with the senior leader or to have a conversation with the senior leader
3. The process and how the form will be used
4. Feedback from telework has been that too much text in the form can be overwhelming. An idea to address this is to add links to pages for more detailed information

This epic will cover all the issues/tickets related to finalizing MVP features for SL Review before the November release.

more decisions and information will be available as we do the UX sessions with SL team. (22nd august)

As a senior leader or potential candidate, i want an easy and secure way to get access to the SL Review Form

this ticket is to finalize the business process to trigger the initial notification to managers/senior leaders/nominated band 4s

User Story
As members of the project team, we all need to be aware of the gap analysis done related to the current features in Digital Journeys vs the expected features for SL Review

Tasks

• Finalzie the Gap Analysis

• Share the gap analysis with the project team

Acceptance Criteria
Once the checklist above has been crossed

User Story
As the project team working in an agile way, we need to setup all the meetings/events

Tasks

• Create scrum sessions for every morning (09:45 am tentative time)

• Sprint Planning

• Backlog Grooming

• Sprint Review

• Sprint Retro

****book all these sessions in the morning, preferably before 11 am so that Bhumin can join all of these sessions

Acceptance Criteria
Once all the items in the list above has been created and all team members have been added

This may no longer be required after change in scope to ADM-led process

We need to make a decision on whether we need to have an explicit opt out option in the form.

Key points from Aug 19 Session -

1. For having an opt out option
   • We will be able to get detailed analytics on the people who opted out
   • We will be able to ask people for their reason to opt out
2. For not having a opt out option
   • If someone chooses to go into the form & submit it, the have implicitly decided to opt in. If they choose not to submit it, they have implicitly decided to opt out.
   • People being asked to explicitly opt out may feel they will be negatively perceived by their supervisors.
   • There are other ways to get data about people who opt out. If we know everyone who was sent the communication about the SL review process and everyone who submitted the form, the people who received communication but did not submit the form implicitly opted out.
   • We can ask supervisors, on who decided to opt out & why as they would have the information for the people under them.

As a program area/and product owner, our team (and other PSA scrum teams) need a correct and current list of all ministry names, agencies boards and commissions in order to populate the Telework Agreement drop-down as well as other forms that will reply on the same information.

Build an accurate dataset that is maintained

Requirements:

1. find one source of truth
2. can be filtered to those within Span BC
3. Data can be shared/stored with BP for other areas
4. Our team/others can import data into our tools (such as Telework Agreement)
   (we would still like the ability to manually edit the list)

There are many stakeholders in this group, including:
FMO
PIDA (Jill Inget/COI team) : https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content?id=D0DB3729C7624C51BB6730535B012354
Policy team
Corporate Communications
BP
Knowledge base team (that updates the list as a topic guide in the Knowledge base)

User Story
As a member of the forms program area, I want to have a process map/document/checklist/methodology that lists out all the steps to carry out end to end test of testing new features and also testing scripts for all live forms.

Tasks
Create a comprehensive archive of testing scripts for the digi jrny forms program area

Acceptance Criteria
When the testing task list is approved by the PO

User Story
As a user, I want to be able to fill out the mat/pat form with custom validations and checks built into the form. The content in the form needs to give me enough information to clear significant confusion.

Acceptance Criteria
When the mat/pat form front-end has been signed off by Connie and it's ready to be rolled out for usability testing

Notes/Tasks

Technical Tasks

• Build a prototype using the new Wizard feature
  • Breakdown the form into questions & ask only show only what is relevant to their secario - e.g. Birthing Parents do not need to see the rules around adoption

Section - Instructions

• Keep "Before you begin" instructions consistent with Telework & other Digital Journeys, include only general instructions
• Bullet point #1 in prototype says the Mat/Pat content is in AskMyHR. It is in Careers&MyHR.
• Applicant need to know the selections they make are final and cannot e changed once the leave starts.

Section - Employee Information

• Only show information (Name, Ministry etc.), no not allow editing. Instruct applicants to correct information in PeopleSoft so as to keep data consistent.
  • Use whatever name is available in PeopleSoft, legal name is not required, only 1 field for name is enough
  • Province should not be multiselect (as it was in the prototype)

-[ ] Confirm eligibility using appointment status codes in PeopleSoft
- Ticket 612

-[ ] Add a "best way to contact you" as applicants lose access to work email once they go on leave.
- Potentially use this to give access to the form once leave starts

Leave Selection

• Employees will not serve a waiting period only if they have taken a leave where they are eligible for EI before. This would mean they will not be paid during the 1 week of waiting period, & the final week if they take the full 17 weeks of maternity leave.

User Story
As a SL, we need a landing page to access the form and get information on the whole process for SL review.

Tasks

• Engage the content team to start exploring the content for this landing page

• consult with SL team to finalize content

• Create page in QA

• Launch page

Acceptance Criteria
Once all the checklist items are completed and checked-off

Any work that needs to be done before the Telework Launch.

We need copy for the following fields/section

• Section description for "Select Senior Leader" to make it clear they they have to search for the leader they want to nominate & use the basic info section to check if the person they selected from the list is the person they intend to nominate.
• Section description for "Basic Information" to ensure people can change it. Specifically that prepopulated fields can be changed if they are not correct
• For sections "Expertise & Skills" and "Learning and Development", share categorized list of options
• Copy for the question to confirm if they have had a conversation with the senior leader
  • Copy for the information popup if they answer no, saying it is highly recommended that they have a conversation with the SL they are nominating
• Copy for confirmation page after submission (instructions about validation meeting, if it happens etc.)
• Copy for email for ADMs after submission (instructions about validation meeting, if it happens etc.)