Skip to main content

Scheduling Online Meetings
draft-nottingham-scheduling-online-meetings-00

The information below is for an old version of the document.
Document Type
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Expired".
Author Mark Nottingham
Last updated 2021-12-02
RFC stream (None)
Formats
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
draft-nottingham-scheduling-online-meetings-00
Network Working Group                                      M. Nottingham
Internet-Draft                                           2 December 2021
Intended status: Best Current Practice                                  
Expires: 5 June 2022

                       Scheduling Online Meetings
             draft-nottingham-scheduling-online-meetings-00

Abstract

   This document recommends best practices when scheduling online
   meetings.

About This Document

   This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.

   Status information for this document may be found at
   https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-nottingham-scheduling-online-
   meetings/.

   information can be found at https://mnot.github.io/I-D/.

   Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at
   https://github.com/mnot/I-D/labels/scheduling-online-meetings.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on 5 June 2022.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

Nottingham                 Expires 5 June 2022                  [Page 1]
Internet-Draft         Scheduling Online Meetings          December 2021

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
   license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
   Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
   and restrictions with respect to this document.  Code Components
   extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
   described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
   provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Considerations When Scheduling Online Meetings  . . . . . . .   3
     2.1.  Reasons for Meeting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.2.  Meeting Participants  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.3.  Scheduling Conflicts  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Recommendations for Scheduling Online Meetings  . . . . . . .   4
     3.1.  Gather Information  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.2.  Find the Best Solution (if possible)  . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.3.  Find an Equitable Solution  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       3.3.1.  Poll from the Least Privileged Perspective  . . . . .   6
       3.3.2.  Equalize the Pain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
       3.3.3.  Rotate the Pain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     3.4.  Regularly Confirm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   4.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7

1.  Introduction

   The Internet has made it possible for many people to meet
   synchronously online, no matter where they are, so long as they have
   suitable connectivity.  Online meetings thus enable collaboration
   without travel, empowering those who cannot attend an in-person
   meeting, either because they do not have the means, or because
   external circumstances (like a global pandemic) prevents it.

   However, the ease with which a meeting can be scheduled belies the
   difficulties that can be encountered when attempting to include a
   broad selection of people with different commitments, timezones, and
   expectations.  Successfully scheduling an online meeting often
   requires a delicate balance between accommodating a large set of
   constraints with the need to make progress.

   This document recommends best practices when scheduling online
   meetings.  It does not address the many other issues encountered in
   planning online and hybrid meetings.

Nottingham                 Expires 5 June 2022                  [Page 2]
Internet-Draft         Scheduling Online Meetings          December 2021

2.  Considerations When Scheduling Online Meetings

   When scheduling an online meeting, an organizer must consider a
   number of different factors that can constrain their choices and
   influence the outcome.

2.1.  Reasons for Meeting

   There are many reasons to hold an online meeting, and often the type
   of meeting has an impact on scheduling considerations.

   For example, a meeting might be scheduled to make a specific
   decision, and thus it's important that all stakeholders have equal
   opportunity to participate in the discussion leading to it.  Another
   meeting (even of the same group) might be held to gather feedback or
   update participants about the status of an effort, in which case
   scheduling conflicts might be resolved by a combination of holding
   multiple meetings and coordinated communication about the outcomes of
   each.

   Successful meeting scheduling will consider the nature of the
   meeting.  In particular, if the reasons for meeting do not require
   everyone to attend and there are potential conflicts, multiple
   meetings and/or alternative means of achieving the meeting's goals
   should be considered.

2.2.  Meeting Participants

   Participants often have different motivations for attending a
   meeting.  Often, people attend a meeting to witness what occurs
   without contributing, because they want to track the discussion and
   any outcomes.  Others may attend and only contribute if a proposal
   that they object to is made.  It is often only a fraction of the
   participants who will make substantial contributions to the
   discussion.

   Scheduling is also influenced by the number of people who want to
   participate.  Finding a time that is acceptable to five or six
   participants is noticeably easier than doing so for fifty or sixty,
   both because of the larger number of permutations in the latter case,
   and because a small number of participants is more likely to develop
   a working ethic that allows cooperation.

Nottingham                 Expires 5 June 2022                  [Page 3]
Internet-Draft         Scheduling Online Meetings          December 2021

   Another factor to consider is whether the set of potential
   participants is known during scheduling.  If a meeting purports to be
   'open' -- that is, to allow broad participation from anyone --
   participation from those not represented in scheduling discussions
   needs to be considered, so that they are not systematically
   disadvantaged.

   Successful meeting scheduling will assure that those who are
   reasonably considered to be necessary to the proceedings are able to
   avoid conflicts.  For example, those facilitating the meeting and
   those presenting critical information are reasonably considered to be
   necessary to a meeting.  Likewise, presence of key stakeholders are
   only slightly less necessary to a meeting's success.

   However, those necessary parties should not have any elevated
   privilege in terms of having their preferences accommodated.  If a
   meeting time is merely inconvenient to them, rather than a serious
   conflict (see Section 2.3), that should not overcome others' need to
   avoid serious conflicts.

2.3.  Scheduling Conflicts

   Finally, there are different kinds of scheduling conflicts.  One
   person might consider having to commute to an office or shift another
   meeting or meal as inconvenient, whereas another might have a
   commitment to collect a child from school or provide care to a family
   member that is difficult (if not impossible) to change.  Likewise,
   there is a significant difference between the mild annoyance of
   joining a meeting outside of business hours and disrupting someone's
   circadian rhythm -- potentially affecting more than one day of their
   life as they readjust -- to join one at 3am.

   Successful meeting scheduling will take the nature of conflicts into
   account, heavily discounting participants' mere inconvenience and
   prioritising those whose commitments or location make their need to
   avoid conflicts greater and more legitimate.

   In general, a one-time conflict is not a reason to change the time of
   a regular meeting or a series of meetings.

3.  Recommendations for Scheduling Online Meetings

   Most online meetings have the potential for scheduling conflicts.
   The steps below help implement the guidelines above, and are intended
   to help schedule both single and recurring meetings.

Nottingham                 Expires 5 June 2022                  [Page 4]
Internet-Draft         Scheduling Online Meetings          December 2021

3.1.  Gather Information

   Ask group participants for:

   1.  The timezone that they are usually participating from.

   2.  If they have any genuine conflicts.  For example, "I need to
       collect my children from school at 4pm and no one else can do
       it".

   3.  If they have preferences.  For example, getting up early, staying
       up late, avoiding family mealtimes.

   "I have another meeting at 4pm on Tuesdays" is not a conflict, it is
   a preference.  This explicitly assumes that those who participate in
   the meeting for work purposes should prioritise it; otherwise,
   successfully scheduling the meeting is much less likely.

   Conflicts and preferences should be gathered privately; e.g., in an
   e-mail to the convener.

3.2.  Find the Best Solution (if possible)

   Based upon the information gathered, identify one or more candidate
   times for the meeting that conform to these rules:

   1.  No participant is expected to attend any part of the meeting
       between 11pm and 8am in their stated timezone, unless they
       explicitly state a preference for doing so, and

   2.  No participant has a genuine conflict in any part of the
       candidate time.

   If no candidate times are available, proceed to one of the options in
   the next step.

   Otherwise, choose a candidate while conforming as much as possible to
   any participants' stated preferences, announcing it to the list for
   confirmation.

3.3.  Find an Equitable Solution

   If it isn't possible to find a time that meets all of the relevant
   constraints, a compromise solution needs to be come to.  In doing so,
   the considerations above can be incorporated by using one of the
   following methods.

Nottingham                 Expires 5 June 2022                  [Page 5]
Internet-Draft         Scheduling Online Meetings          December 2021

3.3.1.  Poll from the Least Privileged Perspective

   A poll can be used to select a time for the meeting.  In doing so, it
   is important to consider the dynamics of group behaviour, because a
   large number of people who have similar needs are likely to overwhelm
   the needs of a minority in a disproportionate fashion.

   For example, if ten participants are all in the US/Pacific timezone,
   three are in UK/London, and one is in Japan/Tokyo, a poll that has
   many US-friendly options is likely to result in the meeting taking
   place during business hours in the US, in the evening in London, and
   at an extremely unfriendly hour in Tokyo, because the US participants
   will not take others' inconvenience fully into account.

   To counteract this tendency, such polls should only include options
   that accommodate the needs of the least-represented participant.  In
   our example above, that might include options early in the morning
   for the US, late in the evening for Tokyo, and in the afternoon for
   London.

   This option works best when participants are in somewhat compatible
   timezones; if it is not possible to prevent a participant from being
   inconvenienced by a truly unreasonable meeting time, the following
   options may be more appropriate.

3.3.2.  Equalize the Pain

   Alternatively, the information gathered can be used to calculate the
   'least painful' time to hold the meeting, by assigning a 'pain value'
   to each hour of the day.  For example, a meeting during local
   business hours has 0 pain, whereas a meeting at 3am has a very high
   value (e.g., 5000).  By calculating the cumulative pain for attendees
   in each possible time slot, the time with the least collective pain
   can be found.

   See the online tool (https://bit.ly/meeting-pain-calculator) that
   facilitates this.  Note that it counts each timezone only once, no
   matter how many participants are in that timezone, to counteract the
   unfair weight that a large number of participants in one area can
   have.

   This option works best for meetings that are one-off, or in a short
   series, and at least one participant will be truly inconvenienced by
   an unreasonable time.  If it is an ongoing series of meetings, it
   might be combined with the next option.

Nottingham                 Expires 5 June 2022                  [Page 6]
Internet-Draft         Scheduling Online Meetings          December 2021

3.3.3.  Rotate the Pain

   When avoiding conflicts is impossible -- for example, because a truly
   global pool of participants is needed -- it is more appropriate to
   rotate through different meeting times that distribute the pain, so
   that at least some meetings will be convenient for all participants,
   and any inconvenience is shared.

   For example, if a series of three successive meetings needed to
   include participants from many parts of the world, the first might be
   scheduled during business hours in North and South America, the
   second during those hours in Europe and Africa, and the third during
   business hours in Asia and Oceania.

   Note that the relative number of participants from each region does
   not affect the distribution of meetings.  This is because the
   resulting pain is not a shared experience -- it is an individual one,
   and should not be proportional to participant distribution.
   Furthermore, if a meeting needs to be perceived as globally
   representative, it is important that the opportunity to participate
   is equal.

   The downside of this approach is that the meeting time changes,
   potentially causing confusion and more disruption.  As a result, it
   should only be used for meetings that have significant amounts of
   time between them (such as a month or more).

3.4.  Regularly Confirm

   If a meeting is regularly scheduled or part of an ongoing series, it
   is important to regularly confirm the information of participants and
   the selected time, because new participants may join (or wish to),
   their information might change, and daylight savings time might
   change the best choice (especially when participants come from the
   Southern hemisphere).

4.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119>.

Author's Address

Nottingham                 Expires 5 June 2022                  [Page 7]
Internet-Draft         Scheduling Online Meetings          December 2021

   Mark Nottingham
   Prahran
   Australia

   Email: mnot@mnot.net
   URI:   https://www.mnot.net/

Nottingham                 Expires 5 June 2022                  [Page 8]