0005-onboarding-process

0005-onboarding-process.md

@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+# Decide on an onboarding process to unblock new volunteer involvement
+
+* Status: proposed 
+* Deciders: @Davidezrajay @sebastiangaertner @ZavenArra Tabitha Kelly
+* Date: 2022/05/22
+
+
+## Context and Problem Statement
+
+Greenstand sources engineering and operations volunteers from the public, and currently there is no onboarding process in place.  Past onboarding processes required more human resources hours than the organization currently has available, but did produce documentation that could be leveraged in a more automated process.  
+
+## Decision Drivers <!-- optional -->
+
+* Ease of initial implementation
+* Ease of long term maintenance
+* Availability of project context for new volunteers
+* Coordination with leadership styles of current team leads
+* 
+
+## Considered Options
+
+1. Fully self driven onboarding, consolidating operations and engineering into a single flow
+2. Implement onboarding processes dependent on preferences of individual team leads
+
+<!--
+## Decision Outcome
+
+Chosen option: "{option 1}", because {justification. e.g., only option, which meets k.o. criterion decision driver | which resolves force {force} | … | comes out best (see below)}.
+
+### Positive Consequences 
+
+* {e.g., improvement of quality attribute satisfaction, follow-up decisions required, …}
+* …
+
+### Negative Consequences 
+
+* {e.g., compromising quality attribute, follow-up decisions required, …}
+* …
+-->
+
+## Pros and Cons of the Options <!-- optional -->
+
+### 1. Fully self driven onboarding, consolidating operations and engineering into a single flow
+
+Update the Greenstand website to present a single volunteer onboarding form.  Provide the new volunteer with the appropriate volutneer handbook (operations or engineering), and a link to join the Greenstand slack after they complete the form.   The Slack join link will add the volunteer automatically to #community_intros, where team leads or other contributors can find them and add them to appropriate channels fro their interests. 
+
+* Good, because it's easy
+* Good, because volunteers will have immediate access to the community
+* Bad, because there is no filter on individuals having access to the community
+* Bad, because there is not personal onboarding estabilished
+* Bad, because different onboarding preferences or timelines relevant to individual teams are not considered. 
+
+### 2. Implement onboarding processes dependent on preferences of individual team leads
+
+Talk with existing team leads and establish preferences for onboarding needs and timelines.  Update the website with information relevant to each team, so that volunteers onboard in the way that a given team wants and expects. 
+
+* Good, because this ensures the right volunteers join the right teams
+* Good, because team leads' time is maximized by curating the onboarding process to their needs and availability
+* Good, because team leads' are empowered to become involved in onboarding
+* Bad, because more work and coordination is required
+* Bad, because the website may have to be updated from time to time
+* Bad, because volunteers do not get immedaite access to the community
+* Bad, because the potential volunteers might not be able to choose the right team without context. 
+