Holacracy Community of Practice Archive, 2015-2019 Community Holacracy Web Site

Attention Point App

Policy to Adopt: 

This policy defines a new type of currency for the organization, called "Attention Points" (or AP's for short). Attention Points will ultimately get allocated to a role, to "fund" the role with partner attention. A role allocated 100 Attention Points indicates the ideal attention for that role equals one full-focus partner in total; 200 AP's means the ideal attention is that of two full-focus partners, while 50 means the ideal is half of a full-focus partner's attention.

No partner may dedicate more focus to a role on a sustained, ongoing basis than is called for by the allocated Attention Points. Further, if a partner has more than his/her full-focus worth of role assignments in total, the number of AP's associated with each assignment should be interpreted as a rough relative prioritization for how to split attention across roles; however, any conflicting prioritizations shall overrule this one (e.g. explicit prioritizations given by a relevant Lead Link or other prioritization role/system). For the purpose of these calculations, if a role is multi-filled, the Attention Points allocated to the role are considered to be evenly divided across the role-fillers, unless otherwise specified by whomever assigns people into that role.

Only the Lead Link of the circle adopting this policy may create new Attention Points, and once created they become a resource of the circle, similar to a cash budget. The partner or role that owns/controls Attention Points may allocate them to a role to fund desired attention within the role, or may transfer them to another partner or role to so allocate. Once allocated to a role/circle, Attention Points may be unallocated and reallocated by whatever role/partner allocated them in the first place.

Optional Part (delete if also using the v4.1 Spending Authorization app):

In addition to allocating a specific number of Attention Points to a role, anyone controlling AP's may also allow a role-filler to self-allocate AP's to the role from the funder's budget, within any constraints desired. For example, a Lead Link might specify an allocation of "Whatever is Needed" on a role providing a key support function, and tell the role-filler to self-allocate as many AP's as he/she needs to get enough attention in the role to prevent critical work from dropping (these AP's would still come from the Circle's supply, they would just get allocated by the role-filler based on experience, rather than by the Lead Link based on an intended funding level).

3 Replies
Georgiy Gres
04/05/2017

Hi everybody!

I do not see the usefulness in these Attention Points and thus have a question. 

'Only the Lead Link of the circle adopting this policy may create new Attention Points, and once created they become a resource of the circle, similar to a cash budget'

How Lead Link can understand and define, how many attention points should be addressed to the particular Role or Project?  This App Description has nothing about the algorithm of defining exact APs for Roles/Projects. 

I think, this is very specific and almost impossible to identify by one person and is possible to identify only based on the experience of the Role's/Project's performer.

So what is the sense of this App, if we can not correctly enough calculate APs?

 

Xavier Boëmare
04/06/2017

Hi Gregory,

If I may,

The Lead Link, by default, is accountable for "Allocating the Circle’s resources across its various Projects and/or Roles". In that matter, this App does not change that. If your tension is "This resource allocation on Roles/Project cannot be done by only one person..." then you may want to propose in governance a different way of doing it and then removing this accountability from the Lead Link.

My understanding of this App is just a way of doing this allocation by creating a more tangible scale on the attention partners should put while energizing a role. So for instance the LL allocates 20 Attention Points to Role A. So Partner X energizing role A should not dedicate more than 20% of his focus to it (my assumption here would be that 100 AP = 1 FTE).

So if you're still interested by this App, but don't want the LL to decide about AP allocation, maybe you should first transfer Resource allocation accountability to a different process, and update accordingly this App.

Did I help a bit ?

Georgiy Gres
04/07/2017

[@mention:491495232183315418], thank you for the answer! Believe, I clearly understand your point of view.

You've told:

My understanding of this App is just a way of doing this allocation by creating a more tangible scale on the attention partners should put while energizing a role. So for instance the LL allocates 20 Attention Points to Role A. So Partner X energizing role A should not dedicate more than 20% of his focus to it (my assumption here would be that 100 AP = 1 FTE).

I would like to disagree with you. LL may understand how much time the Partner needs to spend on each Role, but one Partner is involved in different Circles with different LLs, you see? LL can not see the picture from the view of a Partner. I would even say that the LL acts as a manager of the Partner, because he/she says to the Partner how long he/she has to accomplish the Role.

Are you sure, that you understand Attention Points right?

I think, I have better way to organise attention of the partners onto the Projects and Next Actions. The idea is each partner of the company has own Kanban board, where all his/her Next Actions and Projects are located in the prioritised way. All means the projects from all Roles the partner holds.

The prioritisation of the Next Actions and Projects is done according to some coefficient. For example, the ratio of the ‘percentage of already done tasks (in hours)’ to the ‘percentage of already spent time (in hours)’. It requires each project and next action to have:

  • Defined start date;
  • Defined deadline;
  • Either estimated time for each task of the project (or next action) or automatically calculated average time for one task from the experience.

*Task means either a Next Action or one of actions in a Project.

 

Actually, do you know how the Attention Points are used by H1? Maybe we both understand them wrong. For now I still see no need in them.

Kind regards,
Georgiy.