Celebrating and Recognizing TAG Contributors

[nikhita]

Motivation

The TOC would like to create a structured framework to celebrate and recognize TAG contributors. This has also been requested by TAG leads in the past. Few reasons why we should do this:

• It's the right thing to do :)
• Given that we are pushing more responsibilities to TAGs with sandbox annual reviews, not having adequate recognition programs in place will make the process unsustainable.
• Tangible recognition will help TAG contributors justify their involvement to their employers better.
• Attract new contributors and improve overall TAG staffing.

Note: This is not meant to replace the Chop Wood, Carry Water, etc awards.

Ideas

This idea was originally discussed in a private TOC meeting in Nov 2022. I have included the details of the discussion from the meeting below.

It's not set in stone and we can always amend this based on what TAG leads think. This is also a raw idea at the moment and a lot of details need to be refined (covered in open questions below).

Badges for Recognition

Create and issue digital credly badges for the following roles. TAG leads nominate folks for each of these roles to the TOC.

TAG Contributor

• Criteria
  • Actively contributing for at least 9 months (2 KubeCons)
  • Contributions drive the TAG's work forward
  • Significant contributions (not just lurking on calls)
• Skills
  • Mentoring, inclusivity

TAG Lifetime Achievement

• Criteria
  • Significant longevity of contributions to TAG 3+ years.
    • TODO: need to get data which TAGs have been active for > 3 years.
• Skills
  • Mentoring, inclusivity, ??

The contributors who recieve these badges will also be celebrated in a blog post and added to a doc (automated through yaml?) in the toc repo.

Open Questions

(especially looking for input from TAG leads)

• Are there any other ways we can recognize folks apart from credly badges?
• What critiera do we use so that it is consistent across TAGs?
• Are there concerns from TAG leads around bandwidth for implementing this (time to nominate folks, etc)?
• How often should we do this? Once/twice per year? Align with KubeCon(s)?

Next Steps

• [ ] Discuss ideas async on this issue.
• [ ] Discuss ideas in a public TOC meeting.
• [ ] Create a PR to document the process

[nikhita]

xref https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/265, https://github.com/kubernetes/steering/issues/263 - similar ongoing efforts that are being worked on by the Kubernetes Steering Committee

[RichiH]

This looks great!

Two questions come to mind:

• What lookback period should be applied to historic contributors?
• What about recognizing TAG chairs & tech leads that way?

[leonardpahlke]

Great! One additional idea: The K8s community issues contributor awards once a year and sends out a laminated picture to you. Example:

[leonardpahlke]

Are there concerns from TAG leads around bandwidth for implementing this (time to nominate folks, etc)?

I don't see bandwidth being an issue here if we do it once or twice per year. It's also a task we are delighted to do!

How often should we do this? Once/twice per year? Align with KubeCon(s)?

Maybe once a year so it has a bit more impact? Both options are good :)

[joshgav]

Very much support this idea. Recognizing TAG leaders and contributors a) provides them moral support and is the right thing to do; b) encourages them to contribute more; and c) helps them justify their volunteer work to their employers.

This discussion begs a question - should we have an official notion of TAG membership? That is, a way for folks to officially join a TAG in a basic way. While somewhat ceremonial, official "basic" membership would give folks a sense of ownership and responsibility and would encourage them to contribute more. Also, these TAG "members" would then be the candidates for official recognition and leadership positions.

Next thought (and answer to OP's "Are there other ways we can recognize folks?") is that perhaps we should designate "contributor" as more than an award. That is, it should denote additional privilege and responsibility in the TAG too. For example, a contributor might get "approval" rights in TAG repos and voting rights on TAG positions. Giving folks official responsibility could be as valuable as the recognition itself and would move them to contribute more as a result.

I also suggest we grant TAG contributors and leaders something like CNCF ambassadorship and its benefits like discounts to Kubecon. Perhaps though it should be the equivalent of ambassadors but not actual ambassadors.

Re "lifetime" awards, perhaps we don't want to encourage people to stay on TAGs for many years. I'm reminded of Dawn Foster's message at Kubecon Amsterdam that one's goal should be to eventually be an emeritus. Perhaps "contributor" status and leadership positions are enough? That is, if you're on the TAG for 3 years and making significant contributions you should probably become a Lead or Chair.

So in sum I'm suggesting we set some additional official roles within TAGs - basic "member" and "contributor" - in addition to existing leadership roles like TAG chairs and TLs and WG chairs. We'd recognize folks that achieved "contributor" status with a Credly badge, more privilege and responsibilities, and perhaps CNCF ambassadorship.

---

@RichiH

What about recognizing TAG chairs & tech leads that way?

+1. Perhaps TAG members from "contributor" level and up should automatically be CNCF ambassadors and get the same benefits such as Kubecon discounts. Leadership roles could also have another badge.

@nikhita

Are there concerns from TAG leads around bandwidth for implementing this (time to nominate folks, etc)?

IMO this is a valuable use of leaders' time as it enables their groups to succeed by encouraging and supporting their contributors. Nevertheless, there's time and politics involved in recognizing people and that shouldn't be trivialized.

How often should we do this? Once/twice per year? Align with KubeCon(s)?

If "contributor" is a status as I suggested above we should probably allow TAGs to nominate new "contributors" any time. But we should recognize new (and old) contributors twice a year at Kubecon. We could list them in the same slides and posts as CNCF ambassadors.

[cathyhongzhang]

Re "lifetime" awards, perhaps we don't want to encourage people to stay on TAGs for many years. I'm reminded of Dawn Foster's message at Kubecon Amsterdam that one's goal should be to eventually be an emeritus. Perhaps "contributor" status and leadership positions are enough? That is, if you're on the TAG for 3 years and making significant contributions you should probably become a Lead or Chair.

Agree with this. We do not want to create a situation where people get "lifetime" awards and then stay on TAGs not doing much anymore

So in sum I'm suggesting we set some additional official roles within TAGs - basic "member" and "contributor" - in addition to existing leadership roles like TAG chairs and TLs and WG chairs. We'd recognize folks that achieved "contributor" status with a Credly badge, more privilege and responsibilities, and perhaps CNCF ambassadorship.

I like your suggestion.

[raravena80]

Are there any other ways we can recognize folks apart from credly badges?

How about CNCF Swag: TAG-Contributor Shirt, Hoodie or something else.

What criteria do we use so that it is consistent across TAGs?

We could also add to the criteria members who have helped expand the reach of the TAG by reaching out to related groups, projects and community/non-community members.

(One thing to keep in mind is that TAG-CS and TAG-EnvSus are a bit different than the other "tech" driven TAGs).

Are there concerns from TAG leads around bandwidth for implementing this (time to nominate folks, etc)?

I don't think it should take a long time to nominate folks, but would be good to open it up to other community members to nominate too.

Also, some TAGs may have more or less bandwidth depending on the number of chairs/leads. This is where it would be helpful if other TAGs with chairs/leads with extra cycles can pitch in.

How often should we do this? Once/twice per year? Align with KubeCon(s)?

KubeCon sounds good.

[parispittman]

lightweight process: have folks submit #shoutouts in slack for tag contributors and then bubble the shoutouts up in some fashion during kubecon, newsletters, website, etc.

[jberkus]

Additional ideas:

• More titles in your TAG! Titles/role names are free, and they give a regular contributor recognition of their area of responsibility.
• Shoutouts in TAG meetings, AND in the monthly TAG round-table for the TOC (although the latter would be just on the slide and not read out loud for time reasons)
• Contributor Swag (requires budget); this would be great not just as a thank-you, but also to give folks something to wear when they do maintainer sessions & kiosks.

[aliok]

For the people who would have the "TAG Contributor" title after 9 months of active contribution, but who are not in a leading position in a TAG, following could be great to recognize contributors and help them grow into leadership:

• Mentorship from TAG leaders / TOC
• Vouchers for training platforms

[jberkus]

Nikita: what about having the TAGs added to Devstats? That would make it a lot easier to track contributions.

[nikhita]

Nikita: what about having the TAGs added to Devstats? That would make it a lot easier to track contributions.

Great idea! I also wanted this for the cncf-tags GitHub org. I have created https://github.com/cncf/toc/issues/1131 to track this.

[nikhita]

Update - @castrojo to check if we can get any swags in time for KubeCon.

[TheFoxAtWork]

need a write up on what we've done here

[TheFoxAtWork]

@nikhita and others on this issue - i know we've done work here, introducing the Taggies for instance. if there are no outstanding activities remaining, (i know there was a lot of ideas but we didnt pursue them all), can we get this documented in the TOC repo (like referencing the Taggies, how they work etc.) so this issue may be closed and the other idea items broken out into specific issues for them? CC @jeefy