Topic on Talk:Technical decision making/Flow

Thanks for taking up this difficult task. I imagine for most routine work, this will work fairly smoothly. So, I am going to think about a few edge cases.

1. The one-week deadline for the decision making forum seems tight in some scenarios. But, I suppose it depends on what "feedback" means here. Is there / should there be a mechanism to ask for more time?
2. I am expecting / assuming that most actors / decision teams will act in good faith on receiving critical / negative feedback from some section of stakeholders. But, how (or where in the process) are conflicts (as in technical directions that elicit potentially opposing / divergent views in the extreme) going to be resolved?
3. How are rollbacks of decisions handled where they might become necessary? Is that a fresh proposal?

Relatedly, I assume that this process is open to being refined in the future based on actual working experience with it?

Thanks for the questions:

1. In that timeframe groups need to simply say if they are impacted by the decision and that they need to be consulted and the problem statement is right. Do you think it is possible for a team to know they "might" be impacted and reply in that timeframe?
2. How are things escalated now?
3. Fresh proposal

Yes, the plan is to retro and adjust as we try it.

1. It is possible, but since I am talking edge cases, I am also thinking of time-off scenarios where there may not be adequate team capacity to make the call (if the team rep is say away).
2. Good qn. I don't know. Prior to TechCom, it was nebulous. With TechCom, presumably they could block approval till conflicts were resolved in whatever fashion they needed to be resolved?