Many changes needed

[xxMATTGxx]

Hmm, that seems fine if reports are as simple as that. They seem a bit weird though, @Inseriousity. makes a point that they seem a bit repetitive. Would they need these reports if continual feedback is given, like after each event by discussing how it went well etc? That seems a better learning process than a report which might not show the exact details, and the benefits of having information fresh in your head will fizzle out over time if the report is a monthly thing

If staff like them then it's fine, but keeping up communication between those involved should be key than a report which is more about statistics and quality feedback.

There is Feedback PM's from a number of departments if say Seniors/Managers have watched them host an event for an example and then they would get a PM highlighting the good parts and any bad parts if needed as well. Reports are more of a general thing which are normally done at the end of/start of each month.

I've created a thread in Habbox Staff only with a poll to see what they think about reports and go from there really.

[GommeInc]

There is Feedback PM's from a number of departments if say Seniors/Managers have watched them host an event for an example and then they would get a PM highlighting the good parts and any bad parts if needed as well. Reports are more of a general thing which are normally done at the end of/start of each month.

I've created a thread in Habbox Staff only with a poll to see what they think about reports and go from there really.

That should be fine enough, as long as the Managers don't over impose their ideas. An event could be a complete success even if it goes against a policy that may exist. It seems weird to PM when a Manager could just tell them on Habbo, but whatever seems most effective I guess.

Also I imagine people like the reports, when someone mentioned them earlier it seemed like they were huge, boring pieces of text done far too often. If they're that simple and done monthly then they could prove interesting, but emphasis should be on what made an event successful and go on from there rather than how many events were done It doesn't need to be written out formally either.

[xxMATTGxx]

That should be fine enough, as long as the Managers don't over impose their ideas. An event could be a complete success even if it goes against a policy that may exist. It seems weird to PM when a Manager could just tell them on Habbo, but whatever seems most effective I guess.

Also I imagine people like the reports, when someone mentioned them earlier it seemed like they were huge, boring pieces of text done far too often. If they're that simple and done monthly then they could prove interesting, but emphasis should be on what made an event successful and go on from there rather than how many events were done It doesn't need to be written out formally either.

I find it easier to talk to someone about something over the forum or even on Msn/Skype than Habbo itself to be honest. Plus you also got a record of what you have said to someone via the forum as well.

[GommeInc]

I find it easier to talk to someone about something over the forum or even on Msn/Skype than Habbo itself to be honest. Plus you also got a record of what you have said to someone via the forum as well.

You won't get banned for saying anything either

[nvrspk4]

Random comment: titles do matter, they keep people motivated and promote retention - something I've learned from an organization I run in real life.

[FlyingJesus]

I think reports are a good idea even as minimally done as they are, since it does provide an actual archive of someone's working history and allow for for management to take appropriate action without just being accused of making decisions on a personal level (not that there's a problem with doing that anyway on a site like this) but yeah I think it's a decent safety net for management to avoid potential uproar if someone loud gets suited and booted

Still think management structure needs redoing though

[MKR&*42]

Hmm, that seems fine if reports are as simple as that. They seem a bit weird though, @Inseriousity. makes a point that they seem a bit repetitive. Would they need these reports if continual feedback is given, like after each event by discussing how it went well etc? That seems a better learning process than a report which might not show the exact details, and the benefits of having information fresh in your head will fizzle out over time if the report is a monthly thing

If staff like them then it's fine, but keeping up communication between those involved should be key than a report which is more about statistics and quality feedback.


Has the Wiki been updated or is there any update to resolve the problem? It would be worth while to allow guest editing. Over time you could get rollback editors and have the system entirely open to guests, and the rollbackers can be on hand to revert any bad edits It works surprisingly well on Wikia sites and independent Wikis.

The wiki does get updated fairly regularly, I'm not too sure still why it hasn't been re-added in one of the updated @Chipppiewill; . When I was Senior Content Designer on the Wiki I believe I had the chance to rollback certain edits (and all wiki staff can undo the latest revision I believe). I agree with the option to allow guests to edit and to have their edits moderated, it was a shame it got removed.

[GommeInc]

The wiki does get updated fairly regularly, I'm not too sure still why it hasn't been re-added in one of the updated @Chipppiewill; . When I was Senior Content Designer on the Wiki I believe I had the chance to rollback certain edits (and all wiki staff can undo the latest revision I believe). I agree with the option to allow guests to edit and to have their edits moderated, it was a shame it got removed.

It would be nice to see it returned. It was an interesting experience when I did a few edits on a few independent Wiki sites - seeing how Guests and Members interact, and promoting long time editing members to rollbackers and gradually see them climb up through the system

[Grig]

I think AGM roles used to make sense when Hx was a bigger and busier community. Back then the Staff AGM was the one who disciplined, rewarded, encouraged, and loosely organised all of the staff and to whom the managers were answerable if they were being lax in making the tighter organisational decisions within their departments, but now it seems like their actual titles mean nothing at all and instead it's just 3 "super managers" who shepherd a group of managers when that shouldn't be necessary. Nowadays it certainly makes no sense to have as many management figures as there are, so yeah I agree there needs to be a major reshuffle and new laying out of what ones roles actually are

It's a shame that the Staff AGM role was essentially nerfed just because staff were complaining about being made to actually do the work they'd signed up to do - Hx has been going down in slow skips and lazy bounds ever since staff roles were made more lax as people use their "jobs" just as a status rather than actually being passionate about it.

Precisely, which is why I was campaigning for a change to the past in terms of the staff agm. It should be clear which AGM takes care of which department and the staff AGM role in the form is is now is extremely inefficient, but that could be down to the person within the role, who seems to be taking a laid-back behind the scenes approach, which is just wrong. I sometimes think it's just Matt and Mike running the place and forget Myke exists, which is a shame really.

Although I'm sure this issue has been brought up before, but not much was done.

[nvrspk4]

Could be argued that it's a good thing that the AGM structure changes with each team / as Habbox's needs change.