Wiki source code of Continuous Improvement
Last modified by Robert Schaub on 2025/12/22 14:37
Show last authors
| author | version | line-number | content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | = Continuous Improvement = | ||
| 2 | **From Sociocracy 3.0**: Empirical approach to improving FactHarbor systems. | ||
| 3 | == 1. Philosophy == | ||
| 4 | **Continuous improvement** means: | ||
| 5 | * We're never "done" - systems always improve | ||
| 6 | * Learn from data, not opinions | ||
| 7 | * Small experiments, frequent iteration | ||
| 8 | * Measure everything | ||
| 9 | * Build, measure, learn, repeat | ||
| 10 | **Inspired by**: | ||
| 11 | * Sociocracy 3.0 empiricism principle | ||
| 12 | * Agile/lean methodologies | ||
| 13 | * Scientific method | ||
| 14 | * DevOps continuous deployment | ||
| 15 | == 2. What We Improve == | ||
| 16 | === 2.1 AKEL Performance === | ||
| 17 | **Processing speed**: | ||
| 18 | * Faster claim parsing | ||
| 19 | * Optimized evidence extraction | ||
| 20 | * Efficient source lookups | ||
| 21 | * Reduced latency | ||
| 22 | **Quality**: | ||
| 23 | * Better evidence detection | ||
| 24 | * More accurate verdicts | ||
| 25 | * Improved source scoring | ||
| 26 | * Enhanced contradiction detection | ||
| 27 | **Reliability**: | ||
| 28 | * Fewer errors | ||
| 29 | * Better error handling | ||
| 30 | * Graceful degradation | ||
| 31 | * Faster recovery | ||
| 32 | === 2.2 Policies === | ||
| 33 | **Risk tier definitions**: | ||
| 34 | * Clearer criteria | ||
| 35 | * Better domain coverage | ||
| 36 | * Edge case handling | ||
| 37 | **Evidence weighting**: | ||
| 38 | * More appropriate weights by domain | ||
| 39 | * Better peer-review recognition | ||
| 40 | * Improved recency handling | ||
| 41 | **Source scoring**: | ||
| 42 | * More nuanced credibility assessment | ||
| 43 | * Better handling of new sources | ||
| 44 | * Domain-specific adjustments | ||
| 45 | === 2.3 Infrastructure === | ||
| 46 | **Performance**: | ||
| 47 | * Database optimization | ||
| 48 | * Caching strategies | ||
| 49 | * Network efficiency | ||
| 50 | * Resource utilization | ||
| 51 | **Scalability**: | ||
| 52 | * Handle more load | ||
| 53 | * Geographic distribution | ||
| 54 | * Cost efficiency | ||
| 55 | **Monitoring**: | ||
| 56 | * Better dashboards | ||
| 57 | * Faster alerts | ||
| 58 | * More actionable metrics | ||
| 59 | === 2.4 Processes === | ||
| 60 | **Contributor workflows**: | ||
| 61 | * Easier onboarding | ||
| 62 | * Clearer documentation | ||
| 63 | * Better tools | ||
| 64 | **Decision-making**: | ||
| 65 | * Faster decisions | ||
| 66 | * Better documentation | ||
| 67 | * Clearer escalation | ||
| 68 | == 3. Improvement Cycle == | ||
| 69 | === 3.1 Observe === | ||
| 70 | **Continuously monitor**: | ||
| 71 | * Performance metrics dashboards | ||
| 72 | * User feedback patterns | ||
| 73 | * AKEL processing logs | ||
| 74 | * Error reports | ||
| 75 | * Community discussions | ||
| 76 | **Look for**: | ||
| 77 | * Metrics outside acceptable ranges | ||
| 78 | * Systematic patterns in errors | ||
| 79 | * User pain points | ||
| 80 | * Opportunities for optimization | ||
| 81 | === 3.2 Analyze === | ||
| 82 | **Dig deeper**: | ||
| 83 | * Why is this metric problematic? | ||
| 84 | * Is this a systematic issue or one-off? | ||
| 85 | * What's the root cause? | ||
| 86 | * What patterns exist? | ||
| 87 | * How widespread is this? | ||
| 88 | **Tools**: | ||
| 89 | * Data analysis (SQL queries, dashboards) | ||
| 90 | * Code profiling | ||
| 91 | * A/B test results | ||
| 92 | * User interviews | ||
| 93 | * Historical comparison | ||
| 94 | === 3.3 Hypothesize === | ||
| 95 | **Propose explanation**: | ||
| 96 | * "We believe X is happening because Y" | ||
| 97 | * "If we change Z, we expect W to improve" | ||
| 98 | * "The root cause is likely A, not B" | ||
| 99 | **Make testable**: | ||
| 100 | * What would prove this hypothesis? | ||
| 101 | * What would disprove it? | ||
| 102 | * What metrics would change? | ||
| 103 | === 3.4 Design Solution === | ||
| 104 | **Propose specific change**: | ||
| 105 | * Algorithm adjustment | ||
| 106 | * Policy clarification | ||
| 107 | * Infrastructure upgrade | ||
| 108 | * Process refinement | ||
| 109 | **Consider**: | ||
| 110 | * Trade-offs | ||
| 111 | * Risks | ||
| 112 | * Rollback plan | ||
| 113 | * Success metrics | ||
| 114 | === 3.5 Test === | ||
| 115 | **Before full deployment**: | ||
| 116 | * Test environment deployment | ||
| 117 | * Historical data validation | ||
| 118 | * A/B testing if feasible | ||
| 119 | * Load testing if infrastructure | ||
| 120 | **Measure**: | ||
| 121 | * Did metrics improve as expected? | ||
| 122 | * Any unexpected side effects? | ||
| 123 | * Is the improvement statistically significant? | ||
| 124 | === 3.6 Deploy === | ||
| 125 | **Gradual rollout**: | ||
| 126 | * Deploy to small % of traffic first | ||
| 127 | * Monitor closely | ||
| 128 | * Increase gradually if successful | ||
| 129 | * Rollback if problems | ||
| 130 | **Deployment strategies**: | ||
| 131 | * Canary (1% → 5% → 25% → 100%) | ||
| 132 | * Blue-green (instant swap with rollback ready) | ||
| 133 | * Feature flags (enable for specific users first) | ||
| 134 | === 3.7 Evaluate === | ||
| 135 | **After deployment**: | ||
| 136 | * Review metrics - did they improve? | ||
| 137 | * User feedback - positive or negative? | ||
| 138 | * Unexpected effects - any surprises? | ||
| 139 | * Lessons learned - what would we do differently? | ||
| 140 | === 3.8 Iterate === | ||
| 141 | **Based on results**: | ||
| 142 | * If successful: Document, celebrate, move to next improvement | ||
| 143 | * If partially successful: Refine and iterate | ||
| 144 | * If unsuccessful: Rollback, analyze why, try different approach | ||
| 145 | **Document learnings**: Update RFC with actual outcomes. | ||
| 146 | == 4. Improvement Cadence == | ||
| 147 | === 4.1 Continuous (Ongoing) === | ||
| 148 | **Daily/Weekly**: | ||
| 149 | * Monitor dashboards | ||
| 150 | * Review user feedback | ||
| 151 | * Identify emerging issues | ||
| 152 | * Quick fixes and patches | ||
| 153 | **Who**: Technical Coordinator, Community Coordinator | ||
| 154 | === 4.2 Sprint Cycles (2 weeks) === | ||
| 155 | **Every 2 weeks**: | ||
| 156 | * Sprint planning: Select improvements to tackle | ||
| 157 | * Implementation: Build and test | ||
| 158 | * Sprint review: Demo what was built | ||
| 159 | * Retrospective: How can we improve the improvement process? | ||
| 160 | **Who**: Core team + regular contributors | ||
| 161 | === 4.3 Quarterly Reviews (3 months) === | ||
| 162 | **Every quarter**: | ||
| 163 | * Comprehensive performance review | ||
| 164 | * Policy effectiveness assessment | ||
| 165 | * Strategic improvement priorities | ||
| 166 | * Architectural decisions | ||
| 167 | **Who**: Governing Team + Technical Coordinator | ||
| 168 | **Output**: Quarterly report, next quarter priorities | ||
| 169 | === 4.4 Annual Planning (Yearly) === | ||
| 170 | **Annually**: | ||
| 171 | * Major strategic direction | ||
| 172 | * Significant architectural changes | ||
| 173 | * Multi-quarter initiatives | ||
| 174 | * Budget allocation | ||
| 175 | **Who**: General Assembly | ||
| 176 | == 5. Metrics-Driven Improvement == | ||
| 177 | === 5.1 Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) === | ||
| 178 | **AKEL Performance**: | ||
| 179 | * Processing time (P50, P95, P99) | ||
| 180 | * Success rate | ||
| 181 | * Evidence completeness | ||
| 182 | * Confidence distribution | ||
| 183 | **Content Quality**: | ||
| 184 | * User feedback (helpful/unhelpful ratio) | ||
| 185 | * Contradiction rate | ||
| 186 | * Source diversity | ||
| 187 | * Scenario coverage | ||
| 188 | **System Health**: | ||
| 189 | * Uptime | ||
| 190 | * Error rate | ||
| 191 | * Response time | ||
| 192 | * Resource utilization | ||
| 193 | **See**: [[System Performance Metrics>>FactHarbor.Specification.System-Performance-Metrics]] | ||
| 194 | === 5.2 Targets and Thresholds === | ||
| 195 | **For each metric**: | ||
| 196 | * Target: Where we want to be | ||
| 197 | * Acceptable range: What's OK | ||
| 198 | * Alert threshold: When to intervene | ||
| 199 | * Critical threshold: Emergency | ||
| 200 | **Example**: | ||
| 201 | * Processing time P95 * Target: 15 seconds * Acceptable: 10-18 seconds * Alert: >20 seconds * Critical: >30 seconds | ||
| 202 | === 5.3 Metric-Driven Decisions === | ||
| 203 | **Improvements prioritized by**: | ||
| 204 | * Impact on metrics | ||
| 205 | * Effort required | ||
| 206 | * Risk level | ||
| 207 | * Strategic importance | ||
| 208 | **Not by**: | ||
| 209 | * Personal preferences | ||
| 210 | * Loudest voice | ||
| 211 | * Political pressure | ||
| 212 | * Gut feeling | ||
| 213 | == 6. Experimentation == | ||
| 214 | === 6.1 A/B Testing === | ||
| 215 | **When feasible**: | ||
| 216 | * Run two versions simultaneously | ||
| 217 | * Randomly assign users/claims | ||
| 218 | * Measure comparative performance | ||
| 219 | * Choose winner based on data | ||
| 220 | **Good for**: | ||
| 221 | * Algorithm parameter tuning | ||
| 222 | * UI/UX changes | ||
| 223 | * Policy variations | ||
| 224 | === 6.2 Canary Deployments === | ||
| 225 | **Small-scale first**: | ||
| 226 | * Deploy to 1% of traffic | ||
| 227 | * Monitor closely for issues | ||
| 228 | * Gradually increase if successful | ||
| 229 | * Full rollback if problems | ||
| 230 | **Benefits**: | ||
| 231 | * Limits blast radius of failures | ||
| 232 | * Real-world validation | ||
| 233 | * Quick feedback loop | ||
| 234 | === 6.3 Feature Flags === | ||
| 235 | **Controlled rollout**: | ||
| 236 | * Deploy code but disable by default | ||
| 237 | * Enable for specific users/scenarios | ||
| 238 | * Gather feedback before full release | ||
| 239 | * Easy enable/disable without redeployment | ||
| 240 | == 7. Retrospectives == | ||
| 241 | === 7.1 Sprint Retrospectives (Every 2 weeks) === | ||
| 242 | **Questions**: | ||
| 243 | * What went well? | ||
| 244 | * What could be improved? | ||
| 245 | * What will we commit to improving? | ||
| 246 | **Format** (30 minutes): | ||
| 247 | * Gather data: Everyone writes thoughts (5 min) | ||
| 248 | * Generate insights: Discuss patterns (15 min) | ||
| 249 | * Decide actions: Pick 1-3 improvements (10 min) | ||
| 250 | **Output**: 1-3 concrete actions for next sprint | ||
| 251 | === 7.2 Project Retrospectives (After major changes) === | ||
| 252 | **After significant changes**: | ||
| 253 | * What was the goal? | ||
| 254 | * What actually happened? | ||
| 255 | * What went well? | ||
| 256 | * What went poorly? | ||
| 257 | * What did we learn? | ||
| 258 | * What would we do differently? | ||
| 259 | **Document**: Update project documentation with learnings | ||
| 260 | === 7.3 Incident Retrospectives (After failures) === | ||
| 261 | **After incidents/failures**: | ||
| 262 | * Timeline: What happened when? | ||
| 263 | * Root cause: Why did it happen? | ||
| 264 | * Impact: What was affected? | ||
| 265 | * Response: How did we handle it? | ||
| 266 | * Prevention: How do we prevent this? | ||
| 267 | **Blameless**: Focus on systems, not individuals. | ||
| 268 | **Output**: Action items to prevent recurrence | ||
| 269 | == 8. Knowledge Management == | ||
| 270 | === 8.1 Documentation === | ||
| 271 | **Keep updated**: | ||
| 272 | * Architecture docs | ||
| 273 | * API documentation | ||
| 274 | * Operational runbooks | ||
| 275 | * Decision records | ||
| 276 | * Retrospective notes | ||
| 277 | **Principle**: Future you/others need to understand why decisions were made. | ||
| 278 | === 8.2 Decision Records === | ||
| 279 | **For significant decisions, document**: | ||
| 280 | * What was decided? | ||
| 281 | * What problem does this solve? | ||
| 282 | * What alternatives were considered? | ||
| 283 | * What are the trade-offs? | ||
| 284 | * What are the success metrics? | ||
| 285 | * Review date? | ||
| 286 | **See**: [[Decision Processes>>FactHarbor.Organisation.Decision-Processes]] | ||
| 287 | === 8.3 Learning Library === | ||
| 288 | **Collect**: | ||
| 289 | * Failed experiments (what didn't work) | ||
| 290 | * Successful patterns (what worked well) | ||
| 291 | * External research relevant to FactHarbor | ||
| 292 | * Best practices from similar systems | ||
| 293 | **Share**: Make accessible to all contributors | ||
| 294 | == 9. Continuous Improvement of Improvement == | ||
| 295 | **Meta-improvement**: Improve how we improve. | ||
| 296 | **Questions to ask**: | ||
| 297 | * Is our improvement cycle effective? | ||
| 298 | * Are we measuring the right things? | ||
| 299 | * Are decisions actually data-driven? | ||
| 300 | * Is knowledge being captured? | ||
| 301 | * Are retrospectives actionable? | ||
| 302 | * Are improvements sustained? | ||
| 303 | **Annually review**: How can our improvement process itself improve? | ||
| 304 | == 10. Cultural Practices == | ||
| 305 | === 10.1 Safe to Fail === | ||
| 306 | **Encourage experimentation**: | ||
| 307 | * ✅ Try new approaches | ||
| 308 | * ✅ Test hypotheses | ||
| 309 | * ✅ Learn from failures | ||
| 310 | * ✅ Share what didn't work | ||
| 311 | **Not blame**: | ||
| 312 | * ❌ "Who broke it?" | ||
| 313 | * ❌ "Why didn't you know?" | ||
| 314 | * ❌ "This was a stupid idea" | ||
| 315 | **Instead**: | ||
| 316 | * ✅ "What did we learn?" | ||
| 317 | * ✅ "How can we prevent this?" | ||
| 318 | * ✅ "What will we try next?" | ||
| 319 | === 10.2 Data Over Opinions === | ||
| 320 | **Settle debates with**: | ||
| 321 | * ✅ Metrics and measurements | ||
| 322 | * ✅ A/B test results | ||
| 323 | * ✅ User feedback data | ||
| 324 | * ✅ Performance benchmarks | ||
| 325 | **Not with**: | ||
| 326 | * ❌ "I think..." | ||
| 327 | * ❌ "In my experience..." | ||
| 328 | * ❌ "I've seen this before..." | ||
| 329 | * ❌ "Trust me..." | ||
| 330 | === 10.3 Bias Toward Action === | ||
| 331 | **Good enough for now, safe enough to try**: | ||
| 332 | * Don't wait for perfect solution | ||
| 333 | * Test and learn | ||
| 334 | * Iterate quickly | ||
| 335 | * Prefer reversible decisions | ||
| 336 | **But not reckless**: | ||
| 337 | * Do test before deploying | ||
| 338 | * Do monitor after deploying | ||
| 339 | * Do have rollback plan | ||
| 340 | * Do document decisions | ||
| 341 | == 11. Tools and Infrastructure == | ||
| 342 | **Support continuous improvement with**: | ||
| 343 | **Monitoring**: | ||
| 344 | * Real-time dashboards | ||
| 345 | * Alerting systems | ||
| 346 | * Log aggregation | ||
| 347 | * Performance profiling | ||
| 348 | **Testing**: | ||
| 349 | * Automated testing (unit, integration, regression) | ||
| 350 | * Test environments | ||
| 351 | * A/B testing framework | ||
| 352 | * Load testing tools | ||
| 353 | **Deployment**: | ||
| 354 | * CI/CD pipelines | ||
| 355 | * Canary deployment support | ||
| 356 | * Feature flag system | ||
| 357 | * Quick rollback capability | ||
| 358 | **Collaboration**: | ||
| 359 | * RFC repository | ||
| 360 | * Decision log | ||
| 361 | * Knowledge base | ||
| 362 | * Retrospective notes **Remember**: Continuous improvement means we're always learning, always testing, always getting better. | ||
| 363 | == 12. Related Pages == | ||
| 364 | * [[Automation Philosophy>>FactHarbor.Organisation.Automation-Philosophy]] - Why we automate | ||
| 365 | * [[System Performance Metrics>>FactHarbor.Specification.System-Performance-Metrics]] - What we measure | ||
| 366 | * [[Contributor Processes>>FactHarbor.Organisation.Contributor-Processes]] - How to propose improvements | ||
| 367 | * [[Governance>>FactHarbor.Organisation.Governance.WebHome]] - How improvements are approved |