Compiling LCR Feedback and Bugs

[tonynocchi]

3. I don't know the full-scope of development but I would assume with a project this big the developers are being paid to develop the system. Some of them may be members, but there might be no members on the development team(s).

All church employees must be temple worth members. And we know from those developers who do sometime frequent the forums that many (if not most) of them have (or have had) callings as clerks in specific. Most of them are very aware of many issues and pain points clerks and leaders have to deal with. But they don't set the development priorities. That's done by the product managers in the sponsoring church departments under the (close) direction of the general authorities of those departments.

Do you know for sure that this is an in-house church project and not something that has been contracted out? Even if it is in-house, the main thing I'm learning here is that there's a lot of apathy and/or lack of desire to communicate anything to the stake level or below...so much, that as I've mentioned before, our stake president got involved and elevated issues because of the impact they were having on our stake. The last release notes I can find are from November 10, 2021....

There are 14,593 wards and branches in the US operating on LCR. Just a few changes that save bishoprics, clerks, and auxiliary leaders even just a few minutes a week would collectively save thousands of hours weekly.

[lajackson]

Do you know for sure that this is an in-house church project and not something that has been contracted out?

I have been told that yes, this is true.

Even if it is in-house, the main thing I'm learning here is that there's a lot of apathy and/or lack of desire to communicate anything to the stake level or below

The developers communicate with those to whom they are responsible and who give them their assignments. They do not report to the local units.

our stake president got involved and elevated issues because of the impact they were having on our stake.

This is an effective way of communicating major issues. But the project managers also read the feedback sent through normal channels and, with approval from their priesthood leaders, guide the developers accordingly.

Just a few changes . . .

Oh, that it were that simple. But there are greater factors at play in the decision making process. Church headquarters does not share those with us, except in very rare cases.

[sbradshaw]

Do you know for sure that this is an in-house church project and not something that has been contracted out?

The Church does hire contractors and vendors (who aren't necessarily Church members) to supplement regular full-time employees (who must be active temple-worthy members) on several internal and public-facing tech projects, including Church apps and websites. I don't have information to provide on specific products like Leader and Clerk Resources.

[sbradshaw]

I don't think there's anything wrong with discussing bugs and features here in the community forum, as discussion and putting things into words often triggers helpful thoughts and ideas. It can also inspire more people to provide feedback through the regular channels. I'd like some of the things you mention myself!

However, sometimes threads with generic titles and multiple topics can become magnets for generic bug reports from users who don't understand how feedback or the forum works, creating an eternal thread that never resolves. See, for example, this thread that's been going on for 10 years, with 58 pages of replies – the issues being discussed changing over time: "Send a Message" Function on LCR. So I agree with jdlessley that it might be good to keep things a little more focused and actionable (to the extent reasonable in a community forum).

[tonynocchi]

I don't think there's anything wrong with discussing bugs and features here in the community forum, as discussion and putting things into words often triggers helpful thoughts and ideas. It can also inspire more people to provide feedback through the regular channels. I'd like some of the things you mention myself!

However, sometimes threads with generic titles and multiple topics can become magnets for generic bug reports from users who don't understand how feedback or the forum works, creating an eternal thread that never resolves. See, for example, this thread that's been going on for 10 years, with 58 pages of replies – the issues being discussed changing over time: "Send a Message" Function on LCR. So I agree with jdlessley that it might be good to keep things a little more focused and actionable (to the extent reasonable in a community forum).

I've pretty much given up on the thought of even trying to make a difference after recent discussions. We're just going to use work-arounds like discussed in the other thread about outreach. Obviously this introduces inefficiency and risk into how we do things but it's still significantly more efficient and effective than relying solely on what the Church is providing us. Maybe that's the intent though...but I haven't really seen anything communicated about LCR since like November 2021.

[ambldsorg]

... But the project managers also read the feedback sent through normal channels and, with approval from their priesthood leaders, guide the developers accordingly.

I'm less convinced that this is the case. I've submitted "feedback" multiple times regarding bug that I discovered in LCR back in 2019. Nobody has ever contacted me about it (at least not that I can recall) and it most certainly has not been fixed. This "feedback" mechanism is hardly what i would call "communication". Because of the one-way nature of this mechanism, it's really hard to test your statement, but I went ahead and submitted more feedback on this same issue by clicking on the Feedback link at the bottom of the LCR Send a Message page. We'll see if this "normal channel" works.