Daniel Mayer wrote:
--- daniwo59(a)aol.com wrote:
This is not an indictment of volunteers. I believe
that they are the
lifeblood of this organization. At our size, however, we are faced with enormous
responsibilities. All of these efforts at reorganization are attempts to channel
volunteer efforts effectively, so that they can continue doing what they do
best--fulfilling the Foundation's mission statement by creating and
distributing high quality free content resources--while limiting the repercussions
that the Foundation, and by extension, the volunteers, face when things do not
go right. This is something that requires professional legal and financial
knowhow.
Exactly. And while the pool of Wikimedians who can help is large and growing larger, that
pool
will not always have the right mix of skills we need to run the foundation (sic the
oranization
NOT the projects). Thus we will sometimes have to look outside that community to fill
certain
roles within the foundation.
BTW, every board member is also a Wikipedian. :) Some just edit more than others.
-- mav
Having been involved with several other very large volunteer
organizations, I beg to differ that you won't find volunteers with the
right mix of skill necessary for most aspects of developing with
Wikimedia Foundation and associated Wikimedia projects. If it continues
to grow, I would agree that there must be some professional staff to
deal with things like legal requirements and administrative overhead
that somebody must do but nobody really cares to accomplish without
getting a paycheck because it is pure drudgery. I am continually amazed
though at how many tasks that would appear to me as mindless tedium
still get accomplished with Wikimedia projects, like the recent changes
patrol and endless battles with trolls.
One of the critical things that happens with large volunteer
organizations is that training becomes a critical attribute, where
volunteers are trained in critical skills like leadership development
and critical aspects of the organization to help that volunteer group
accomplish its mission. Usually you can even find "train the trainer"
classes, and even people who conduct instruction for those people to
conduct the "train the trainer" classes. This is something that is
currently missing from Wikimedia projects, where new leaders are usually
developed by throwing them into a leadership position and left to either
sink or swim.
An example of this is with the American Red Cross, where they have
largely volunteers that run almost every aspect of their organization.
Yes, they do have professional staff that deals with the mundane day to
day issues, but the bulk of what they accomplish could not happen
without a huge group of volunteers that are activly involved. The Red
Cross also has a huge number of training sessions for these volunteers,
and is constantly trying to get its volunteers trained on things like
knowledge of First Aid, CPR, and disaster relief. None of these are
skills that come naturally to any random volunteer unless you have a
medical degree, and even then professional medical personnel still learn
things through their association with the Red Cross that they would
otherwise not learn.
I could mention examples from other very successful volunteer
organizations, but I think this gets the point across fairly well.
Volunteer groups can be successful, and some very large mostly
volunteer organizations do exist. I would also add that there is a huge
diversity of background from those who do participate on Wikimedia
projects, and this diversity is something that needs to be exploited to
help the growth of all Wikimedia projects.
--
Robert Scott Horning