Hi Luis,
Many thanks for the swift update. I'll be looking forward to the announcements next week.
My final question above still stands, though, and I do feel that an answer from the ED or the Board is in order. In November, Lila claimed (inaccurately, IMO) that the 2010 process was "outsourced" and insufficiently transparent, and that this process would be more transparent. However, the WMF has repeatedly boasted of the 1,000 stakeholders were engaged, and as many of us recall, the central tool used to craft the plan was an open wiki that many of us collaborated to build.
In what respect is the current process, which was begun many months ago and has yet to produce any significant visible artifacts, more transparent, or more inclusive, or better aligned with any governance values, than the 2010 process?
The removal of Doc James from the board has brought many people's attention to the issue of transparency. I hope the WMF leadership can take this opportunity to discuss its approach to transparency in relation to strategic planning -- which is of course of central interest to anyone who cares about the organization's direction.
-Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]]
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 12:54 PM, Luis Villa lvilla@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hey, Pete-
We'll be announcing some next steps on strategy next week.
Brief preview: the schedule has changed somewhat, because we wanted to take some more steps to be inclusive of staff feedback (has been underway for a few weeks) and community feedback (starting next week). The timeline will be tight, because we're trying to tie this into the annual plan process and an FDC submission, but we hope this is the start of a healthier, young-term process of annual planning and strategy.
Hope that helps? Luis
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 2:03 AM, Pete Forsyth peteforsyth@gmail.com wrote:
I think this is a question for Patricio or Lila:
At the November 2015 Metrics & Activities meeting, Lila presented[1] a slide outlining the new Strategic Planning process.[2]
Amid general comments about how inclusive the process would be, that
slide
indicates that the draft briefly introduced at that meeting was to be finalized in December 2015, approved by the Board in January 2016, and presented publicly in May 2016.
Can you confirm if that is actually the process underway? Are you on schedule?
Can you address (in this venue) whether a plan that is developed in November and December by (at least some) staff, and presented publicly
the
following May, can truly be more inclusive than the 2010 plan -- which engaged 1,000 people, and took a year to complete, on an open wiki?
-Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]]
[1] At about 20 minutes in:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_Foundation_Metrics_-_Novem...
[2]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:WMF_Metrics_%26_Activit...
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- Luis Villa Sr. Director of Community Engagement Wikimedia Foundation *Working towards a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge.* _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe