Hi Tilman,
Thanks for redirecting the thanks to Anna and Maria.
Erik mentioned quarterly reviews accounting for community feedback: http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/wiki/foundation/471142. Involving community members directly in meetings could be interesting if done carefully, and/or there could also be ways of amplifying the weight given to community feedback already received about projects like Flow when conducting quarterly reviews. I believe that Communications already wants to find someone who will perform sentiment analysis, and perhaps summarizing community sentiment for quarterly reviews could be part of their job.
Let me quote the end of the notes from this quarterly review of Grantmaking:
Anasuya: As we are. If we are moving to a much more proactive structure, we are going to need much more tech support internally. There needs to be a larger long term strategy around that. Lila: it should show success and then Product can invest. We need to integrate these projects in the communities. Let's say the library is a good one, someone in product needs to look at it and see what is the threshold of success and how much staffing do we need so that we can match it. And it seems like Growth may be the place to evaluate these things. Erik: We also need to look at your team's short term needs. Like I did on Friday with Frank Schulenburg and Floor with regard to the education program's needs. Lila: I think the next steps is to group about this and determine next steps.
To me it sounds like there is further significant business to be discussed that is effectively a part of this quarterly review but time expired for this particular meeting, so I am hoping that there will be notes from the discussion that follows. In order for me to comment usefully, it would be good to know if that follow up discussion has already happened and if so what was decided in that discussion, or if that discussion is planned for the near future.
Thanks,
Pine
On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 8:27 AM, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote:
(For other readers: Pine appears to refer to the publication of the minutes from the quarterly review meeting for the Wikimedia Foundation's Grantmaking team, announced in a separate thread at https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2014-October/074824.html )
On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 1:14 AM, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
Tilman, thanks for those notes.
As mentioned at the top of the page, these minutes were actually taken by Anna Koval and Maria Cruz. (I had been unable to attend this particular review due to a conflicting meeting.) So the thanks should go to them ;)
There was discussion awhile ago about involving the community in
quarterly
reviews,
I don't recall that discussion, do you have a link?
and I have some questions and comments about this review, mostly for Lila.
Sure! Feel free to leave them on the talk page - as community members have already been doing with other reviews this week.
However, I would like to see the notes from the "group" mentioned at the
end
of the quarterly review before I make comments, or if there is an opportunity for community participation in the "group", I would like to participate in a community capacity, if that is ok. (:
Well, again, I wasn't at the meeting myself, but my interpretation of that sentence is that "to group about this" simply was a somewhat colloquial expression meaning to have a smaller followup meeting between staff from the Product team and from the Grantmaking team, including Erik and possibly Lila, about the particular issue in question - technical support for grantmaking work which would need dedicated time from WMF software developers in the Product team. I'm not sure what you meant by "the notes" - please be aware that not every WMF staff meeting has a designated minute-taker - and in any case "group" was a verb here, not a noun ;)
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications) Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB