Hi Maggie,
Thanks for the comments. I wanted to wait to respond to this until I was able to be a little clamer, and until after Wikimania as people return to business as usual.
I am glad to hear that the plan does not include centralizing all community development-related activities inside of WMF.
I remain concerned about the community-WMF relationship and the way in which training could be done by WMF in such a way that conveys the notion that community members and affiliates are under the management and direction of WMF. I have tried to be supportive of Learning Days, partly because my perception is that affiliate volunteers appreciate learning tools for self-evaluation, and partly because of my belief that WMF's Learning and Evaluation team shares my personal interest in analyzing the effectiveness and efficiency of programs and uses of resources. In the larger picture, I would like to see WMF hand off more of that type of work to peer leadership among affiliates and individual community. I hope that this type of evolution is considered as a part of the strategy process.
Given the degree of uncertainty about where the strategy process will lead and the associated uncertainty about the deliverables for the person who is hired into the Manager of Community Development position, it sounds to me like this position should be frozen until the strategy process is complete. Is there a reason to continue with the hiring process prior to the completion of the strategy process?
Can you expand on what you envision this person doing? The job description gives me the impression that WMF intends to hire numerous people to work under this person, and it is difficult for me to see how that can be done without taking over work from affiliates and grantees.
I should also add that WMF staff are often much more expensive than affiliate staff and grantees, so even if there is training work that WMF would like to do, hiring more WMF staff seems like the most expensive option available. Is there a reason to hire more WMF staff to do what affiliates and grantees can almost certainly do less expensively?
Thanks,
Pine ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 2:01 PM, Maggie Dennis mdennis@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi, all.
I wanted to drop a few more thoughts as the hiring manager of the particular role under discussion and the interim chief of CE.
First, as noted, the full scope of this role will be defined in conjunction with the community consultation in strategy phase 2. There is a track for Capacity Building in which the Foundation is an active participant, along with many others. There is no plan to centralize all activities related to Community Development within the Foundation. I personally wouldn't consider that a good idea - we have different experiences and expertise and work best when we work together. And there is plenty to be done. The Foundation is already and has long been quite active in this area. In addition to facilitating peer-to-peer development, Foundation staff have been directly taking a role in training for years, from many specific sessions at Learning Days https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Learning_Day_ events to the dedicated Community Capacity Development program < https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Capacity_Development%3E and many other points between.
While I’m here, I’ll note that we knew that this particular job was going to happen when we were writing the annual plan in January and February, and hence we included it by name in our plan, but CE is organizing our structures in ways intended to help us take on the new work necessary to reach our strategic direction, while continuing to provide the core support and services to which we are already committed. This will result in more roles being developed under executive review and in accordance with Board guidance for Foundation staffing. I imagine everyone here is familiar with the “Work With Us” page at < https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Work_with_us%3E. CE’s plans for work done by these roles will be developed in conjunction with the movement strategy, just as the plan for this role will be.
Hope this helps.
Best,
Maggie
On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 6:19 PM Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
I agree with Ad and keyed on the same objection when reading Pine's complaint. The WMF has been the primary organization responsible for developing the community since the inception of the Wikimedia movement. That isn't changed by the titles of any particular position. To the
extent
that conflicts of interest develop between the WMF and affiliates, I question the objectives of the affiliates. Affiliates that fund Wikidata, GLAM projects and other efforts that source significant volumes of high quality content do good work. The value of edit-a-thons, "management effort" dedicated to organizing organizations and paying staff and all
that
entails and other soft efforts is less well established. I don't think
the
creation of a management layer position over existing staff and work at
the
WMF is a great moment to consider the pros and cons of these efforts, however, whether at the WMF or affiliates. That opportunity is the
strategy
development process.
On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 5:58 PM Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Ad,
I agree that WMF support for training can be beneficial (although,
given
the choice, I would prefer non-WMF funding sources in order to minimize conflicts of interest between community/affiliate goals and WMF).
However,
the more firmly that WMF tries to elevate itself as the manager of the wikiverse and to tell community members what to do, the more strongly I object. Community autonomy should be respected, and WMF's purpose in
the
wikiverse is to offer support rather than to assert centralized
management.
I have been thinking about these issues for a few days. I think that
WMF
providing technical support and training, such as a document regarding
"How
to create a citation", is much safer than non-technical training, such
as
"How to apply notability guidelines" which may refer to policies and practices that are almost exclusively established by community
consensus
instead of WMF edict.
Regarding WMF involvement in community health, I think that there are
ways
that WMF can be supportive without placing itself in control or
asserting
leadership. For example, WMF can usefully and safely improve technical tools for sockpuppet detection, and WMF can research the prevalance of incivility on wikis over time, and WMF can research the effectiveness
of
interventions that the community decides to implement.
Pine ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
-------- Original message --------From: Ad Huikeshoven <
ad@huikeshoven.org>
Date: 7/15/18 12:19 PM (GMT-08:00) To: Wikimedia Mailing List < wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Concerns about WMF's "Manager of Community Development" job posting Dear friends,
Pine wrote "The idea of WMF placing itself in the position of managing community development is problematic." I disagree with Pine. It has been recognized in the past that community
is
the key asset in the movement. I do belief that it is a fiduciary duty
to
manage your key asset wisely and responsively. Editing / contributing
to
Wikimedia projects has a radically decentralized nature. Your concern regards paying due respect to that radically decentralized nature. Community health has been or is an issue for example. I am very glad
there
is going to be a person leading a team of professionals to provide
guidance
to volunteer leaders. And the person will have a challenge to gain
trust
of
the community, and to build trust within the communities.
Have a nice weekend,
Ad _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l 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 _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l 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
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l 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
-- Maggie Dennis Interim Chief of Community Engagement Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l 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