James, regarding "Long term strategy should not be determined by the ED and a couple of board members", why do you say, "a couple of board members"? There are ten board members. Are you saying a couple of them have inordinate influence?
Yes, the board and ED should heed input from the volunteers and the readership, but the final decision needs to be in the board's and ED's hands. Which is fine if you have a board and ED who do listen to those stakeholders.
A few other thoughts:
Until Lila arrived we had a board that was stratospherically out of touch with, at least, the Wikipedia community, and an ED almost exclusively focussed on fundraising and being liked by everybody - especially her employees.
We still have a board, with the exception of Jimmy and Dariusz, who might as well be on the other side of the moon. Jimmy makes himself available on his Wikipedia talk page but, sadly, his incompetence for this job is clear.
Lila should have taken the community along with her as the Knowledge Engine project was evolving. I don't know what was behind her reticence. I presume an element was unwillingness to announce a thing while the thing was shifting and changing from one day to the next. She hasn't engaged any more with the wider volunteer community than Sue did, and that should change - though it's hard to know how.
But since her arrival, the WMF has undergone significant change in its orientation toward the readership and the wider volunteer community:
* The Community Strategy Consultation effectively highlighted the needs and wants of our readers, as well as those of the wider volunteer community, and this has informed the ongoing strategy design process - a process that has deep community input. That strategy, in turn, informs funding decisions.
* The Community Resources Team is in place - it surveyed the community and discussed with them their technical priorities, and tailored their Idea Lab Campaign accordingly.
* The WMF have accepted the FDC's proposal that the WMF submit to the same reporting standard they expect of their chapters.
* There has been a 180 degree shift in the level of respect shown by the WMF staff to the wider volunteer community. Volunteers who actually write content and run Wikipedia all remember the contempt they were shown regularly by all levels of the WMF just two years ago.
The latter is superficial but very important to us volunteers.
The former three points evince profound structural and philosophical change and speak of genuine respect for the stakeholders that matter most. As a Wikipedia volunteer, I'm deeply grateful for all these changes that have happened during Lila's tenure.
I realise the staff must be missing the good old days when Sue was at the helm and the idea of key performance indicators was a distant rumour, and they effectively had a job for life. It must be hard to see popular but incompetent colleagues getting sacked or encouraged to leave, to have accountability forced on you, to have to be respectful to the volunteers, to have a comfortable, plodding 5-year plan taken away from you.
If Sue had done her job, Lila wouldn't have to be doing most of these unpleasant things.
The board needs to stand by its ED, and the ED needs to engage better with her crew. Those who have been demonstrating gross disrespect for the ED over the last few days need to leave.
Anthony Cole
On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 1:02 AM, James Heilman jmh649@gmail.com wrote:
I agree having all board members engage with the community in their own voice is likely the best way forwards. All of us will take your statements as representing whatever fraction of the board you are unless you state otherwise. There is nothing wrong with a board that disagrees with each other, all I request is that you do not pretend their is "consensus" were their isn't one. We as a community disagree all the time. We however are still able to work together transparently and get a lot done.
One of the roles of the board is to determine "WMF's long term strategy"
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_Handbook#Effectiv... I tried to get a discussion going on our internal board wiki. I also hoped to bring the wider community and staff into that discussion so that we could have some shared decision making around where we want to go. This is how one gets buy in and is key in a volunteer movement. We have some amazingly smart people both as staff and as community members. Long term strategy should not be determined by the ED and a couple of board members.
Would be good to see the board leading a collaborative discussion of strategy. -- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine www.opentextbookofmedicine.com _______________________________________________ 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