On Feb 29, 2016 3:13 AM, "Ilario Valdelli" <valdelli@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','valdelli@gmail.com');> wrote:
Hi, in my opinion there is no need to differentiate and to clarify what "high-tech" means.
The real problem is to define the KPIs (key performance indicators) and a balanced relation of those indicators.
A corporation can be a high-tech corporation and take care of the comfort of all stakeholders without problems, the big deal is to find this
balanced
relation.
I too like measuring things, but I think we can't just measure people and expect that's going to create a healthy productive environment for staff and volunteers. I think you have to talk and listen to people to do that. Rant time:
It's great to track measurable things to engage in a feedback loop for whether we're accomplishing our goals, but the measures are always limited in what they tell you; at best they're proxies for the information you really wanted -- such as "page views" when we want to know "how many people are learning and improving their lives through Wikipedia?" or active editor counts when we want to know "do we have a strong, healthy volunteer workforce?"
It's very common for such feedback loops to fail dramatically when you optimize for the measurement instead of for your actual goals...
Focusing on KPIs is how people die in hospitals (because the sickest people don't get risky surgery to keep post-op survival rates up) or schools with at-risk children get defunded here in the US (schools whose students get low standardized testing results are punished under the "No Child Left Behind" law of 2001).
This link came up in some discussions off list, and aligns with my concerns: http://www.the-american-interest.com/2015/08/03/the-costs-of-accountability/
-- brion
Kind regards
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 10:29 PM, Brion Vibber <bvibber@wikimedia.org
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','bvibber@wikimedia.org');>
wrote:
I think there are many different interpretations of what it means to
"be a
high-tech organization", which makes it a difficult label to base
arguments
around; readers will interpret it very differently depending on their personal experiences and biases.
One view might concentrate on notions of "innovation", "excellence", or "return on investment" achieved through super-smart people creating
unique
technology -- this view associates "high-tech" with success, competitive advantage, brand awareness/marketshare, and money (profit for
traditional
corporations, or investment in the mission for non-profits).
Another view might concentrate on other features considered common to "high-tech" companies such as toxic work environments, lack of
diversity,
overemphasis on engineering versus other disciplines, disconnection from users' needs, and a laser-focus on achieving profits at the expense of long-term thinking. This view associates "high-tech" with social and economic inequality and exploitation of employees and users for their
labor
& attention to the detriment of their physical and emotional health.
And there are many, much subtler connotations to be found in between.
I believe a high-tech organization should invest in smart people
creating
unique technology. But I also think it should invest in people, period. Staff and volunteers must be cultivated and supported -- that's how
loyalty
and passion are developed, and I believe they pay dividends in
productivity
and recruitment.
Absolutely Wikimedia Foundation needs to build better technologies -- technologies to serve the needs of our editors, our readers, our photographers, our citation reviewers, etc. This means Wikimedia
Foundation
needs a good relationship with those people to research, brainstorm,
plan,
develop, test, redevelop, retest, and roll out software successfully.
The
people who represent Wikimedia Foundation in those relationships are its staff, so it's important for management to support them in their work
and
help them succeed.
It is my sincere hope that when the current crises are resolved, that
the
Board of Trustees and the executive can agree on at least this much as a shared vision for the Foundation.
-- brion _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org');
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org'); ?subject=unsubscribe>
-- Ilario Valdelli Wikimedia CH Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera Switzerland - 8008 Zürich Wikipedia: Ilario https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ilario Skype: valdelli Tel: +41764821371 http://www.wikimedia.ch _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org');
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org'); ?subject=unsubscribe>