==WMF in 5 years== *Board and management The management of the Wikimedia Foundation will show new outlines on how things will be managed. As many of the chapters have grown in prominence and as many have a legal requirement for being independent in many of their activities, the format of the Wikimedia Foundation is becoming more one of a federation. A federation of chapters and projects that share the same ideals and cooperate in realising the shared ideals of bringing information to all people of the world in all languages. The real strength of this federation of Wikimedians can be found in so many efforts on so many levels by so many people all sharing this same sense of purpose already now. For a federation however, we will need clear guidance to ensure it’s continuing existence and growth. The board is gaining added significance because it is more and more seen as the glue that binds the WMF chapters, projects and communities together. It consists of true citizens of the world and in this it has not changed at all. There is still a lot of talk about how an ideal board should look like but in effect it has not changed much. The stability of the WMF is studied as a management model but it proves quite hard to emulate. *Staff (the positions, the roles, whether they're paid or not) Even though the WMF relies on its volunteers, there has been an increasing need for the fulfilment of requirements that need full time attention. Some of these roles are part of the WMF some are part of chapters and some are part of projects. As the importance of the role of the WMF as an honest and independent broker in the information society is growing, organisations want the WMF to fulfil roles that the WMF is reluctant to take on. As these roles are defined and as funding is found for the fulfilment of these roles more and more staff will be needed. There is already some discussion if a second person should be hired to manage the ever-increasing number of student projects relating to the Wikimedia Foundations and its projects. *Budget The budget that the WMF publishes still does not reflect the true amount of money that it takes to actually operate and make things work in the long run. As the WMF is increasingly seen as a partner that helps organisation realise their goals, the WMF becomes increasingly aware of how many costs do not materialise. Next years budget for the WMF and its chapters is estimated to be over 5.000.000 Euro. *Fundraising scheme Fundraising has two broad goals; there is the need for the continuation of present services and there is the need that is project specific. The scheme of [[Donations: putting your money where your mouth is]] proved a success. Many projects came into being because of this grassroots support. The support for the continuing service is mainly supported by companies, organisations and governments that share our values. There are some that we do not want to cooperate with and this reluctance has made us friends and adversaries. *Philanthropic activity and outreach to get our content widely redistributed As we are gaining more content in more languages, more DVD schemes like the one premiered for the German Wikipedia are established, these do prove a money spinner and the money earned is used to sponsor the creation of new DVD projects. The foundation is gaining ground in many languages through the cooperation with Universities, much content was realised by providing scholarships for students in return for new encyclopaedic and lexicological content. As the credibility of the Wikimedia Foundation increases, the educational content it provides is becoming increasingly influential. The new educational content published under the aegis of the WMF is characterised by a neutral point of view; this is something that is valued by some and reviled by others. *Projects The Wikispecies project is fulfilling the early promise after the restart as a Wikidata project, of particular importance was the cooperation on the taxonomy of the Caridea, where it was demonstrated that both the “splitters” and the “lumpers” are of an equal importance to taxonomy. Some projects seem to be increasingly the domain of professionals, however study shows that these professionals have always been there. Being a Wikimedia contributor proves to be increasingly relevant for professional standing. *Content objectives As we are getting more cooperation with Universities and Standard bodies, we gain more and more resources for inclusion in our databases. The importance of this was shown in the lexicological content where much of the initial data for the less well-known languages came from these sources. An increasing amount of data is available within Wikidata projects; these sometimes however prove divisive because some want to combine data projects while others want to keep them "small and beautiful". The project that really proved a hit was the WMF version of the 1986 "BBC Domesday Project ", it resulted in over three million pictures of India and some four million pictures of China alone. *Software objectives. With the increasing specialisation of the projects, there is an increasing need for developers, having a full time liaison person for University grade students proved extremely successful in that the retention rate of developers was over 5%. As the expectations of the look and feel have changed, the content of the projects is becoming increasingly a multi media experience. *Relationship between chapters and parent organisation. As more chapters are founded, it is increasingly difficult to hard for the chapters to coordinate activities. This need for coordination is however acutely felt. Problematic is that the chapters are not equal; long established chapters have different needs from the more recent chapters, as we assume an organic growth it is not always easy to bridge expectations with reality. *Relationships with the outside world (PR, partnerships, etc.) As the Wikimedia Foundation becomes more relevant, more organisations seek the cooperation on all kinds of issues. Fortunately the principle of having a neutral point of view was with the WMF from the beginning. This proves to be the guiding principle in deciding whom we want to partner with. *Other (anything we did not think of) Where to host next years Wikimania, how to find a venue for some 2500 people attending (and press) *Relationship between projects and the parent organisation. As the communities of the projects outside the Western world are growing, the languages barrier between the WMF and the projects grows. Consequently there is an increasing divergence between the policies of the projects and it becomes more of an effort to ensure that global principles are adhered to. *Relationship between projects and chapters. Projects are not bound to one country while chapters are. This will result in legal problems. As the communities of projects are autonomous but as it is the chapters who are addressed when there are legal problems, it is important that the independence of the projects is either affirmed or denied. Thanks, GerardM