Let me begin with, what I consider to be, one of the most powerful statements of the Digital Era and the 21st century.
Imagine a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge – Jimmy Wales 2004
Every time I read this statement, it stirs up all the excitement and enthusiasm I have for Wikipedia. It not just presents a potential vision but also a) opens up un-ending possibilities across multiple realms; b) enunciates the largest ever human collaboration across all kinds of boundaries; c) presents an opportunity that was never possible in the human history; and d) shows the conception of one of the best democratic platforms of collective-knowledge-building and free-knowledge-sharing. More importantly Jimmy Wales’ statement succinctly instructs what needs to be done as PDA2K. Further, the A2K programme work-plan (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/India_Access_To_Knowledge/Programme_Plan) has clearly quantified this into measurable milestones.
So I felt it is more productive to not delve too much into the ‘what’ question, but focus more on how can we achieve this? Thus the below plan is more of an Operational Plan than a vision statement. Further, it is not a work-plan as it lacks micro details. What I set out to do below is to present an outline of the key tasks and strategies that we could adopt to achieve our collective vision in year 1. It should be noted that I have deliberately not touched upon some of the activities that are currenly being deployed.
Focus Areas: There are a number of Wikimedia projects in Indian languages and about 20 Indian language wikipedias. Given the current size of the A2K team and the support available it is prudent to identify focus areas/projects where deeper impact can be achieved. After a careful examination of the various Indian languages wikipedias it will be useful to have the following as the primary focus languages. These would be 1) Hindi; 2) Malayalam; 3) Tamil; 4) Kannada & 5) Telugu. Have worked with few parameters (like current activity, operational convenience, infrastructure, etc) in making this suggestion and community members are welcome to question this or offer suggestions. Further, as a secondary focus, 5 more languages could be identified in consultation with the Wikimedia India Chapter (WIC) and other community members. Basically the A2K team will have to focus 70% of its energies on these 5 languages in order to achieve long-term tangible impact of creating large user and editor base. This will allow for speedier implementation of pilots/strategies, provide quick learning and enable cross-pollination of the success strategies in the secondary focus areas. In the first two months a game plan will be drawn up for each of the 5 primary languages in consultation with the WIC and the community.
Three Nodes: I perceive three important nodes for the growth of Indian Wikimedias and Wikimedia in India. First, the one which we all know is the Community. The second is what I call Knowledge Collaborators (more about it below) and the third is the A2K team itself. These should not be seen as watertight divisions as they often complement each other and work in collaborative manner
Node 1 – Community: Community is our greatest strength. It is important to start with the learnings and challenges the Wikimedia communities have faced in each of the 5 primary language areas. Initially a framework will be developed to capture the community experience of growing their respective language Wikimedia projects. Following this A2K team will collate the collective knowledge of the community members and come up with a SWOT (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SWOT_analysis) analysis, which will be shared with community. Based on this SWOT analysis the A2K team will work with the respective community to set Goals (focussing on community expansion and retention) for the next one year. Following this a detailed work planning exercise will be undertaken. This work-plan will be reviewed and reworked on a quarterly basis by the community.
Deliverable in the first 60 days: 1) Framework/Process for each of the 5 language communities; 2) Collation of collective learning and challenges; 3) SWOT analysis; 4) Goal setting; 5) Commence work-planning exercise
In addition to the regular activities of the Community the following catalytic community building tools will also be developed and deployed through the Community in order to amplify the reach and growth of that respective language Wikimedia project.
i) Wiki-Community Leadership Programme
Rationale: Outreach to communities in small cities and towns need a continuous and consistence engagement.
Objective: Primary role will be community sensitization, mobilization and expansion and mentoring Grass-root wiki leaders (GWL).
Each of the language community will either nominate or recruit at least 5 Wiki-Community Leaders (WCL), who will be able to physically cover at least 3-4 districts. A2K in collaboration with the WIC will invest on these Leaders in building their capacities by offering them a) leadership curriculum; b) public-speaking skills; c) curriculum on community mobilization and effective volunteerism; and e) necessary technological and content support.
Outputs: 1) 5 WCL to mentor at least 5 GWLs = A base of 150 leaders (i.e. 150 potential editors); 2) Each WCL to organize 1 Perspective Building Programme (PBP) every week (avg 15 new members per event) = 750 PBPs; 3) Each WCL to organize 1 Wiki-Outreach and Orientation event every month (avg 10 new members per event) = 300 Wiki-Orientations to reach 3000 members (may result in 150 editors).
Deliverable in the first 60 days: 1) Identification of WCL; 2) Curating a training module for WCL;
ii) Perspective Building Programmes (PBP)
Rationale: Don’t start talking shop if you want build community. Build perspective and focus on enrolment. A group becomes a community only when it is enrolled into the idea.
Objective: Create an enabling communal context where the Indian Wikimedia projects find an immediate identification and association.
The majority of educated individuals in non-metro contexts are unaware or not exposed to discourses about knowledge production, consumption and availability of knowledge, open source, technology and knowledge, knowledge industries, etc. In such a context the success rate of a Wikimedia orientation workshop comes down drastically. Also, there is a need to generate a larger debate about the above mentioned topics, which will create conducive atmosphere for the growth of Indian Wikimedia projects and could break the vicious circle we are stuck in.
Outputs: 1) 15-20 model PBPs each in 5 languages; 2) Possible replication across other Indian language Wikimedia projects; 3) Public awareness about Indian Wikimedia (Direct about 20,000 people; Indirect about 60,000 people and may result in 8000 new users); 4) If successful, possible availability of a strong Pilot for the Global wiki-community
Deliverable in the first 60 days: 1) Creating a blue-print for PBP; 2) Model PBP creation; 3) Testing in 2 locations each across of 5 language areas; 4) Review
iii) Wiki-Panchayat
Rationale: Keep four crabs in a box and each one will ensure that no one will escape. Where there is a community there is bound to be a dispute.
Objective: Instituting a community based conflict resolution body, especially to avoid edit wars. To be modelled on our good old Panchayt system.
Deliverable in the first 60 days: Discuss the modalities of Wiki-Panchayat with the respective communities and work towards developing a model. Develop a work-plan to design and roll-out the idea.
iv) Quarterly Jam Sessions (QJS)
Rationale: It is important to review and reflect and revise to successfully meet the goals.
Objective: These mandatory sessions will push the community to physically and virtually come together and take a stock of how they are progressing against their own plans. This community based review mechanism will further foster collaborations; build larger community ownership; enable peer-to-peer learning; and catalytically contribute to the strengthening of the community, while celebrating the collective spirit.
Outputs: 1) 4 QJS in each of the 5 language areas; 2) Increased public visibility to Wikimedia and Indian Wikimedia projects; 3) Possible replication across other Indian language Wikimedia projects;
Deliverable in the first 60 days: Discuss the modalities of QJS with the respective communities and work towards developing a model. Develop a work-plan to design and roll-out the idea.
v) Wiki-Caravans
Rationale: People are always happy to join-in the celebrations.
Objective: A yearly event that will celebrate and publicly show-case the growth of Wikimedia projects in 5 Indian languages. Will facilitate greater visibility, help in building institutional partnerships and raise funding for WIC.
Outputs: At least 1 Wiki-Caravan organized across 5 language areas; 2) Increased public visibility to Wikimedia and Indian Wikimedia projects; 3) %age increase in fund raising of WIC
Deliverable in the first 60 days: In collaboration with WIC and community members work towards curating a model Wiki-Caravan. Assess fund requirement. Develop a work-plan to design and roll-out the idea.
Node 2 – Institutional Knowledge Collaborators: As we all know these are typical domains of Knowledge-Holes and Knowledge-Habitats, where a large packet of population is formally into knowledge production, consumption and dissemination. These can be classified as below.
i) Galleries
ii) Libraries
iii) Archives
iv) Museums
v) Universities and Research Institutions
vi) KINSHIP Groups
vii) NGOs
viii) Foundations
i to iv) GLAM I think WIC and some members from the Community are already engaging with GLAM institutions. It would be useful to review our current mode of engagement with GLAM institutions and the results that have been achieved. A lot of digitization and preservation work is underway across various GLAM institution and we need to plug into this network and explore possibilities of collaborations.
Deliverable in the first 60 days: Review the current strategy. Develop a list of GLAM institutions in the five language areas and map existing networks, digitization activities and projects.
v) Universities and Research Institutions
Rationale: With the impending advent of foreign universities and privatization of higher education there is a lot of out of box thinking amongst the Universities and Research Institutions to make itself socially relevant and societally connected. Increasingly these institutions are looking at technological interface for learning, cutting-edge courses and developing qualitative regional language resources for higher education.
Objective: There is a huge potential En-Wikimedia and Indian Wikimedia projects can offer to Universities and Research Institutions in re-inventing their pedagogic practices. These institutions need to be made aware that Wikipedia can be the potential open learning and knowledge dissemination tool.
Possibilities: Students to put up their assignments and project reports on the Wikimedia platform. Wikipedia as a potential young researcher’s tool; Indian language Wikipedias can be leveraged as a potential regional language resource for advanced learning.
Approach: 1) MOUs with Universities/Research Institutions; 2) Institute 5 Fellowships (quarterly) for Young Researcher in Residency Programme (YRRP) in each focussed language area with 15 new articles and 100 edits in respective language Wikipedia and 100 new key words as deliverables. 3) Faculty Engagement Programme (FEP), 2 in each language for six-month duration, whereby a faculty is provided support to mentor and manage at least 5 Young Researchers on an Indian topic; 4) Wiki-Young Researchers Workshop
Outputs: 1) MOUs with at least 2 Universities/Research Institutions in each of the 5 language areas to potentially garner 5,000 users and 250 editors. 2) YRRP directly to add 100 active editors with 1500 new articles, 10,000 edits and 10,000 key words. 3) Indirectly YRRP can have a much larger (3x) foot-print if executed strategically. 4) FEP to yield at least 100 active editors and will have the same direct output as YRRP.
Deliverable in the first 60 days: 1) Devise a draft blue-print for engagement with University and Research Institutions; 2) Create a long list of potential partner institutions; 3) Few ice-breaker meetings with faculty in Universities.
vi) KINSHIP Groups – These are what I would like to call Groups with Knowledge on Issues, Niche Subjects, Hobbies and Independent Projects.
Rationale: There is a huge potential here for knowledge pooling and very few institutions like Sarai have managed to successfully tap into knowledge groups.
Objective: The biggest advantage is that these groups have tons of passion for their respective subject and will be more than willing to become Wikimedians. It is only that we need to identify and reach them. The ideal strategy would be to initially follow a YRRP model.
Output: 1) Institute 5 YRRP Fellowships (quarterly) in each focussed language area with 15 new articles and 100 edits in respective language Wikipedia and 100 new key words as deliverables. 2) Actively link them with Community.
Deliverable in the first 60 days: 1) Devise a draft blue-print for engagement with KINSHIP Groups; 2) Create a long list of potential groups; 3) Few ice-breaker meetings.
vii & viii)NGOs and Foundations – There is huge potential for Indian Wikimedia to collaborate with NGOs and Grant making Foundations.
Right now I can only suggest one example of collaborating with Community Radio Stations across India for content sharing, which they anyhow produce and submit to Ministry of I&B. They can also be potential grass-root networks (with technology) to create and cultivate new users and editors. Similarly sector specific NGOs offer a really big opportunity for the growth of Wikimedia in India. But it is important to know how to engage the NGOs and Foundations.
Deliverable in the first 60 days: An engagement plan will be developed.
Node 3 – A2K Team: The A2K team will be an important caveat in this Operational Plan. Have briefly outlined the activities and could elaborate if there are any specific questions.
a. A review of work done so far; Learnings and Challenges (Month 1)
b. Revisiting the Role and Objectives of Team Members (Month 1)
c. SMART Goal Exercise - Personal and Professional Goal setting (Month 2)
d. Work Planning Exercise & Goal Setting (Month 2)
e. Monthly Review (From Month 3 onwards)
f. Budget Planning in sync with Programme Planning (Month 2)
g. Creating Key Result Areas for each member of the team (Month 2)
h. Periodic Public Disclosure and Open assessment of Team performance (From Month 3 onwards)