Dear all
Over the past few months I have been leading the process of reviewing and refreshing Wikimedia UK's strategic framework, and developing a new business plan for 2016 - 19. The draft strategic framework sets out a new vision for the charity and I would love to hear from volunteers, members and other stakeholders about whether you support the proposed direction of travel. The process so far has involved a board away day in December, a planning session with the staff team, and a review of the draft documents at the board meeting in March. Community consultation on the strategic framework forms an important part of this process and will run until the end of this month.
https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/2016_Strategy_Consultation
The planned outputs from the strategic planning process will be a clear, concise strategic framework for the period 2016 to 2019, which outlines our vision, mission, values, planned outcomes, strategic goals and objectives and major programme strands, plus a three year business plan which puts the strategy in context, articulating the external context and drivers, planned priorities and programmes for the three year period and internal resources including staffing and funding.
When considering the draft strategic framework, I would be particularly keen for you to bear these questions in mind - although please don't feel that you have to answer all (or indeed any) of them:
1. Do you agree with the overall strategic framework proposed? If not, why/what changes would you like to suggest? 2. Is there anything missing? 3. How should WMUK prioritise activities? 4. How can we work with you on delivering the strategy?
You can respond to this consultation by *Monday 30th May 2016 *by adding your thoughts to the talk page or by sending an email to me on lucy.crompton-reid@wikimedia.org.uk.
With best wishes and many thanks Lucy
Hi Lucy,
Is there an analysis somewhere for the new outcomes in the strategy and the Objects (M3) in the Articles of Association showing how well it meets that core?
Increasing access to "UK cultural heritage" seems to be something in addition to the Objects, as well as the one about "learners". These are good areas with past projects banked, but by prioritizing these as measurable outcomes, proposals for projects that might be focused on say, engaging the elderly rather than educating them, or projects where the domain of knowledge lies mainly in non-UK cultural heritage material, such as international politics or international artworks, would be of a lesser priority.
If the charity is spending its budget on projects in a way that looks increasingly different to the current Articles of Association, it may be sensible to consider amending them for a members resolution at the forthcoming AGM rather than deferring for another year.
Thanks, Fae
On 11 May 2016 at 14:05, Lucy Crompton-Reid lucy.crompton-reid@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
Dear all
Over the past few months I have been leading the process of reviewing and refreshing Wikimedia UK's strategic framework, and developing a new business plan for 2016 - 19. The draft strategic framework sets out a new vision for the charity and I would love to hear from volunteers, members and other stakeholders about whether you support the proposed direction of travel. The process so far has involved a board away day in December, a planning session with the staff team, and a review of the draft documents at the board meeting in March. Community consultation on the strategic framework forms an important part of this process and will run until the end of this month.
https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/2016_Strategy_Consultation
The planned outputs from the strategic planning process will be a clear, concise strategic framework for the period 2016 to 2019, which outlines our vision, mission, values, planned outcomes, strategic goals and objectives and major programme strands, plus a three year business plan which puts the strategy in context, articulating the external context and drivers, planned priorities and programmes for the three year period and internal resources including staffing and funding.
When considering the draft strategic framework, I would be particularly keen for you to bear these questions in mind - although please don't feel that you have to answer all (or indeed any) of them:
- Do you agree with the overall strategic framework proposed? If not,
why/what changes would you like to suggest? 2. Is there anything missing? 3. How should WMUK prioritise activities? 4. How can we work with you on delivering the strategy?
You can respond to this consultation by Monday 30th May 2016 by adding your thoughts to the talk page or by sending an email to me on lucy.crompton-reid@wikimedia.org.uk.
With best wishes and many thanks Lucy
--
Lucy Crompton-Reid
Chief Executive
Wikimedia UK
+44 (0) 207 065 0991
Hi Fae
Many thanks for the prompt feedback!
Firstly, I want to be clear that when we (or certainly when I!) talk about 'UK cultural heritage', we mean that in the broadest possible sense in terms of what is *held* in the UK (which obviously includes knowledge, information and assets originating in and/or relating to many different cultures), and what is relevant to the people who *live* in the UK (again, covering many different cultural, ethnic, linguistic backgrounds). But if this is misleading we should certainly look at the wording.
I would argue that the objects of the charity are fairly broad, as they are to promote and support the widest possible public access to, use of and contribution to, Open Content of an encyclopaedic or educational nature or of similar utility to the general public, in particular the Open Content supported and provided by Wikimedia Foundation. Whilst the objects of course have to be the driving force of our strategy, the purpose of the three year framework is to identify which particular aspects of 'open content of an encyclopaedic or educational nature' the charity will focus on during this particular planning period. I therefore don't think that we will be committing budget or staff time to any projects that fall outwith the objects - and indeed, if we were planning to do so, we should certainly look to amend the Articles as you suggest.
Thanks again, and warm regards Lucy
On 11 May 2016 at 15:26, Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Lucy,
Is there an analysis somewhere for the new outcomes in the strategy and the Objects (M3) in the Articles of Association showing how well it meets that core?
Increasing access to "UK cultural heritage" seems to be something in addition to the Objects, as well as the one about "learners". These are good areas with past projects banked, but by prioritizing these as measurable outcomes, proposals for projects that might be focused on say, engaging the elderly rather than educating them, or projects where the domain of knowledge lies mainly in non-UK cultural heritage material, such as international politics or international artworks, would be of a lesser priority.
If the charity is spending its budget on projects in a way that looks increasingly different to the current Articles of Association, it may be sensible to consider amending them for a members resolution at the forthcoming AGM rather than deferring for another year.
Thanks, Fae
On 11 May 2016 at 14:05, Lucy Crompton-Reid lucy.crompton-reid@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
Dear all
Over the past few months I have been leading the process of reviewing and refreshing Wikimedia UK's strategic framework, and developing a new
business
plan for 2016 - 19. The draft strategic framework sets out a new vision
for
the charity and I would love to hear from volunteers, members and other stakeholders about whether you support the proposed direction of travel.
The
process so far has involved a board away day in December, a planning
session
with the staff team, and a review of the draft documents at the board meeting in March. Community consultation on the strategic framework
forms an
important part of this process and will run until the end of this month.
https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/2016_Strategy_Consultation
The planned outputs from the strategic planning process will be a clear, concise strategic framework for the period 2016 to 2019, which outlines
our
vision, mission, values, planned outcomes, strategic goals and objectives and major programme strands, plus a three year business plan which puts
the
strategy in context, articulating the external context and drivers,
planned
priorities and programmes for the three year period and internal
resources
including staffing and funding.
When considering the draft strategic framework, I would be particularly
keen
for you to bear these questions in mind - although please don't feel that you have to answer all (or indeed any) of them:
- Do you agree with the overall strategic framework proposed? If not,
why/what changes would you like to suggest? 2. Is there anything missing? 3. How should WMUK prioritise activities? 4. How can we work with you on delivering the strategy?
You can respond to this consultation by Monday 30th May 2016 by adding
your
thoughts to the talk page or by sending an email to me on lucy.crompton-reid@wikimedia.org.uk.
With best wishes and many thanks Lucy
--
Lucy Crompton-Reid
Chief Executive
Wikimedia UK
+44 (0) 207 065 0991
-- faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
Hi Fae,
Thanks for raising those concerns. I do agree that we need to do our best to align WMUK's activitites with our written Articles - and vice-versa if required. If the thrust of volunteers' work starts to diverge from what we had anticipated, then we need to be open to recognising that, and amending our plans - and if necessary the detail of our Articles - to keep the charity and our volunteer base pulling in the same direction.
Lucy is, of course, quite right that our objects are broad enough to allow a lot of latitude in how we meet them. Nevertheless, I recognise that it is not just how WMUK spends its budget, but also how it enables and steers the efforts of volunteers, much of which have impact far beyond any financial investment we make in them.
To that end, if you feel that there are specific issues to be mentioned or specific wording that would be an improvement to our Articles, then please do suggest them - preferably on-wiki so that we can have a broad discussion, and you have my promise that I'll raise them with the Board with a view to an AGM resolution, if needed.
On 11/05/16 23:34, Rex X wrote:
To that end, if you feel that there are specific issues to be mentioned or specific wording that would be an improvement to our Articles, then please do suggest them - preferably on-wiki so that we can have a broad discussion, and you have my promise that I'll raise them with the Board with a view to an AGM resolution, if needed.
Yes, a resolution at an AGM, as has happened in the past.
Those Articles that are a legal entity, for which the members of charity have a right to amend? And not the wider volunteer community?
Gordo
But Gordo, how would you expect the wider volunteer community to amend the Articles other than by debating and voting on a resolution at an AGM (or EGM)?
Volunteers who are not members, for whatever reason, can still make their views known, even if they have no legal entitlement to vote.
I'd be interested in any ideas to increase participation, of course.
On 12/05/16 22:19, Rex X wrote:
But Gordo, how would you expect the wider volunteer community to amend the Articles other than by debating and voting on a resolution at an AGM (or EGM)?
Members will vote.
Gordo
Yes, I said that. So what's the answer to the question I asked: how else would you do it?
On 13/05/16 03:38, Rex X wrote:
Yes, I said that. So what's the answer to the question I asked: how else would you do it?
By encouraging the wider community to become members, so that they get a vote at the AGM.
The volunteer community is much larger than the membership of the registered charity, and that body does indeed influence the activities of WMUK.
But I am not happy with non members influencing change at the level of Articles of Association. Non members become members who then get a vote on these matters.
Wider engagement? How would I do it? Well communications strategy and policy is always a good place to start.
Gordo
Gordo, you're right that the volunteer community is larger than the member base, and we really want to change that! I will be presenting an (early) draft communications strategy to the board in June, and one of the issues we will be looking at within the wider strategy is membership. Cheers, Lucy
On 13 May 2016 at 09:13, Gordon Joly gordon.joly@pobox.com wrote:
On 13/05/16 03:38, Rex X wrote:
Yes, I said that. So what's the answer to the question I asked: how else
would
you do it?
By encouraging the wider community to become members, so that they get a vote at the AGM.
The volunteer community is much larger than the membership of the registered charity, and that body does indeed influence the activities of WMUK.
But I am not happy with non members influencing change at the level of Articles of Association. Non members become members who then get a vote on these matters.
Wider engagement? How would I do it? Well communications strategy and policy is always a good place to start.
Gordo
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
So does anyone have any comments on the actual strategic framework document?
https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/File:DraftStrategicFramework2016-19February201...
Personally I think it's quite good, but then I sort of would anyway. Do you agree? Disagree? Partially agree? Have questions? Please let us know!
Chris
On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Lucy Crompton-Reid < lucy.crompton-reid@wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:
Gordo, you're right that the volunteer community is larger than the member base, and we really want to change that! I will be presenting an (early) draft communications strategy to the board in June, and one of the issues we will be looking at within the wider strategy is membership. Cheers, Lucy
On 13 May 2016 at 09:13, Gordon Joly gordon.joly@pobox.com wrote:
On 13/05/16 03:38, Rex X wrote:
Yes, I said that. So what's the answer to the question I asked: how
else would
you do it?
By encouraging the wider community to become members, so that they get a vote at the AGM.
The volunteer community is much larger than the membership of the registered charity, and that body does indeed influence the activities of WMUK.
But I am not happy with non members influencing change at the level of Articles of Association. Non members become members who then get a vote on these matters.
Wider engagement? How would I do it? Well communications strategy and policy is always a good place to start.
Gordo
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
--
Lucy Crompton-Reid
Chief Executive
Wikimedia UK
+44 (0) 207 065 0991
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT.
Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
On 13 May 2016 at 12:42 Chris Keating chriskeatingwiki@gmail.com wrote:
So does anyone have any comments on the actual strategic frameworkdocument?
https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/File:DraftStrategicFramework2016-19February201...
Personally I think it's quite good, but then I sort of would anyway. Doyou agree? Disagree? Partially agree? Have questions? Please let us know!
Well, yes, and I intend to comment by 30 May. When I'm not jet-lagged (flights KIX to LCY are fairly effective at that), I'd like to lay the proposed strategy alongside https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Strategic_goals and have a good look. Various topics that have come up in WMUK discussions, such as the discriminating use of the ideas behind OERs and outreach, and goal G4, deserve attention.
Charles
On 13 May 2016 at 12:42, Chris Keating chriskeatingwiki@gmail.com wrote:
So does anyone have any comments on the actual strategic framework document?
https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/File:DraftStrategicFramework2016-19February201...
Personally I think it's quite good, but then I sort of would anyway. Do you agree? Disagree? Partially agree? Have questions? Please let us know!
Problem is that the document suffers from being to broad and too safe of most people to form much of an opinion about. Indeed its hard to have an opinion on "We promote the values inherent in the concept of open knowledge" beyond that statement being largely meaningless.
On 17 May 2016 at 00:15, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
Problem is that the document suffers from being to broad and too safe of most people to form much of an opinion about. Indeed its hard to have an opinion on "We promote the values inherent in the concept of open knowledge" beyond that statement being largely meaningless.
To be clear I'm not saying that the document in general is meaningless just that it covers the kind of broad stuff that people tend not to be too interested in. My actual feedback can be found on the talk page.
The board seems to have cultivated a mostly apathetic membership, which nicely preserves the status quo and thus the board has little to gain from actually members what it's doing beyond the legal requirements. One of the many reasons I'm glad I'm no longer a member. I never begrudged the membership fee, but legal membership implies a level of responsibility I'm not comfortable with considering how little scope the membership has to change anything. But I enjoy reading the highly sanitised reports that confirm that the deckchairs are in order on the Titanic.
As for membership and the wider community, the latter is inherently a more ephemeral group. It's unrealistic to expect that all or even the majority of them will become members of the organisation. Those who want to get involved in the politics and the decision-making (to the extent that it doesn't interfere with the status quo) will always be a subset, and having a large and healthy community with interests broader than those of the chapter is a good thing. The charity and company limited by guarantee can be part of a broader ecosystem.
Harry Mitchell http://enwp.org/User:HJ +44 (0) 7507 536 971 Skype: harry_j_mitchell
On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Lucy Crompton-Reid < lucy.crompton-reid@wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:
Gordo, you're right that the volunteer community is larger than the member base, and we really want to change that! I will be presenting an (early) draft communications strategy to the board in June, and one of the issues we will be looking at within the wider strategy is membership. Cheers, Lucy
On 13 May 2016 at 09:13, Gordon Joly gordon.joly@pobox.com wrote:
On 13/05/16 03:38, Rex X wrote:
Yes, I said that. So what's the answer to the question I asked: how
else would
you do it?
By encouraging the wider community to become members, so that they get a vote at the AGM.
The volunteer community is much larger than the membership of the registered charity, and that body does indeed influence the activities of WMUK.
But I am not happy with non members influencing change at the level of Articles of Association. Non members become members who then get a vote on these matters.
Wider engagement? How would I do it? Well communications strategy and policy is always a good place to start.
Gordo
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
--
Lucy Crompton-Reid
Chief Executive
Wikimedia UK
+44 (0) 207 065 0991
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT.
Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
On 13 May 2016 at 09:13 Gordon Joly <gordon.joly@pobox.com> wrote: Wider engagement? How would I do it? Well communications strategy and policy is always a good place to start.
I agree with that much. Have done since January 2011.
Charles
wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org