[Wikimedia-l] Fellowship

Thu May 10 20:49:49 UTC 2012

Thanks for bringing these questions and answers to this list, Florence and
Theo!  Fellowships are definitely their own role category at WMF as for
other organizations, and the nuances aren't very clear-cut, so its always
good to see how others view things.

Theo, I'm glad to hear you think the roles are becoming more clearly
fleshed out - thats really nice feedback, thank you!  The program pages on
meta are still a work in progress, and I'm hoping to do another run on them
this summer.  As the program evolves, we're learning which fellowships are
good models to build on and which ones might be done differently next time.
 For this reason, I'm always trying to update my thinking and will point to
the most recent fellowships as probably the best examples of what WMF
fellowships are today.

As I see it, there are 2 angles to consider in discussing fellowships:  the
spirit or intent, and the paperwork.

The spirit of a WMF fellowship is a bit different from both traditional
staff roles and contractor roles.  Fellowship work is based around a
project and generally a fellow focuses on completing 1 or occasionally a
few projects during their fellowship period.  Projects are scoped to be
completed in 12 months or less and designed to be largely worked on
independently and led by fellows themselves, with some support from myself
and other WMF people as needed.  Some fellows work in teams to complete a
project, some work by themselves.  Fellows do technically report to someone
at WMF - usually that's me, but I'd characterize my management style as
something along the lines of "lets talk about where you want to go and what
help you might need in order to get there."  Fellows bring some expertise
with them related to their project, and are also expected to learn
something and professionally develop over the course of their project.

Example:  Peter Coombe's fellowship, which began this month, is a 6 month
fellowship to pilot a data-driven method for redesigning Help pages on
EN:WP.  Peter is a long-time editor of EN:WP so he brings his community
expertise as well as his experience writing explanatory documentation from
other past work.  He's keen to learn more about usability testing and
develop his skills in this area, so that will be where the professional
development aspect comes in for this fellowship.

This is different from a staff role where someone is hired to work more
generally in an area or department where they might contribute to many
different projects going on at the same time and where there isn't a
defined end date for their role.  I see this as also different from a
traditional contractor model, where the organization defines the set of
tasks that need to be completed, finds someone who is an expert in those
tasks, and contracts with them to complete these tasks.  In the
fee-for-service contractor model there isn't really a sense of professional
development, and there isn't much organizational support or mentorship
built into the model.

There are indeed Research Fellowships and Community Fellowships, but the
distinction between these 2 titles now is mostly in the project focus and
fellow's background.  Community Fellowships are intended for members of the
Wikimedia Community, and they generally work on projects that will have
some direct impact on the community (again, Peter's fellowship).  Research
Fellowships are titles used for fellows who work on research projects - for
example, in last summer's Wikimedia Summer of Research we engaged a group
of Research Fellows.  Some of these research fellows were also active
members of the community though, and some of their work does also have
direct impact on the community (Research Fellow Jonathan Morgan is working
on the Teahouse project with Community Fellow Sarah Stierch, for example),
so these distinctions aren't always very neat and tidy.

We try to bring fellows to visit WMF in person at least once during their
fellowship.  Some relocate to work from the San Francisco office, some do
not, and this is mostly decided based on the needs of the project and what
other commitments the fellow has (school, family, etc).

The way the paperwork is structured for each fellowship is done case by
case, though, and this is what I think starts to be confusing when we're
trying to put fellows in any particular bucket of contractor or staff.  The
US has very specific regulations for engaging people that WMF must follow,
and so while the intent of all fellowships in the program should be the
same regardless of the paperwork, fellows come from many different
countries and work on many different kinds of projects.  Duration and
location varies, so the type of contract or any benefits or liability
varies from case to case, and is determined by what the law says based on
all of these factors.  I'm thankful that legal liability issues haven't
come up yet, hoping they never will, and figure that if they do our legal
team will take it on a case by case basis as well.

Sorry for the long email - and now I guess you see why the program pages
are still kind of confusing too :-)  Let me know if this sparks other
questions or feedback!

Thanks,
Siko

> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 15:42:09 +0530
> From: Theo10011 <de10011 at gmail.com>
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fellowship
> Message-ID:
>        <CAP9+R95T0PQcEN395TKk69ofNR--gBWd7B8Taveqve1+Rp=YgQ at mail.gmail.com
> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Hi Florence
>
> I'm sure someone from the staff is going to explain this better later, but
> I will give it a shot until they do. I fielded questions about this last
> year, and did some clean-up work on Meta, so I looked up the information
> about this. I might be wrong on a couple of things, but I will try and
> explain to the best of my knowledge.
>
> Fellows, and their organizational, administrative roles have been fleshed
> out much better now than they were before. I believe Siko deserves a lot of
> the credit, along with other staffers. The delineation are becoming more
> clearer now than they were before.
>
> As it stands, there seem to be 2 types of fellows- one is, Research fellows
> and the other, Community fellows.
>
> Research fellows are usually remotely located, who sign on for a limited
> time and project. Their terms are usually smaller and only for the duration
> of the project which they sign on for. They are signed on for a specific
> task or project and supported through it. They are remote contractors,
> whose purpose is the completion of their research project and WMF supports
> them through it.
>
> Community fellows, which might be more familiar, are usually community
> members. They are usually located at the WMF office, and usually have one
> year terms (in majority of the cases). They may or may not have a specific
> project, or take on more projects during their fellowship. They are usually
> community resources/representatives at the staff with some familiarity with
> the staff and inner-workings. The last 3 community fellows incidentally,
> moved on to staff positions after their terms - Steven, Maryana and James.
> As far as I know, no past fellow exceeded the one year term.
>
> To the best of my knowledge, Community fellows are contractors. They are
> technically separate from staff, and technically not answerable to a direct
> superior. Traditionally, fellows are independent of the organization that
> appoints them. (not sure if that is the same in WMF context)
>
> I answered a couple of your questions in-line also.
>
> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Florence Devouard <anthere9 at yahoo.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Hello
> >
> > Following a conversation started on another mailing list on the meaning
> of
> > "fellowship", I am forwarding here a question that I hope will be
> answered
> > by someone (I can not help being curious :)).
> >
> > My original question was
> >
> > "I have also been wondering myself what the difference is between a
> fellow
> > and a staff member. The only difference I could personally figure out is
> > that the fellow is there for a very specific mission and for a fixed
> amount
> > of time, whilst the staff person may have his role and tasks change over
> > time and is supposingly on unlimited time (until he leaves or get fired).
> > Am I correct in my interpretation or is a fellow something different than
> > what I think it is ?"
> >
> > I got the following answers
> >
> > "From a communications perspective I have no problem defining what a
> > fellow is, and what they're doing. They are receiving compensation from
> the
> > Foundation to really focus on the work that they do, but I don't believe
> > would we call them 'staff' of the Foundation, nor contractors. Creative
> > Commons has fellows as well, but I've generally seen them communicating
> and
> > carrying out work within their research or area of activity focus:
> > https://creativecommons.org/**fellows<
> https://creativecommons.org/fellows>
> >
> > I do believe in either case a fellow does work on a specific project or
> > initiative for a set period of time."
> >
> >
> > as well as
> >
> > "See also https://meta.wikimedia.org/**wiki/Wikimedia_Fellowships#**
> > What_a_Fellow_is.<
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Fellowships#What_a_Fellow_is.>..
> > (and the following section, "What a Fellow is not...") "
> >
> > and
> >
> > "In other contexts, one of the important reasons why a fellow might not
> be
> > considered "staff" of the organization providing the fellowship is
> because
> > they would remain on the staff of whatever organization they were
> > affiliated with originally. Somebody at a university who receives a
> > fellowship to pursue research while on sabbatical is still primarily seen
> > as part of the university. (Not that Wikimedia fellowships are designed
> for
> > purely academic research, but the principle about affiliation applies
> > nevertheless.)"
> >
> > Which answers partly to my question indeed.
> >
> > I would be interesting to have not only a communication/management
> > perspective, but also an administrative & legal one.
> >
> > Does the fellowship status implies that the WMF pays for health or
> > retirement benefits (as it would for a staff member) or does the fellow
> > receive a lump sum and manages by himself to pay for taxes and benefits
> > depending on the country he lives in (as would a contractor) ?
> >
>
> Depends on the type of fellowship. Research fellows don't get other
> benefits, they are purely contractors. Community fellows are different, the
> exact nature of benefits was going through a change from what I remember
> since last year. Since majority of the community fellows have been located
> in SF, the exact tax and benefit paid, depends on California laws than
> elsewhere.
>
>
> > Does the fellowship status implies that, should the fellow get in
> trouble,
> > he would be considered "staff" (in terms of liability) or is he on his
> own
> > ? (which in my terms would be "if as staff", he is covered by WMF
> > insurrance versus "if as contractor", he has to pay insurrance by
> himself).
> >
>
> They are not staff. Research fellows truly are remote contractors, while
> Community fellows might be considered independent contractors working
> along-side staff. They are technically still not staff. In case of trouble,
> they would be considered as contractors. Perhaps not legally, but they are
> still considered representative of the organization that appoints them. I'm
> guessing, how far WMF takes the relationship or defends a contractor, would
> depend on the nature of the case.
>
> I hope this helps, I'm sure someone will correct me if I missed anything.
>
> Regards
> Theo
>
>
> ------------------------------
>

-- 
Siko Bouterse
Head of Community Fellowships
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.

sbouterse at wikimedia.org