In my opinion the work of the FDC cannot be limited to compare three years,
to evaluate three budgets and to evaluate three impacts.
I would say that it's *out of context*.
I have had this feeling when I have read that the FDC consider that Amical
is the best example to follow.
How "to follow"? Amical operates in a different context than other
chapters. The question that a good example can be *cloned* is surrealistic.
Ok, nothing to say but:
a) Amical operates in small community where the language is a strong glue
within the community
b) Amical has a strong inter-relation Wikimedia projects = organization
c) Amical has no big internal conflicts generated by external or internal
questions (may be the opposite)
d) the territory where Amical operates is relatively small
A good example to compare Amical is with Wikimedia Israel.
I would not speak in the specific case of WM DE but I suggest to look in
the history of the German projects and in the German chapter and to check
how many external decisions have had an impact in the German community to
generate a bias. I don't think that these decisions have been a good
solution to improve the community participation to the projects.
What I see is that the numbers of editors is decreasing a lot in the
biggest projects.
It may be caused by a wrong strategy where is privileged the diversity and
the Global South but without paying attention that the historical
communities and to the "usual" editors. May be I am wrong but there are
more online projects becoming attractive for the "potential" editors and
the change of the target is not producing a real impact.
So it's not a question of comparison of three budget.
If the problem is critical the solution to limit the decreasing is not
beneficial.
regards
Il 24/Nov/2014 19:14 "Sydney Poore" <sydney.poore(a)gmail.com> ha scritto:
Hi Patrik,
During this round of the FDC evaluating the requests, the majority of the
organizations that we were looking at had submitted requests to the FDC for
the past 3 years. While we have seen improvement around strategic planning,
budget planning and evaluation, there is still a great amount of room for
improvement from everyone in the wikimedia movement (including the WMF.)
If you read the recommendations, FDC is primarily asking the largest
organizations to re-evaluate their current capacity to deliver impact to
the movement in line with the funds that they are using. In many instances
it involves looking at the organizations overall capacity to develop and
execute a strategic plan. Because the FDC is making recommendations about
unrestricted funds, rather than focusing on a specific project or program,
often the reductions in funds is linked to concerns about an organizations
capacity to grow (eg., hire and manage more staff, do more complicated
projects.)
Warm regards,
Sydney Poore
User:FloNight
Member FDC