It's also my point considering that to get external funds probably a team (like WLM) can bu pushed to find a stronger impact outside Wikimedia movement in order to get more external funds.
The Gender gap has a stronger potentiality because is more flexible to be adapted to external funds, but my expectation is that the teams submitting the request of grants can also learn the ability to setup a good project and good reports and to reach a maturity consisting in the capacity to "design" interesting projects for external funds (also for the global South).
Basically to build a "best practice" in these terms: "someting that enable organizations to deliver benefits, return on investment, and value on investment through a sustained approach" (ITIL definition).
In my opinion the experience of WM SWE can become a best practice but for "mature" teams.
regards
On 06.01.2015 12:26, Anders Wennersten wrote:
Ilario,
My point is rather that while WLM has a clear-cut dynamic, "put in resources->get photos in Commons", I believe that in the area of gender-gap the dynamic could be more complex (as in my example).
And if WMF only want to see a direct link between effort and impact, they could miss out other dynamics. And in my example I think the funding body never even asked it the number of female editors in Wikipedia increased, for them the media coverage was a more concrete and satisfying result (I wonder if this would be true for WMF grantmaking?)
Anders