Here's a crazy question.
Non-profit organizations are famous for having terrible web sites. Generally they get a fixed budget and after they spend it, they have a party and announced that they succeeded. Nobody ever tells the users, or rather, the people who might have been the users if they found out about it.
For a long time I thought "non-profit" was a cause of failure, or rather, that profit was a cause of success. Nobody at a library benefits from making a digital library 5% easier to use, but if a company like AMZN improves its site by 5%, that translates into happy customers plus a pile of money that can go into bonuses, dividends, etc.
That continuous improvement is missing in most non-profits. At best they get a series of grants to do things and set goals for major upgrades. Sometimes these upgrades fail, sometimes they really help, often they end up spending a lot of money for 3 years to get something that's about the same as what they had before.
How does the Wikimedia foundation escape this trap?