Revolution of 2016/WMF as high-tech organization/bg
Unique technology and investing in people
I believe a high-tech organization should invest in smart people creating unique technology. But I also think it should invest in people, period. Staff and volunteers must be cultivated and supported -- that's how loyalty and passion are developed, and I believe they pay dividends in productivity and recruitment.
My point is that it is necessary to monitor trends and make sure Wikipedia does not get so aniquitated that is it left behind. But on the other hand, blindly chasing new tech fads can tear the organization and the humans still very much needed to add to, improve and update a huge gathering of data. Any new technologies we want to explore must conform to the main purpose of Wikimedia, the free dissemination of information. I have no problem with, say, Wikipedia content be reused for other formats (it is already.) but that encyclopedic basis needs to remain intact and accessible to all, not just those who know all the new tech gizmos.
— Leigh Thelmadatter, https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-February/082310.html
Високотехнологична организация или не?
Actually, in the facebook discussion which was earlier referenced on this list someone noticed (unfortunately, without much impact) that WMF is not a business company and not a high-tech company, but more like a culture/ educational institution.
— Yaroslav M. Blanter, https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-February/082705.html
As stated on a number of occasions, I whole-heartedly agree with this approach. It is also logical from strategic management point of view: our core competitive advantage is the ability to engage with the knowledge communities around ideas (we are the best in the world at that), and not developing tech (we're good, but we're no match for Google, 3M, or Facebook here). We should realize that as the vision of the WMF as predominantly a high-tech organization is really dangerous.
We COULD outsource most of our tech (I'm not supporting this, I'm just giving perspective). We COULD NOT outsource the community support.— Dariusz Jemielniak, https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-February/082707.html
Какво е високотехнологична организация?
in my opinion there is no need to differentiate and to clarify what "high-tech" means.
The real problem is to define the KPIs (key performance indicators) and a balanced relation of those indicators.
A corporation can be a high-tech corporation and take care of the comfort of all stakeholders without problems, the big deal is to find this balanced relation.
— Ilario Valdelli, https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-February/082770.html
It's great to track measurable things to engage in a feedback loop for whether we're accomplishing our goals, but the measures are always limited in what they tell you; at best they're proxies for the information you really wanted -- such as "page views" when we want to know "how many people are learning and improving their lives through Wikipedia?" or active editor counts when we want to know "do we have a strong, healthy volunteer workforce?"