Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2017/Direction/GLAM Discussion

GLAM Discussion: Wikimedia 2030 Draft Strategic Direction

As some of you are already well aware, after all the activity of the past few months, the time has now come to summarize what we have learned and discussed, and create a document that we can agree on as a movement. A small team is leading the writing process, in partnership with contributors. The process is very much one of co-creation, similar to how we write Wikipedia articles.

The goal isn’t just for you to agree with the final text, but also to help co-author it so that you can see a strategic direction that you believe in when the process is over.

You can find complete rationale and updated draft direction posted on meta it s open for final comment through September 24th. In October, the final draft will be open for endorsement by groups and individuals, willing to support it.

Whether you edit the page directly on Meta, comment on the talk page, or prefer to share your thoughts here in private, I want to encourage you to participate in this process before the draft is finalized. The goal is for all of us to engage in finalizing the draft so that in October folks can show their agreement and support for a shared direction by endorsing the document together.

This page has been set-up specifically for GLAM groups and stakeholders to discuss together in order to feedback best for any changes needed. Other groups and individuals, along with the Wikimedia Foundation, will be encouraged to sign it. This is why it is very important that you take time to read the document, discuss it within the committee, and ask questions; I want to make sure that you know you have an open line of communication through me into the strategy team if you want it. To understand more about the drafting and endorsement process please see the basic FAQ at the bottom of this page.

I hope you find a way to participate in this process.

GLAM Feedback about the current draft

We are genuinely looking forward to your thoughts and support in the crafting of the document. For this I have included a few prompts to help you review and feedback any concerns or suggestions.

What is your overall take on the strategic direction, does it help to inspire or direct the GLAM communities on any potential priorities with relation to the your work and the GLAM partnerships ecosystem?

• Please discuss your thoughts on the talk page and then add major comments here

What, if any recommendations do you have for improvements to the draft direction or surrounding documentation?

Discuss what would make the Strategic Direction more endorse-able, what specifically would you change? What should we keep, change, drop, add? At this conceptual level, not at the fine editing level.

Please write as specifically as possible what that change would look like.

• Please discuss your thoughts on the talk page and then add major comments here

Is there anything in the direction that causes the concerns to the level that would interfere with your endorsement?

• Please discuss your thoughts on the talk page and then add major comments here

Other comments

• Please discuss your thoughts on the talk page and then add major comments here

Endorsement Process FAQs

What does endorsement mean?

‘Endorsement’ is the process by which actors in the Wikimedia movement will show their agreement on the strategic direction emerging from the 2017 movement-wide strategy process. The strategy team is reaching out directly to some of the groups who have shown leadership in the movement and explicitly inviting them to co-create the draft of the document during the month of August, to make sure that the strategy reflects a diversity of perspectives, interests, and capacities. Those groups will have a designated contact person to be their channel into the drafting group and to answer their questions. In September, the team will ask those groups to ‘endorse’ (or sign on to) the strategic direction document to show support for the new direction and the process by which it emerged.

How do we actually endorse this strategic direction? Who can we tell once we’ve signed it? Do we actually have to sign anything?

The exact process for signature hasn’t been determined yet, but it’ll probably happen by signing on a page on Meta on behalf of your organization. The document, which we’ll have written together, will say that we support the direction and will contribute to its progress and success in whatever way our organizations can. The signature must come from someone who can speak for the organization (e.g. the Chairperson of your Board). If your group doesn’t have a formal structure, please approve the document in whatever way your organization or group makes official decisions. The strategy team asks that you start discussions with your decision group early, keep them informed, and possibly schedule a vote in advance, so that your organization is ready to be among the first to endorse in September. You are encouraged to discuss your decision with other groups and share your support on social media and other communication channels. The team will prepare some materials during and after Wikimania for this purpose, should you need them.

What does the signature mean for the future work of our organizations?

Your signature only serves as support for the general direction of our movement, the process by which it emerged, and a commitment from your organization to participate in good faith in the next series of discussions. In the next discussions, starting in October/November 2017, we will all discuss the resources, structures, roles and responsibilities that our movement needs to execute the direction we agreed on. This is when your organization will decide whether you want to take an active role in some of those activities, or if you prefer to continue what you have been doing until now. Some parts of the strategic direction will resonate for some groups, and other parts will resonate with others groups. Your organization doesn’t have to follow everything in the strategic direction.

Do we have to agree with everything in the direction document?

Thankfully, no. We all have to keep in mind that this is a movement strategy, not an organization- or person-specific strategy. We hope to agree on where the movement is going. But you don’t have to agree with every single line in the document in order to sign on. Hopefully, you will share your opinions during the writing and feedback process in August about the parts of the draft that you feel need to change.

Who is writing this strategic direction document?

The document is being written on Meta, and reviewed by many groups and contributors, including you. A “drafting group,” composed of people with a diverse set of perspectives from across the movement, is helping to review and write the document as well. This drafting group consists of the following people: Kaarel Vaidla Sandra Rientjes Anna Torres Netha Hussein Felix Nartey Anne Clin (Risker) Adele Vrana (Director of Partnerships, Global Reach at WMF) Caitlin Virtue (Director of Development at WMF) Panthea Lee (Principal at Reboot) Also involved in the writing process are members of the strategy team, including Wikimedia Foundation staff (Katherine Maher, Anna Stillwell, Guillaume Paumier) and consultants from williamsworks (Ed Bland, Shannon Keith).

What’s next?

The next step is the feedback process. The draft will be posted to Meta and Wikimedians will be invited to edit the draft or discuss it on the associated talk page. The drafting group will facilitate the integration of those comments into the text, whether they come from direct comments, from groups, or from the sessions at Wikimania. The hope is that a stable document amenable to most people across the participants will emerge by the end of August.

Where are we in the process and how can we contribute?

As an organized group, the strategy team will ask that you review the document as early and often as possible in the last week of July and in August. This may happen in offline meetings, on a wiki, over e-mail, over a video conference, etc. Regardless of the method, the goal is to discuss the draft: what do you like about it? What don’t you like? What could be improved? Is something missing? Is there anything so problematic in the draft that it would keep you from endorsing it? Sharing your opinion early and often will ensure that your thoughts are documented on Meta and incorporated in the successive revisions of the document.

We still feel like this whole movement strategy process is nonsense. What if we’re this far along and we still don’t agree?

There is still time to participate, be bold, and edit the wiki page for the draft. This last period of discussion is about collaboratively writing something we agree on. If, at the end of the process, you still disagree with others, you can continue doing what you’re already doing. But this final period will allow you to comment on the draft strategic document and provide your thoughts on the talk page. What would you change?

What if we don’t see the detail we want reflected in this document?

This draft isn’t meant to be overly detailed. The detail of ‘how’ we will accomplish this big-picture direction will be discussed in Phase 2 (starting in October/November 2017). If you believe that your position isn’t represented at the highest level, then please participate in the drafting discussion from now until the end of August to see if others agree with you, and make the appropriate suggestions on the talk page.

Let’s say we do agree, or at least we’re marginally accepting of what’s happened up to this point. What are the important dates we should know about going forward?

• In August the draft strategic direction will be posted and edited on Meta-Wiki and anyone can provide their thoughts on the talk page. This draft is exactly that: a draft; and is meant for people to react to, rewrite, and adapt to make sure that it appropriately reflects all voices. Some parts of the document are likely to be written on Meta before August 1, if you are interested in an early look.
• Wikimania (August 10−13) will also be an opportunity to provide some feedback and get your questions answered. If possible, share your thoughts before WIkimania, to make sure they’re integrated early. No one wants to rush through the comments at the end of the process and risk missing some.
• At the end of August, the document will be “frozen” on its final revision.
• Through September, you and others will hopefully endorse the document you will have co-created.

How did we get here?

Here’s an overview of what happened in the last 7 months of the movement strategy process:

1. Cycle 1: In Cycle 1, the strategy team asked a few open-ended questions to the entire community, as well as groups and individuals who aren’t yet a part of the movement. People from far and wide responded and gave their thoughts on what the Wikimedia movement could be by 2030. The team took those comments and grouped them into five major themes that emerged: Building a Healthy Community, The Augmented Age, Developing A Truly Global Movement, Becoming the Most Trusted Source of Knowledge, and Participating in the Knowledge Ecosystem.
2. Cycle 2: In Cycle 2, using those five themes, the strategy team asked the same community members and outside experts to discuss what they saw as most important in those themes, what tradeoffs would have to be made if we followed each, and how Wikimedia might have the greatest impact. At the end of Cycle 2, the team analyzed those responses and discussions.
3. Cycle 3: In parallel with community discussions, independent research was also commissioned on topics relevant to the process, like reliability, the evolution of technology, and how to integrate absent or underrepresented voices. Cycle 3 was an opportunity to share that information across discussion spaces and communities. The purpose was both to make more informed decisions as a community, but also to fact-check the results of the research.
4. Drafting: A group of people who represent perspectives from across the movement is now convening to review all the information, discuss early drafts, and eventually put forward a draft text for comment by the wider movement in August.