Community Relations/Annual Plan 2018-19
Community collaboration in product development
[edit]Select the activity type, see definitions here:
X Programmatic activities
General and Administrative activities
Fundraising activities
Goals, Outcomes, and Outputs
| Teams contributing to the program: | |
| Community Liaisons | |
| Annual Plan FY18-19 topline goals | |
| #1) Knowledge Equity - grow new contributors and content
#2) Knowledge as a Service - increase reach X #3) Knowledge as a Service/Foundational Strength - evolve our systems and structures None of the above How does your program affect the annual plan topline goal: We refine processes that allow us to build capacity in the organization and in the movement to effectively deal with information and communications, primarily in the technical field. | |
| Program Goal | |
| To increase the awareness and participation of Wikimedia communities in the Foundation’s product development projects. To engage a higher quantity and diversity of participants to result in a better understanding, collaboration, and products. | |
| Outcome 1 | |
| The Wikimedia Foundation has a smooth, successful engagement with the communities planning and releasing software products. | |
| Output 1 | |
| Community Liaisons provide community engagement support to Audiences and Technology’s teams. | |
| Outcome 2 | |
| Communities engage in ongoing product development projects by providing early input and becoming early adopters. | |
| Output 2 | |
| A centralized source of information about public product development projects and release plans, highlighting opportunities for communities to provide early input on software plans, as well as their preference about getting beta features and early deployments. | |
| Outcome 3 | |
| Community members from smaller and/or underrepresented parts of the community provide their feedback about software plans, testing, and deployments | |
| Output 3 | |
| Expand the Tech Ambassadors and Tech Translators programs beyond the top 25 Wikimedia communities. | |
| Output 4 | |
| Experiment with ways to involve more and more diverse contributors in calls for testing and feedback. | |
| Outcome 4 | |
| Audiences and Technology teams deciding to handle basic community engagement activities on their own can do it with the use of comprehensive documentation. | |
| Output 5 | |
| A compilation of HowTo documentation about engaging the communities, merging and updating existing documentation and creating more guides as needed. | |
Targets
| Outcome 1 | Target 1 | Measurement method |
| The Wikimedia Foundation has a smooth, successful engagement with the communities planning and releasing software products. | * 100% of support requests submitted to CL by Audiences or Technology receive a response within a week.
* 100% of support requests accepted are resourced within three months. * Zero unanticipated clashes with the communities related to tasks where CL support has been committed. * Degree of satisfaction of teams receiving CL support is “Very satisfied”. * At CE Insights, participants estimate that the Wikimedia Foundation collaborates well with Wikimedia communities to develop software. |
* Phabricator records.
* Post-mortem analysis of community clashes related to software releases. * Satisfaction surveys to Foundation teams. * CE Insights. |
| Outcome 2 | Target 2 | Measurement method |
| Communities engage in ongoing product development projects by providing early input and becoming early adopters. | * By December 2018, we have completed a centralized source of information about public product development projects and release plans.
* 100% of support requests by Foundation teams to seek early feedback or early adopters are satisfied in the terms agreed. |
* Presentation of the new source of information at the Oct-Dec 2018 Quarterly Check-in.
* Phabricator records. |
| Outcome 3 | Target 3 | Measurement method |
| Community members from smaller and/or underrepresented parts of the community provide their feedback about software plans, testing, and deployments | * 50 wiki communities selected through various criteria (number of active contributors, Foundation’s geographic or linguistic priorities…) have at least one active tech ambassador and (when relevant) one active tech translator.
* For special requests for feedback agreed with product managers involving big communities, at least 1% of contributors active in one community express their opinion (0.5% for English Wikipedia). |
* Tech Ambassadors and Tech Translators lists, reviewed.
* MediaWiki records. * Surveys. |
| Outcome 4 | Target 4 | Measurement method |
| Audiences and Technology teams deciding to handle basic community engagement activities on their own can do it with the use of comprehensive documentation. | * By December 2018, we have completed the documentation.
* Degree of satisfaction of teams using this documentation is “Very satisfied”. |
* Presentation of the new source of information at the Oct-Dec 2018 Quarterly Check-in.
* Surveys |
| Dependencies (optional) |
| No hard dependencies. Obviously, we depend on Audiences and Technology teams requesting Community Liaison support, and we depend on them following our support request process and completing our satisfaction surveys. |
International developer events
[edit]Select the activity type, see definitions here:
X Programmatic activities
General and Administrative activities
Fundraising activities
Goals, Outcomes, and Outputs
| Teams contributing to the program: | |
| Developer Relations | |
| Annual Plan FY18-19 topline goals | |
| #1) Knowledge Equity - grow new contributors and content
#2) Knowledge as a Service - increase reach X #3) Knowledge as a Service/Foundational Strength - evolve our systems and structures X None of the above How does your program affect the annual plan topline goal: International developer events energize the Wikimedia technical community, strengthen personal and social ties, and serve as high-bandwidth meeting spaces to discuss the future and to advance complex problems. Improving our programmatic approach to the organization of these events while keeping the events themselves as flexible as their participants enjoy them helps evolving the movement's systems and structures. | |
| Program Goal | |
| Well-facilitated and organized meeting spaces for groups and most active volunteers in the developer community to collaborate face to face, with appropriate representation of Foundation, affiliates and volunteers to discuss the future of Wikimedia technologies in depth. | |
| Outcome 1 | |
| Agreement on focus areas between Technology, Audiences and the local affiliate co-organizers inform the organization of each event and related activities, scholarships, and Foundation travel plans. | |
| Output 1 | |
| Chiefs of Technology and Audiences are involved in the definition of the high level plan for each international event, following a calendar that allows them to define focus areas and their corresponding activities and travel plans for their departments. | |
| Output 2 | |
| When partnering with a local affiliate, agree on focus areas relevant to them for their technical needs and local developer outreach. | |
| Outcome 2 | |
| Volunteer and professional participants contribute significant progress on announced priorities at events thanks to face to face collaboration, discussions, and hands-on work. | |
| Output 3 | |
| Organization of the Wikimedia Hackathon partnering with an affiliate. | |
| Output 4 | |
| Organization of the Hackathon in Wikimania partnering with the Wikimania organizers. | |
| Output 5 | |
| Organization of scholarships through own programs or participation in existing programs ensuring a good and diverse representation of volunteers aligned with the event focus areas and developer growth paths. | |
| Output 6 | |
| Support local groups in their outreach to local developer groups and participants in co-located events (i.e. editors at Wikimania) that are relevant to the event focus areas and activities. | |
| Outcome 3 | |
| Wikimedia’s technological vision and roadmap decisions obtain significant progress in a public annual event dedicated to this purpose. | |
| Output 7 | |
| Organization of the logistics of the Wikimedia Developer Summit, an event owned by the Chief Technology Officer, including logistical support to the Program Committee. | |
| Output 8 | |
| Refine the Call for Participation process based on lessons learned at the Wikimedia Developer Summit 2018. | |
| Outcome 4 | |
| Personal and social connections between participants and also with remote developers are reinforced before, during, and after each event, resulting in better collaboration and relationships throughout the year. | |
| Output 9 | |
| Process to match offer and demand for help before and during the event, with a special focus on covering volunteers' needs. | |
| Output 10 | |
| Infrastructure for online collaboration open to remote participation. | |
| Output 11 | |
| Post-event follow-up of participants and activities in order to make the most of the software, materials and discussions produced during the event, and to keep high levels of engagement and retention especially among newcomers of these events. | |
Targets
| Outcome 1 | Target 1 | Measurement method |
| Agreement on focus areas between Technology, Audiences and the local affiliate co-organizers inform the organization of each event and related activities, scholarships, and Foundation travel plans. | Focus areas for each event announced before the opening of registration and scholarship requests. | Check the event main page and announcements. |
| Outcome 2 | Target 2 | Measurement method |
| Volunteer and professional participants contribute significant progress on announced priorities at events thanks to face to face collaboration, discussions, and hands-on work. | Closing session showcasing the results of the event reflects the progress made by different individuals and groups in the focus areas and other areas too, with special celebration of volunteer and newcomer achievements.
High satisfaction among participants about the event organization, contacts made, progress made, and the use of their time. When local organizers are involved, a local sample of the previous targets must show a high rate of success as well. |
Analysis of the closing session and the results showcased.
Satisfaction survey to all participants. Survey / interviews to the representatives of Technology, Audiences and the local organizers. |
| Outcome 3 | Target 3 | Measurement method |
| Wikimedia’s technological vision and roadmap decisions obtain significant progress in a public annual event dedicated to this purpose. | The stakeholders of the focus areas selected are present at the event ensuring good coverage of the topics discussed.
Significant absences at the event are covered with statements shared beforehand and/or remote participation. The documentation published at the end of the event reflect the discussions, progress, action points and way forward for the topics discussed. |
Survey / interviews to the Program Committee, the TechComm, the maintainers of the areas discussed, and the chiefs of Technology and Audiences. |
| Outcome 4 | Target 4 | Measurement method |
| Personal and social connections between participants and also with remote developers are reinforced before, during, and after each event, resulting in better collaboration and relationships throughout the year. | One month before the event, a 10% of the registered participants have proposed activities welcoming contributors.
One week before the event, 90% of registered participants looking for project suggestions have been matched with a project lead or a mentor. 50% of remote participants who have registered their plans or interests also find partners, participate in showcased activities and in a post-event survey. 100% of registered participants who were looking for project suggestions are surveyed a month after the event and receive a personalized list of suggestions based on their answers. |
Check event website and related records (e.g. registration, survey....
Analysis of the closing session and the results showcased. |
| Dependencies (optional) |
| This program requires involvement of Technology and Audiences management defining focus areas and coordinating their travel plans and activities accordingly, taking into consideration volunteers' needs as well.
The Wikimedia Developer Summit requires close collaboration with Technology to support the Program Committee and the logistics of the event. The Hackathon at Wikimania requires good coordination with Community Resources as main contact and participant in the Wikimania organization. |