User:MCruz (WMF)/Sandbox/Global Metrics Stage 2

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

How will we evaluate the strengths & weakness of each proposal?[edit]

There were many issues raised by community and staff about Global Metrics, more than can be addressed through just changing the metrics or the requirements. However, it's important to recognize where this replacement for Global Metrics will solve issues, create new issues, or lead to the same issues as today. To this end, we identified a set of criteria, based on the project's design principles, that we have used to assess the strengths and weaknesses of each proposed solution (which can been see under the "Assessment of this option against design criteria" section of each proposal).

Proposal 1:
3 shared metrics

Structure, Metrics, and Learning questions

Structure

  • Three shared metrics that grantees will be required to report, only when relevant to their project goals. These three shared metrics will be shared across all grant programs.

Metrics/Learning questions

  • Participation related metrics:
    • Quantitative: Total individuals involved
    • Qualitative question on community building:
  • Content related metric:
Assessment of this option against design criteria
Area Criteria Assessment
Strike a balance between flexibility and consistency Flexibility
Strike a balance between flexibility and consistency Consistency
Be relevant Expressed interest
Support accountability WMF Grants to WMF leadership and donors
Support accountability Grantee to WMF Grants
Ease community burden Existence of tools
Ease community burden Effort to collect
Ease community burden Availability of guidance

Support Comment Comment privately

Proposal 2:
3 shared metrics
+ 2 grantee-selected metrics

Structure, Metrics, and Learning questions

Structure

  • Three shared metrics that grantees will be required to report, only when relevant to their project goals. These three shared metrics will be shared across all grant programs.
  • In addition each grantee reports on two outcomes that are relevant across their grant activities. These outcomes do not have to measured quantitatively (that is, they don't have to be another metric). For example:
    • APG grantees that have identified gender diversity as a strategic focus across all of their programs might report on how they have improved the content gap on notable women.
    • Project grantees that

Metrics/Learning questions

  • 3 shared metrics are the same as Proposal 1:
    • Participation related metrics:
      • Quantitative: Total individuals involved
      • Qualitative question on community building:
    • Content related metric:
Assessment of this option against design criteria
Area Criteria Assessment
Strike a balance between flexibility and consistency Flexibility
Strike a balance between flexibility and consistency Consistency
Be relevant Expressed interest
Support accountability WMF Grants to WMF leadership and donors
Support accountability Grantee to WMF Grants
Ease community burden Existence of tools
Ease community burden Effort to collect
Ease community burden Availability of guidance

Endorse Give feedback

Propose a new solution Make your suggestion