WWC2023/Program/Strategy/Hubs

• Home
• Research
• Hubs
• Engagement Plan

Goals & Objectives

• Hold a comprehensive discussion to decide on the necessity of a specific type of hub structure for gender organizers. Considering options previously as DEI, Gender, or a dedicated Women's hub.
• Generate key questions guiding the development of a research framework.
• Identify and designate leads to propel the initiative forward with coordination.

Cadence of discussions during the camp

Day 1 - Presentations and shareback to enlighten participants. Present and discuss thematic hub discussions, emphasizing their relevance and potential insights. Learn practical experience from an existing hub pilot within the movement.

Day 2 - Prioritization workshop. Utilize existing data insights to identify existing support structures and potential gaps. Prioritize challenges and explore opportunities and potential focus for future collaborations.

Day 3 - Surface key open questions. Identify key questions requiring answers to determine the hub's viability. Develop a plan for the post-workshop phase, outlining the next steps and how to proceed effectively.

Summary of discussions and outcomes

Day 1

On the first day of the workshop, the focus was on envisioning various ideas through hub conversations. The agenda included insightful presentations on the Movement Charter and Hubs by Ciell, an overview of the CEE Hub by Barbara, and a previous proposal for a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Hub by Camelia. (slides on Commons)

The Movement Charter presentation outlined the ten significant recommendations, emphasizing the movement’s process and global approach to developing shared values and goals. Also covered was the current definition and guidance for hubs promoters, including the current draft chapter on hubs, and the additional value of hubs in the already existing affiliate landscape of Chapters, Thematic Organizations and User Groups. Examples were also shared including pilot hubs like the CEE Regional Hub and thematic hubs like the Arabic language hub and the Education hub.

Barbara Klen shed light on the CEE Hub's inception and its principles, emphasizing openness and knowledge exchange. She shared a comprehensive overview of the CEE Hub's activities during its first year, and highlighted some key learnings on services provided to communities. This includes grant application support and learning sessions, while also recognizing the need for improvement in building relationships with communities.

Camelia Boban presented the previous DEI Hub proposal, emphasizing the importance of diversity in a people-centered movement. Discussions revolved around the DEI Hub's resource model, potential risks, and benefits, including embracing intersectionality and avoiding conflicts.

Day 2

The second day centered on addressing gender inequality and structural challenges within the movement.

Masana shared a detailed analysis of statistics from the 2018 Gender Equity Report that reflected global trends related to gender inequality. The conversation and questions that followed highlighted the need for interventions to promote gender equity. Best practices discussed included hosting off-wiki events, focusing on intersectional knowledge, and tracking progress through data. Challenges and needs were identified, including content creation, organizer demographics, language diversity, and time management. Insights from other feminist movements were shared, emphasizing the importance of working collectively, creating safe spaces, and focusing on both local and global impact. Discussions highlighted issues like mental health considerations for administrators, and participants provided practical suggestions, such as reducing the burden of in-person organizing. This underscored the need for a supportive environment which might be best delivered through a global coordination structure.

Andi presented the findings from her research on the Lusophone Women’s needs. This provided a unique perspective, emphasizing the challenges faced by women in the Lusophone community and the need for strategic level alignment and coordination to provide the capacity building and leadership skills identified through the research.

Day 3

The final day centered on summarizing discussions and planning for the future.

The day kicked off with a recap of the hub discussions in the previous days as well as some open questions about what the next steps might be. The introduction highlighted the need for

Rosie shared a proposal for a research process to be taken forward as the next steps following the camp. The recommended methodology for creating hubs comprises two phases. In the initial phase, existing research from groups like WikiFranca, EduWiki, Wiki Arabia, CEE, and others would be gathered and compiled, including timelines, grant usage, points of contact, survey details, interviews, guides, recommendations, current work status, and original objectives. This information would be analyzed through a research lens, potentially with assistance from the WMF research department or independent researchers. The second phase involves assembling an advisory board and a day-to-day task force, with the former providing recommendations for subsequent steps based on the research review, such as survey implementation, stakeholder interviews, defining objectives, and creating a timeline. The latter would carry out the tasks to … The insights from this phase would inform the decision on the type of 'Hub' to be established.

Vanj Padilla (lawyer; COT Wikimania 2023, ESEAP Hub core team member, and Philippine feminist Wikimedian) has agreed to lead the women+/gender hub research. The process outlined below is based on what other hub researchers have done or are doing now. While it’s time-consuming, basing a decision on something as important as a hub would benefit from applied research methodology, where we are seeking a solution to an existing problem. According to the pre-conference survey, 81% of the responders were interested in conducting research, ergo, conducting hub research seems to be on-track with the mindset of WikiWomenCamp participants.

Hub research process (draft)

Phase 1a

• Identify staff support
• Convene an internationally-representative feminist Advisory Board
• Apply for a contractor grant (e.g., like Cornelius for EduWiki Hub research and Ariel for North America Hub research)

Phase 1b

• Sort out how to name the page on meta-wiki where the gender/women+ hub research information will be placed
• Gather links to hub research (geo and/or thematic) coordinated by other entities (assuming WMF staff know all the entities who have started hub research projects)
• Analyze what other hub researchers have done
• Conduct interviews with past/current hub researchers as needed
• Report outputs on meta-wiki

Phase 2

• Develop an interview rubric (what questions should we be asking?)
• Decide whom to interview (stakeholders)
• Conduct online and in-person interviews with stakeholders
• Reporting outputs on meta-wiki

While the proposed two-phase approach is outlined, concerns are raised about potential delays, prompting some participants to advocate for a quicker process. They suggest parallelizing research with working groups, emphasizing a feminist mindset, setting strict deadlines, and promptly progressing through Phase 1 if required information is readily available. There is an emphasis on scientific rigor, leveraging existing research without duplication, and translating findings into concrete actions through thematic events.

The day ended with a major question regarding who should lead this effort and ensuring community representation. This sparked discussions about potential pathways for doing this with suggestions for a discussion group to get things started, then an advisory group to plan the future work, and a working group to take the work forward.

Key open questions

These are tentatively questions that a discussion group would need to find answers to, in taking the next steps towards building a global coordination structure for gender organizers.

• Building a better table for gender support:
  • What specific interventions and catalysts are suggested to support women+ and contributors, considering global gender inequality trends?
  • How can challenges such as online harassment, lack of language diversity, and burnout be effectively addressed?
• Global Coordination and Hub Discussions:
  • How can global coordination be achieved through actionable steps, considering diverse cultural preferences in communication channels?
  • What strategies can be implemented to address male harassment and protect gender gap projects?
• Structures for Research Implementation:
  • How might an advisory board and task force work collaboratively in the research process, and what distinct roles should each group play?
  • What research methodologies are most suitable for gathering stakeholder opinions and inputs?
  • How can the research process avoid potential delays associated with crowdsourcing strategic thinking?
• Decision-Making and Trust in the Process:
  • In what ways can trust in the process be maintained, and what mechanisms can ensure ongoing collaboration post-camp?