Wikimedia Conference 2018/Feedback evaluation

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Wikimedia Conference 2018 from above

Results of the feedback survey[edit]

tl;dr: you can find the #wmcon survey evaluation (PDF) (168 KB) on Wikimedia Commons.


  • Online feedback survey via Qualtrics
  • Questionnnaire on Wikimedia Commons
  • Data collection:
    • April 22nd – May 13th 2018 (after closing of Wikimedia Conference 2018)
    • Conference participants (registration): 300
    • Participants invited to the survey via email: 300
    • Two reminder emails
    • Participation: n=184 → 62 % of conference participants (2017 survey: 68% of conference participants; 2016 survey: 63% of participants, 2015 survey: 67% of participants)


Survey Report
Survey Report

Background of participants[edit]

  • This year’s participants showed a similar distribution of age as in previous years, and a similar profile with regards to years of involvement with the movement.
  • There were less first time participants than in 2017 and 2016 (2018: 40%, 2017: 53%, 2016: 45%). 54% of the 2018 participants had also attended the 2017 conference.
  • The proportion of female participants has further increased compared to previous years (2018: 38%, 2017: 30%, 2016: 31%, 2015: 29%).
  • The representation of User Groups at the conference has further increased (2018: 34% 2017: 30%, 2016: 20%). Compared to the more diverse audience from last year, the proportion of representatives of formal chapters has risen again (2018: 42% , 2017: 30%) and the number of „other“ or „does not apply“ participants has declined (2018: 4%, 2017: 12%).

Looking back[edit]

  • Outcome-orientation of the Wikimedia Conference 2017 was perceived slightly lower than for the 2016 conference: 91% of the respondents who attended both WMCON17 and WMCON18 experienced tangible outcomes of the 2017 conference for their Wikimedia work (2016/17: 96%).
  • 70% of these respondents stated also having pursued concrete initiatives they had joined or started in the aftermath of the 2017 conference (after 2016 conference: 74%).
  • Most of the initiatives mentioned focused on Movement Strategy, concrete new projects, strategy or governance of one own‘s group/ organization or new collaborations and partnerships.

Content / program[edit]

  • The majority of the respondents judged the conference as an opportunity to exchange ideas with others on movement issues (99% ‘agree’ or ‘strongly agree’), as providing useful information to them and their organization (99%), and as making clear the significance of sharing and collaboration in the Wikimedia movement (95%).
  • With regards to the conference‘s focus on movement strategy, 90% of the respondents agreed that the conference contributed to a shared understanding of the future of our movement. Besides this, aspects like gaining applicable knowledge or improving capacities (90%) were comparable to the 2017 conference.
  • Ratings for ‘improving understanding of partnerships in the Wikimedia movement’ remained at the level of the 2017 conference (86% ‘agree’ or ‘strongly agree’).
  • Satisfaction ratings for the different program facets partly differ from the 2017 ratings: communication regarding the program design process slightly improved (91% ‘very satisfied‘ or ‚satisfied‘), composition of the audience (2018: 86%, 2017: 92%), quality of contributions (2018: 89%, 2017: 92%) and overall scope and selection of conference topics (2018: 88%, 2017: 93%) received slightly lower ratings as in 2017.
  • The aspect of a call to action / definition of next steps was less prominent than in the previous year, but still better rated than in 2016/2015 (2018: 73%, 2017: 80%, 2016: 71%, 2015: 62%).
  • Further remarks on program and content in general have been very diverse, though predominately positive. There were also several negative comments or suggestions regarding the overall program content, scheduling issues or the general setup of the movement strategy track.


  • Getting in contact with other Wikimedians and affiliates is one major benefit of the Wikimedia conference. In terms of networking, 33% of the respondents reported making up to ten new working contacts and 42% reported 11-20 new working contacts. 25% of the participants made even more than twenty new working contacts.
  • Meeting all the Wikimedia people at the conference mainly helped to gain knowledge (99%, ‘strongly agree’ or ‘agree’) and to share knowledge (98%). Making new friends was again one major aspect of gathering at the conference and a bit more prevalent than in the previous year (2018: 98%, 2017: 91%, 2016: 97%). At least 88% of the respondents felt supported to join or start an initiative (2017: 80%).
  • Regarding the ‚Buddy project‘ (bringing together newcomers and more experienced conference participants) there still is a slightly mixed picture: 92% of the more experienced participants perceive the project as being helpful for newcomers. Among the newcomers, just 79% perceive it as being helpful for themselves (at least a bit). But, the broad majority of participants are willing to participate in such a buddy project at Wikimedia conferences again (35% ‚definitely will‘, 46% ‚probably will‘).

Organizational aspects[edit]

  • As in 2017, the organizational aspects of the 2018 conference received very good ratings: especially the support by the WMCON logistics team during (98% ‘excellent’ or ‘good’) and before the conference (99%) or their help with travel coordination (99%) and visa formalities (98%) were especially highlighted.
  • The travel coordination was perceived slightly better than for the 2017 conference (2017: 94%).
  • Overall, no major (or significant) differences occurred between the 2017 and the 2018 evaluation of the organizational aspects. The conference catering (83% ‘excellent’ or ‘good’) was perceived partly critical, as it was in in 2017 (84%).
  • In the open comments, positive remarks clearly dominated. Some critical remarks referred to the venue, the catering and also to the conference party (although less prominent than in previous years)

Overall Evaluation[edit]

  • Insights taken from the organizational profiles the affiliates and teams filled out prior to the conference: participating groups and organizations mainly expected connecting & networking, sharing of experiences and learning as main conference benefits.
  • Networking and learning were also stated as main benefits after the conference (Networking, new contacts: 64% / learning: 49%).
  • On the one hand, sharing of experiences was less prominent at the conference than expected before (prior: 43% / post: 24%). On the other hand, working on movement strategy was mentioned more frequently as expected (prior: 24% / post: 32%), as well as understanding the global movement (prior: 11% / post: 25% ) and mutual inspiration/ motivation (prior: 9% / post: 21%).
  • Generally, expectations were less frequently exceeded than in 2017: 31% of the respondents stated that their expectations regarding the conference were even exceeded (2017: 50%, 2016: 45%). 55% perceived their expectations as entirely met (2017: 39%, 2016: 48%). 13% stated that their expectations were not entirely met (2017: 11%, 2016: 8%).
  • Finally, the conference received a very good overall rating, comparable to the ratings of the 2016 conference, but slightly less positive as in 2017: 66% ‘excellent’, 32% ‘good’ (2017: 72% ‘excellent’, 27% ‘good’ / 2016: 67% ‘excellent’, 32% ‘good’).

Detailed survey evaluation[edit]

  • You can find the detailed survey evaluation as a pdf file (2,1 MB) on Wikimedia Commons.