I think we are much in agreement about all of this, Florian. Except that at
the close of your comments ("If I understood your proposal right, this would
mean we would have no funding at all, because no request came in 6 months
before..."), what I wrote and what you read are not the same thing <smile>,
so please allow me to clairfy...
My intention would be:
<> To fund all the requests which have already been submitted exactly the
same way (by the same decision-making process) that such requests have
previously (traditionally, historically) been funded. This of course would
include allocating funding for the annual conference and anything else that
anyone already has on the calendar -- whether it is for next week or next
year :-)
<> To suspend decisions about all other requests until a (comfortable)
funding policy is developed.
Realistically (in terms of my understanding of the 'systems dynamics of
organizational development in a consensus-driven group' and the way those
dynamics play-out here, in the OOo Community), it could (and perhaps should)
take 6 months for everyone involved with this decision-making process and/or
effected by the outcome to discuss, consider, deliberate and finalize a
cohesive well-thought-through policy.
As with the points you raised regarding needed refinements to our current
process (deputy for the budget holder, funding requirement for a speech or
booth, overview on how much funding might be required in 2010), in order to
arrive at such a comprehensive policy, I see it as necessary to address such
questions as:
<> Is there a global calendar of all OOo-funded activities?
<> If yes, is it easily updateable by the volunteer?
<> If yes, is posting a comprehensive announcement to that calendar a
requirement of receiving funds?
And the above is only the start of a long list of questions that (in terms
of comprehensive marketing analysis and strategic development as I practice
it) would deserve to be answered one step at a time in order for a marketing
budget to be appropriately allocated.
Does that make my intention more understandable? Hope so... and if not, I'll
have at it again <smile>. In the interim, thanks so much for all you do...
~Christine
----- Original Message -----
From: "Florian Effenberger" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 2:42 AM
Subject: Re: [marketing] Request for funding to go to Scale in Los Angeles
Hi Christine,
Christine Louise Beems wrote on 2010-01-20 16.23:
Respectfully, and only in the 'for what it's worth' capacity,
Alexandro's dilemma is an excellent illustration of why it is so
important to allocate budgets in advance. And generally, if there is
agreement to this concept (which I have heard support for but no one
spoke against -- unless I've missed it which is certainly a possiblity)
that some sort of annual 'in advance' budgeting/funding process be
adopted, then it would be good to plan to 'draw a line in the sand' so
to speak; to establish a demarcation point where funding requests
subimtted prior to that time will be considered and allocated a budget
in accord of historical practices...
we need to work on the current process, I agree. Some problems that arose
are:
- there is no deputy for the budget holder, so in case he's not available,
things are delayed
- we have no established rules when to fund (like the requirement for a
speech or booth)
- we're missing an overview on how much funding might be required in 2010
I agree that the longer we can plan in advance, the better it is, but it
might not suit for all needs. In Alexandros case, he might not have
received funding as he will now, because he was quite late. Often chances
occur in a short time, and we shouldn't prevent those people taking these
offers if they help the project.
What I would love to have is an effective way of managing funding requests
without endless discussions. I guess the budget holders of the marketing
budget will do some brainstorming and present a draft of rules here on
this list to discuss about.
And that from that point forward, funding requests will be prioritized
for projects which are (for example) 'planned at least 6 months in
advance' and/or meet other criteria as spelled out in our cohesive
marketing strategy <grin>.
Speaking for myself, not a single event can be planned that detailed in
advance. Of course, we know which events take place at what time, but it's
hard to name a rough amount, because that depends on how many people
attend and what the current quotes are. However, I agree that a list of
events is important -- to my knowlegde, Louis is currently working on that
(see the council agenda).
I further suggest that 'now' would be a good time to (do more than)
consider such a change of procedure by (for example) funding all
requests now on the table which would recieve funding in terms of
established practice and then declaring a hiatus until such time as a
new process is convened.
If I understood your proposal right, this would mean we would have no
funding at all, because no request came in 6 months before...
Florian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
