Re: [Wikimedia-l] Update on Wikimedia movement strategy process (#1!)

[Katherine Maher]

Hi Aubrey,

Thanks for passing that along.

As it turns out, we spent some time at the NYPL talking about strategy at
the Board retreat this November. The Board sat down with Tony Ageh, their
new Chief Digital Officer, to have an informal conversation about how
Wikimedia, the NYPL, and other organizations can continuously reinvigorate
their mission as their medium, audience, and purposes evolve. We didn't
talk about the process from that article specifically (Tony wasn't there in
2014) but more about forward-looking work. Speaking for myself, it was an
interesting conversation full of relevant historical analogies, set in a
memorable venue (the reading room).

I look forward to reading the article in full.

Cheers,
Katherine


On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 01:54 Andrea Zanni  wrote:

> Hi Katherine, thanks for the email.
>
>
>
> Regarding the external expert for inclusive process you are looking for,
>
> maybe this article is of help:
>
> https://hbr.org/2016/12/how-employees-shaped-strategy-at-the
> -new-york-public-library
>
>
>
> I'm posting here for everyone to see because I think is interesting for
>
> everybody to understand
>
> how other (similar?) communities do innovation and shape their strategy.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> Aubrey
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 3:42 AM, Katherine Maher 
>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > *(Apologies for cross posting)*
>
> >
>
> > Hi all,
>
> >
>
> > Since joining the Wikimedia Foundation and movement in 2014, I have often
>
> > heard community members, movement organizations, and staff members speak
> of
>
> > a need for a clear, unifying, and inspirational strategic direction for
> our
>
> > movement. These conversations tend to follow a pattern: they start by
>
> > recognizing the incredible work of our movement over the past 15 years,
>
> > while seeking clarity on what we do next. What do we want to achieve over
>
> > the next 15 years? What role do we want to play in the world? How will we
>
> > prioritize our work and resources?
>
> >
>
> > At the June 2016 Board of Trustees meeting, the Board identified[1] the
>
> > development of a long-term movement strategy as one of our top priorities
>
> > for the coming year. Coming to consensus on a long-term strategic
> direction
>
> > will help us know where we are headed, which path we will take, and how
> we
>
> > will ensure our work is supported.
>
> >
>
> > At the Foundation’s December metrics meeting this morning, Anna Stillwell
>
> > and Lisa Gruwell shared a presentation on the work the Foundation has
> done
>
> > since June to prepare for a movement strategy consultation in the coming
>
> > year.[2] We have been working to understand past Wikimedia strategy
>
> > efforts, estimate future budgets and timelines, and secure resources for
>
> > the year to come. In this email, I want to present some additional detail
>
> > on this progress, and next steps we can take together.
>
> >
>
> > (*Fair warning: this is a very long email.* The critical information is
> as
>
> > follows: The Wikimedia Foundation Board has approved a spending
> resolution
>
> > and timeline for the upcoming strategy work. We anticipate beginning
> broad
>
> > community conversations on the process, goals, and themes in early 2017.
>
> > The Foundation is looking for an external expert to work with us
> (community
>
> > and staff) to support an effective, inclusive process. I’ve been remiss
> in
>
> > regular updates, but we will share them going forward. And of course,
>
> > please share your thoughts and feedback on this list and on Meta [3].)
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > *Strategic direction*
>
> > We are expecting that we will begin a movement-wide strategy discussion
> in
>
> > early 2017, with a process that runs throughout the year. The goal is to
>
> > close 2017 with clarity and consensus on a strategic direction for our
>
> > movement, and begin planning for how we will make progress in that
>
> > direction.
>
> >
>
> > We are currently doing good work across our movement, but lack a unifying
>
> > sense of how that work coheres into something greater than its individual
>
> > parts. Wikipedia and the sister projects are remarkable, and our
> community
>
> > is responsible for their success. Our movement has done an incredible job
>
> > spreading our values and principles around the world—but we often look
>
> > backwards to improve on our past, rather than looking fully at both our
>
> > past and future. There’s an opportunity for us to consider how our vision
>
> > and mission will remain current amidst changing media, demographics, and
>
> > technology, and how we can better coalesce our efforts (ecosystem of
>
> > affiliates, users, experts, new users, cultural and educational
>
> > institutions, and the Wikimedia Foundation).
>
> >
>
> > Additionally, we (community, affiliates, Board, and staff) are
> increasingly
>
> > aware of the challenges which arise without a unified movement strategy.
> We
>
> > have heard from members of the FDC, grant applic

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Update on Wikimedia movement strategy process (#1!)

[James Salsman]

> Regarding the external expert for inclusive process you are looking for,
> maybe this article is of help:
>
> https://hbr.org/2016/12/how-employees-shaped-strategy-at-the-new-york-public-library

What did the New York Public Library do that the Foundation doesn't
already do in their ordinary course of action? "The three core teams
were given a month to present to senior leaders options for their
experiments, and the capabilities needed to try them." That sounds
like business as usual at the WMF.

I have specific questions about this week's strategy announcement; in
particular:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5R5PgBk5b8&t=42m25s

"A general layer of meaning that sits right below the Vision" is the
Mission. I am certain that the Foundation doesn't want to dictate a
Movement strategy at variance with or supplanting the Mission. So why
not declare that the Mission already is the de facto Strategic
Direction and save the time and money to re-do it for implementing the
recommendations of previous strategy work?

Seriously: these strategic directions from 10 years ago still need work:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special_projects_committee/strategic_goals#add_your_own

And what happened to the Recommendations from the past couple years'
strategy work?

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_Foundation/2016/Recommendations

Can we use the ratio of FTE hours working on new strategy projects and
those working on prior strategic goals and recommendations as a
measurable key performance indicator in a way that encourages
accomplishing prior recommendations and developing new ones in a way
that doesn't lead to discarding work?

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Update on Wikimedia movement strategy process (#1!)

[Andrea Zanni]

Hi Katherine, thanks for the email.

Regarding the external expert for inclusive process you are looking for,
maybe this article is of help:
https://hbr.org/2016/12/how-employees-shaped-strategy-at-the-new-york-public-library

I'm posting here for everyone to see because I think is interesting for
everybody to understand
how other (similar?) communities do innovation and shape their strategy.

Regards

Aubrey


On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 3:42 AM, Katherine Maher 
wrote:

> *(Apologies for cross posting)*
>
> Hi all,
>
> Since joining the Wikimedia Foundation and movement in 2014, I have often
> heard community members, movement organizations, and staff members speak of
> a need for a clear, unifying, and inspirational strategic direction for our
> movement. These conversations tend to follow a pattern: they start by
> recognizing the incredible work of our movement over the past 15 years,
> while seeking clarity on what we do next. What do we want to achieve over
> the next 15 years? What role do we want to play in the world? How will we
> prioritize our work and resources?
>
> At the June 2016 Board of Trustees meeting, the Board identified[1] the
> development of a long-term movement strategy as one of our top priorities
> for the coming year. Coming to consensus on a long-term strategic direction
> will help us know where we are headed, which path we will take, and how we
> will ensure our work is supported.
>
> At the Foundation’s December metrics meeting this morning, Anna Stillwell
> and Lisa Gruwell shared a presentation on the work the Foundation has done
> since June to prepare for a movement strategy consultation in the coming
> year.[2] We have been working to understand past Wikimedia strategy
> efforts, estimate future budgets and timelines, and secure resources for
> the year to come. In this email, I want to present some additional detail
> on this progress, and next steps we can take together.
>
> (*Fair warning: this is a very long email.* The critical information is as
> follows: The Wikimedia Foundation Board has approved a spending resolution
> and timeline for the upcoming strategy work. We anticipate beginning broad
> community conversations on the process, goals, and themes in early 2017.
> The Foundation is looking for an external expert to work with us (community
> and staff) to support an effective, inclusive process. I’ve been remiss in
> regular updates, but we will share them going forward. And of course,
> please share your thoughts and feedback on this list and on Meta [3].)
>
>
> *Strategic direction*
> We are expecting that we will begin a movement-wide strategy discussion in
> early 2017, with a process that runs throughout the year. The goal is to
> close 2017 with clarity and consensus on a strategic direction for our
> movement, and begin planning for how we will make progress in that
> direction.
>
> We are currently doing good work across our movement, but lack a unifying
> sense of how that work coheres into something greater than its individual
> parts. Wikipedia and the sister projects are remarkable, and our community
> is responsible for their success. Our movement has done an incredible job
> spreading our values and principles around the world—but we often look
> backwards to improve on our past, rather than looking fully at both our
> past and future. There’s an opportunity for us to consider how our vision
> and mission will remain current amidst changing media, demographics, and
> technology, and how we can better coalesce our efforts (ecosystem of
> affiliates, users, experts, new users, cultural and educational
> institutions, and the Wikimedia Foundation).
>
> Additionally, we (community, affiliates, Board, and staff) are increasingly
> aware of the challenges which arise without a unified movement strategy. We
> have heard from members of the FDC, grant applicants, community leaders,
> and a growing number of affiliates that they at times struggle with
> understanding how our separate efforts tie together and where we are going
> as an overall movement. The absence of a movement strategy, in other words,
> is hampering our ability to work toward our mission. Given the importance
> of that mission, and the need to hold ourselves to the highest account on
> responsible stewardship of donor resources, this is an expensive
> opportunity cost.
>
> *Budget*
>
> At the June Board meeting, I committed to develop a proposed process and
> budget in time for the Board’s annual November Board retreat. This process
> would reflect the type of approach we might take, and be accompanied by an
> estimated budget for the associated work.
>
> To prepare, we wanted to understand past efforts at developing strategies
> for our movement. We audited these past processes (2010, 2012/Narrowing
> Focus, 2014, and some other efforts) and interviewed past participants to
> learn what worked and what did not,[4] and took stock of what was
> missing—from external expertise to audience 

[Wikimedia-l] Update on Wikimedia movement strategy process (#1!)

[Katherine Maher]

*(Apologies for cross posting)*

Hi all,

Since joining the Wikimedia Foundation and movement in 2014, I have often
heard community members, movement organizations, and staff members speak of
a need for a clear, unifying, and inspirational strategic direction for our
movement. These conversations tend to follow a pattern: they start by
recognizing the incredible work of our movement over the past 15 years,
while seeking clarity on what we do next. What do we want to achieve over
the next 15 years? What role do we want to play in the world? How will we
prioritize our work and resources?

At the June 2016 Board of Trustees meeting, the Board identified[1] the
development of a long-term movement strategy as one of our top priorities
for the coming year. Coming to consensus on a long-term strategic direction
will help us know where we are headed, which path we will take, and how we
will ensure our work is supported.

At the Foundation’s December metrics meeting this morning, Anna Stillwell
and Lisa Gruwell shared a presentation on the work the Foundation has done
since June to prepare for a movement strategy consultation in the coming
year.[2] We have been working to understand past Wikimedia strategy
efforts, estimate future budgets and timelines, and secure resources for
the year to come. In this email, I want to present some additional detail
on this progress, and next steps we can take together.

(*Fair warning: this is a very long email.* The critical information is as
follows: The Wikimedia Foundation Board has approved a spending resolution
and timeline for the upcoming strategy work. We anticipate beginning broad
community conversations on the process, goals, and themes in early 2017.
The Foundation is looking for an external expert to work with us (community
and staff) to support an effective, inclusive process. I’ve been remiss in
regular updates, but we will share them going forward. And of course,
please share your thoughts and feedback on this list and on Meta [3].)


*Strategic direction*
We are expecting that we will begin a movement-wide strategy discussion in
early 2017, with a process that runs throughout the year. The goal is to
close 2017 with clarity and consensus on a strategic direction for our
movement, and begin planning for how we will make progress in that
direction.

We are currently doing good work across our movement, but lack a unifying
sense of how that work coheres into something greater than its individual
parts. Wikipedia and the sister projects are remarkable, and our community
is responsible for their success. Our movement has done an incredible job
spreading our values and principles around the world—but we often look
backwards to improve on our past, rather than looking fully at both our
past and future. There’s an opportunity for us to consider how our vision
and mission will remain current amidst changing media, demographics, and
technology, and how we can better coalesce our efforts (ecosystem of
affiliates, users, experts, new users, cultural and educational
institutions, and the Wikimedia Foundation).

Additionally, we (community, affiliates, Board, and staff) are increasingly
aware of the challenges which arise without a unified movement strategy. We
have heard from members of the FDC, grant applicants, community leaders,
and a growing number of affiliates that they at times struggle with
understanding how our separate efforts tie together and where we are going
as an overall movement. The absence of a movement strategy, in other words,
is hampering our ability to work toward our mission. Given the importance
of that mission, and the need to hold ourselves to the highest account on
responsible stewardship of donor resources, this is an expensive
opportunity cost.

*Budget*

At the June Board meeting, I committed to develop a proposed process and
budget in time for the Board’s annual November Board retreat. This process
would reflect the type of approach we might take, and be accompanied by an
estimated budget for the associated work.

To prepare, we wanted to understand past efforts at developing strategies
for our movement. We audited these past processes (2010, 2012/Narrowing
Focus, 2014, and some other efforts) and interviewed past participants to
learn what worked and what did not,[4] and took stock of what was
missing—from external expertise to audience research—to clear ownership of
outcomes.

We recognized that, for example, while the 2010 process was highly
collaborative, it had some notable challenges. For example, it was unable
to turn collaborative goal setting into shared ownership of the work needed
to reach those goals. It also did not have strong participation from
emerging communities, particularly those in countries outside of Europe and
North America. For movement planning to succeed in the future, we will need
both broad and deep participation, from various perspectives and languages.
To consider how we could realize this level of meaningful consu