Credit for that goes to the inestimable Eugene Eric Kim and the hundreds of
Wikimedians who contributed to it. It still exists I believe, at
strategy.wikimedia.org.
Regards,
pb
Philippe Beaudette
philippe.beaude...@icloud.com
> On Aug 25, 2020, at 7:32 PM, Pete Forsyth <petefors...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks Philippe. Funny, the minute I hit "send" I thought of you -- I don't
> know whether or not it was your idea originally, but the "Wikimedia-Pedia"
> that was created during the 2010 Strategic Planning process was probably
> the closest thing I've seen to an organized effort to do this.
>
> -Pete
> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>
>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 5:25 PM Philippe Beaudette <phili...@beaudette.me>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Pete, one thing that I loved about my time at reddit was the existence of
>> a subreddit called “r/museumofreddit”. It was mandatory reading for every
>> new hire on my team and every other team I could convince and it was
>> critical to onboarding me.
>>
>> It lived to serve just the documentary process that you mention.
>>
>> Regards,
>> pb
>>
>> Philippe Beaudette
>>
>>>> On Aug 25, 2020, at 6:35 PM, Pete Forsyth <petefors...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I've thought about institutional memory quite a lot since I stopped
>> working
>>> at WMF in 2011. A few points I think are worth considering:
>>>
>>> 1. Often, institutional memory is measured in terms of
>>> staff/executive/board turnover; while there has indeed been a very high
>>> rate of turnover at times, I would argue that another factor (see #2)
>> is
>>> actually more important.
>>> 2. An organization can do a great deal, with a well-planned top-down
>>> approach, to ensure institutional memory is *generated* and *retained*
>> even
>>> if there's a lot of turnover.
>>> 3. The main thing that can be done is to ensure that significant events
>>> are *debriefed and summarized *("documented") in a way that is clearly
>>> and concisely articulated, supported by evidence and logic, and fair to
>>> various good faith perspectives.
>>> 4. We might call that an "encyclopedic" approach. (The skills required
>>> are almost exactly the skills that tend to be cultivated in our
>> Wikipedia
>>> volunteer community, as codified in its policies and norms, and learned
>>> through practice by its core volunteers.)
>>> 5. The Wikimedia Foundation has not historically done very much in
>> terms
>>> of thorough encyclopedic documentation of important events in its
>> history.
>>> There have been exceptions, and I believe that where it has been done
>> and
>>> done well, much good has come of it. The best example of this, in my
>>> opinion, is the Assessment of Belfer Center Wikipedian in Residence
>>> program
>>> <
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Assessment_of_Belfer_Center_Wikipedian_in_Residence_program
>>> .
>>> This was initiated by then-Executive Director Sue Gardner and her
>> deputy
>>> Erik Möller, who participated actively in it. Specific programmatic
>>> improvements in the Grants department were a direct outcome.
>>> 6. But many events have never been documented with
>>> guidance/resourcing/participation by the WMF. It's worthwhile to
>> debrief
>>> and summarize both positive and negative experiences.
>>> 7. If you don't document positive outcomes, WMF staff may have
>>> difficulty replicating that success, because the experience is not
>> widely
>>> understood within the WMF (or in the community, etc.) The example
>> foremost
>>> in my mind is the 2012 rewrite of the Terms of Use, overseen by
>>> then-General Counsel Geoff Brigham. He made changes to his process to
>>> leverage the knowledge and experience within the volunteer community,
>> and
>>> ended up with a document substantially superior to his initial draft,
>> and
>>> that also had the buy-in of many volunteers whose fingerprints were on
>> the
>>> final document. (I hope to write this up myself some day; if I ever get
>>> around to it, it'll be linked here
>>> <
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Peteforsyth/governance#Organizational_governance
>>>
>>> .
>>> 8. If you don't summarize/debrief negative outcomes, you don't learn in
>>> the moment what went wrong (so as to avoid repeating the mistakes),
>> and you
>>> leave anybody impacted by the problems (e.g. volunteers) with the
>>> impression that you don't care. The example I think of is Superprotect
>>> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Superprotect>. As the author of a
>>> diplomatic letter, signed by more than 1000 people, making
>> straightforward
>>> requests of the WMF, I am not too bothered that they didn't do what we
>>> requested; but I am very bothered that they never acknowledged the
>>> existence of the letter, nor stated which parts of it they
>> agreed/disagreed
>>> with, or what motivated the subsequent decisions they did make. (These
>> are
>>> things they could still do, even several years later, that would still
>> make
>>> a difference.)
>>> 9. As any seasoned Wikipedia writer/editor knows, there is an important
>>> difference between writing that aims first and foremost to be useful
>> and
>>> informative ("encyclopedic"), vs. writing that aims first and foremost
>> to
>>> present an organization in a good light, or to advance an agenda
>> ("public
>>> relations" or "communications" for an organization). People who excel
>> at
>>> one of those types of writing are not always great at doing the other
>> kind;
>>> the two types of writing require a different mindset.
>>> 10. The kind of writing required to summarize and debrief
>>> important events, to create and preserve institutional memory, is (in
>> terms
>>> of the ways I defined them above) *encyclopedic* writing.
>>> 11. In closing, I'd like to make a point about the skillset the WMF
>>> board has hired. I want to be really explicit -- I like and admire the
>>> WMF's Executive Director/CEO; she is highly skilled, and a kind
>> person. But
>>> I am continually surprised that there has been little acknowledgment of
>>> what the board did by hiring her, and the direction the WMF has
>>> (unsurprisingly) taken since her hire. She was previously the WMF's
>>> Communications Director, and her earlier career was largely in
>>> communications. I would urge others to consider that it is not
>> surprising,
>>> if an organization is guided by an executive with a Communications
>>> background, that it would not embrace an encyclopedic approach to its
>> own
>>> self-knowledge.
>>>
>>> If the Board wants to build an organization that learns about its assets
>>> (first among them, IMO, is its extensive and passionate volunteer
>>> community) and its history, and retains what knowledge it gains, I
>> believe
>>> it is entirely within the power of the Board to make that happen. The
>> Board
>>> has several tools at its disposal to ensure that kind of outcome. It can
>>> make its wishes known through directives and motions passed in its
>>> meetings, and it can exert its influence on documents like Annual Plans
>> and
>>> budgets.
>>>
>>> So, I would argue that if there are observable patterns that the WMF is
>> not
>>> doing a great job of retaining institutional memory, and if anybody has
>> the
>>> energy to try to change that (I don't), advocating to the Board is the
>> most
>>> worthwhile way to bring that about. Anything less, it seems to me, is
>>> rather pointless.
>>>
>>> -Pete
>>> --
>>> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>>>
>>> p.s. If interested, please review my own (work in progress) list of
>>> significant events in Wikipedia's history, with links to more detailed
>>> information. I'm interested in feedback, additions, or criticism of this
>>> list. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Peteforsyth/governance
>>> <
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Peteforsyth/governance#Organizational_governance
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 1:52 PM Strainu <strain...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> It seems the WMF is going through another crisis of institutional
>>>> memory, with the T&S team taking center stage. It's not really
>>>> important what they did wrong, it's minor compared with other faux-pas
>>>> they did in the past.
>>>>
>>>> I was wondering though if the organization as a whole has learned
>>>> anything from major crisis in the past and if there is a formal way of
>>>> passing to newcomers information such as when and how to contact
>>>> communities, what's the difference between a wiki, a community and an
>>>> affiliate etc.?
>>>>
>>>> Strainu
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>>>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
