Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Peter J. Bury on October 12, 2012 at 9:45pm

And the key recommendations are:

Key Recommendations

 Increase core group transparency: Core group work should be made more transparent and accessible
regarding who are members, what they are supposed to do, what they have done recently, what decisions they have taken on what basis.

 Actively guide new members: New members should be able to easily find information about e.g.
what are the KM4Dev communication/knowledge sharing platforms and how they work; what they can
do (as new members) to get involved in KM4Dev in various ways, how others have benefitted from or
are using KM4Dev etc.

 Engage in learning-based action: We have to explore, perhaps through one of this year’s focused
conversations how to move from learning to doing – we have lots of rich discussions but little real action is happening inside KM4Dev. This could be explored further.

 Integrate and clarify technology: All KM4Dev communication and knowledge sharing platforms
should be assessed and we should prepare guidelines to clarify how they work and how they are integrated.

 Use stories about KM4Dev: We have collected a lot of stories which could be collated and used for
different purposes: newcomer orientation, testimonies of success for reporting to donors and fundraising, laying out current gaps and next challenges.

 Inform the community about what is going on: We could think of monthly updates about the community (possibly partly automated through RSS feeds) with the help of the monthly rotating facilitation
team, to inform the community about what is going on: current discussions, recent postings on Ning or
on the wiki, core group discussions and work etc.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Peter J. Bury on October 12, 2012 at 9:50pm

On recommendation 1:  Increase core group transparency: Core group work should be made more transparent and accessible regarding who are members, what they are supposed to do, what they have done recently, what decisions they have taken on what basis.

 

Comment: more transparency never harms, though a lot can be found about the core group members, I believe. The Ning contains a separate section on the core group, from where links are offered to the pages of each core group member (if I'm not mistaken). Of course anyone can do a search on core group members through out the Ning and the dGroup and thus find whatever the core group member in question has contributed to the community. 

I'm not sure if Core Group member minutes are made available, they contain action lists and decisions. If they are not available easily, they should be. To my knowledge a lot can be found on our wiki and the search facility there is very very powerful.

My worry: that the recommendation would lead to more managerial work than the volonteer status of core group members can warrant. 

Comments on my comment more than welcome!

Peter, member of the core group.

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion