Open main menu

Wikimedia Diversity Conference 2017/The Way Forward session

Minority languagesEdit

Problem
Place Holder

Placeholder

Solution
Place Holder

Placeholder

Content addition and innovationEdit

Problem
Place Holder

Placeholder

Solution
Place Holder

Placeholder

Involving youth in WikipediaEdit

Problem
Place Holder

Placeholder

Solution
Place Holder

Placeholder

Wikidata-powered automatic templatesEdit

Problem
Place Holder

Placeholder

Solution
Place Holder

Placeholder

LGBT issuesEdit

Problem
Place Holder

Placeholder

Solution
Place Holder

Placeholder

Imposter syndromeEdit

Problem
Place Holder

Placeholder

Solution
Place Holder

Placeholder

Leadership skills for diversityEdit

Problem
Place Holder

Placeholder

Solution
Place Holder

Placeholder

Diversity & GovernanceEdit

Problem

During the “Way Forward Session” of the Diversity Conference 2017 in Stockholm, we decided to discuss diversity in our movement from an (mainly) organizational perspective: how a commitment to diversity also needs to manifest itself in the governance structures of our movement organisations.

“We” are a group of diversity activists who work on these issues in a volunteer and/or staff capacity. The aim of this document is to spark a discourse on diversity from an organisational perspective and to provide the results of these discussions as input for the phase 2 of our strategy process. We do not have all the answers, but we believe raising the important questions is the first important step into the right direction. We would be happy to see your support on this topic and to read your ideas and thoughts!

--CDG (WMAT staff) (talk) 13:57, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

--Virginia Díez (WMES) (talk) 18:59, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

--Jorid Martinsen (WMNO) (talk) 11:52, 31 January 2018 (UTC)


Solution

While movement affiliates only have very limited influence on the rules and structures of Wikimedia projects, one of the things we can control is the set-up of our organisations and here we should aim at leading by example. In order to do that, we should learn from best practices inside AND outside of the Wikimedia movement.

Bylaws
Bylaws of Wikimedia affiliates should be designed to be as inclusive and anti-discriminatory as possible (in local legal context) and required in order to be able to carry the Wikimedia brand. This can be assured by adequate consulting in early stages of affiliate development (by WMF staff, AffCom, peer-to-peer learning, etc.). This is also important in terms of friendly space policies, it is essential to ensure that bylaws and friendly space policies do not contradict each other in order to be effective.

Board diversity
Wikimedia boards by default should also become inclusive and diverse (gender, ethnicity, ability, etc.) as soon as possible in their organisational development process. This can be encouraged by according bylaws as mentioned above, but also through incentives grantmaking schemes and coaching processes from WMF or specific working groups who can share best practices.

Staff
One group of stakeholders that has not been discussed to a great deal in terms of diversity is affiliate (and probably WMF) staff. Here too, we need to catch up in order to live up to our standards: How diverse is the leadership in our movement? Is the high ratio of female EDs and employees in (especially smaller) chapters something to celebrate, or also a symptom of a gender paygap? How do we equip and protect staff who works around diversity issues and has to face harassment and backlash from our communities on a regular basis (in contrast to volunteers they don’t have the choice to retreat and take a time off the projects if things get too heated)?

Deconolizing knowledgeEdit

Problem
Place Holder

Placeholder

Solution
Place Holder

Placeholder

Metrics for diversityEdit

Problem
Place Holder

Placeholder

Solution
Place Holder

Placeholder

Conversation notesEdit

María: Is the draft reflecting the conversations we've had? Does it make you feel empowered? Can you use this back home?

People tended to crowd around 50 % to 80 % agreement, thinning out with a few towards the agree more.

Why don’t people fully agree?
 Examples: Government censorship is an issue, translation isn’t necessarily the answer because of cultural issues, wording, no commitment to action – nice words, but where do we take them?

María: This is about giving an empowering statement that local community leaders can use.

Comment: I would like diversity and what it is and why it matters to Wikipedia, because that would make it less abstract and lead to more action.

Comment: It’s more global than local.

María: Can you as a local leader use this statement and work with it?

Pretty much evenly distributed between 20% and 100%.

Comment: it’s an abstract statement. ”We want more diversity but it’s complicated.” I need something clearer: What is diversity and what can I do.

Comment: We should take it to a more strategic direction that we could adopt for the communities.

Comment: Resources should be handled globally, then locally. Johan: Fairly certain I didn't get this. Feel free to edit.

Comment: I don’t care for the word solutions. We’re not going to solve the problem. We didn’t identify solution, we identify possible areas to work on. We haven’t resolved to do anything.