Совет Попечителей Фонда Викимедиа/Ждём ваших отзывов: места в Совете для Сообществ/Призыв о типах навыков и опыта


Ждём ваших отзывов: места в Совете для Сообществ
Главная страница
Как принять участие
Идеи Совета
Идеи сообщества
Собеседования
Отчёты
График

Оптимальный Совет будет состоять из попечителей, чей опыт охватывает весь спектр работы Фонда Викимедиа и весь спектр деятельности в рамках движения Викимедиа. Это всегда будет изменяющаяся цель и даже расширенный Совет никогда не сможет по-настоящему достичь ее. Однако, в начале любого процесса выбора попечителя Совет должен оценить и определить, какие области знаний наиболее необходимы. Что касается отобранных Советом попечителей, Совет в это время может ориентироваться на эти области при наборе попечителей. Однако для попечителей, отобранных сообществом и аффилиациями, необходим иной подход.

При отборе кандидатов в начале процесса отбора, Совет может указать на навыки и опыт, которыми, как он надеется, будут обладать выбранные сообществом и аффилиациями попечители. Следующая задача состоит в том, чтобы определить обладают ли кандидаты этими навыками и опытом. Форма оценки Попечителя может помочь в этом процессе, но есть еще два ключевых вопроса:

  1. Каким должен быть минимальный уровень знаний? Это касается вопроса о проверке кандидатов.
  2. Кто несет ответственность за обеспечение соблюдения минимальных квалификационных требований? Кандидаты могут самостоятельно отчитаться о своем многолетнем опыте работы на основе квалификационной формы, но все равно должна быть какая-то форма проверки. Это может быть сделан самим Советом, и скорее всего через комитет Совета, или же это может быть сделано органом, состоящим из сообщества, таким как Отборочный Комитет.

Резюме от текущих отзывах

Команда фасилитации поддерживает этот раздел синхронным с данными основного отчёта.

В ходе обсуждения навыков и опыта неоднократно высказывались мнения о том, чтобы предлагать обучение потенциальным кандидатам и членам Совета. Эта обратная связь отражена в разделе «Поддержка кандидатов» ниже.

One volunteer proposed the idea of Specialization seats. Feedback related to dedicating seats of quotas for skills is captured in the corresponding section below.

Sentiment: Divided opinions in a discussion with many ramifications that is expected to continue.

Some people think community experience is the only skill required for community candidates. Others think skills to perform well as a Board member are important, and opinions differ about how strongly the filter should be applied. There is broad agreement that the Board can do more to identify skills needed, to provide training, and to proactively seek potential candidates with these skills. There are questions about how the Board plans to use the recently approved Board Candidate Evaluation Form.

About the idea of skills needed in candidates:

  • There is no agreement about the types of skills that should be required to candidates:
    • Many volunteers, especially long-term contributors, express a strong opinion about not requiring specific skills to community-and-affiliate candidates. They say the role of these trustees in the Board is to represent the community and to contribute community skills. They say that the Board has the directly appointed seats to cover specific skills required.
    • Many volunteers who have joined more recently and some long-term contributors disagree, and believe that all candidates need to have a certain skill set to aspire to a seat in the Board.
    • Each of these two positions includes volunteers who usually don’t participate in governance discussions as well as volunteers well-versed in these discussions, including former trustees.
    • Some volunteers from emerging Wikimedia communites said that some skills should be required of all candidates, irrespective of diversity quotas.
      • In meetings with the Odia and the Gujarati communities it was said that the Board is the highest decision-making authority in the movement, and skills should not be compromised.
    • In a meeting with the North Africa community it was suggested that the Board can use committees or a new advisory council delivering the skills whenever needed, keeping the Board seats for community members who win elections without requirements for specific skills. This idea also appeared in two different meetings with Women from France and Germany.
    • The director of a European chapter said non-specialists can give perspectives specialists tend to overlook, that skills shouldn’t be overrated.
    • At a meeting of the Turkic community, they wondered: what will happen if there are no candidates with specific skills?
    • One person said in an ESEAP meeting that some people improve after given the chance, that willingness to learn is important.
    • A former appointed trustee said that there isn’t any harm in having an eligibility criteria for everyone on the Board, as (according to her) it could lead to a more effective board.
    • Some volunteers said that the community should be allowed to express what skills they believe the Board should have.

Specifics about skills needed in candidates:

  • Several volunteers from different conversations mentioned skills they expect from community candidates. This is a compilation of all the skills mentioned:
    • Community experience
    • Wiki editing
    • Programmatic work in the movement
    • Mediation and negotiation
    • Management, leadership
    • Team working
    • Technical
    • Auditing, assessment
  • Some people say that training for candidates or even trustees after being elected is enough. Some say that the terms are too short to train people with insufficient skills, so a certain amount of skills might be helpful for optimal use of the term.
  • One person in a European community conversation proposed a certain amount of edits in a wiki as a required skill for all trustees, the directly appointed too.

About how to implement a call of skills:

  • There is overall agreement that needed skills should be identified by the Board and advertised well in advance.
  • One person said that the Board should be more proactive about searching for candidates in the community before the election.
  • The Board Candidate Evaluation Form was mentioned in several conversations, although it raised many questions about its intended use, and also about its effectiveness.
  • Some volunteers suggested in different conversations the idea of highlighting the skills of candidates, even if there is no hard requirement for skills.