Revisioning workshop
Would it make sense to include one during the meeting?
Aim would be to:
- clarify direction
- surface assumptions and issues
- structure strategic intermediate objectives
- design strategic action plan
- ...
Hey Kim,
I think that incorporating a re-visioning workshop concept would be great --- I'm not sure of the best way to do this given the virtual nature of the meeting and challenges associated with time, availability etc.
One day my aim is to get enough money so we can all meet face-to-face to discuss strategy etc --- but its seems we'll have to do the best we can with current restrictions of asynchronous meetings.
Do you have any ideas or thoughts on how we might incorporate this. We do have a couple of resources which may be useful from a visioning perspective, for instance:
- WikiEducator 3.0 which is starting to thinking about strategy/operations during the 3rd phase of the strategic plan.
- Draft planning documents for the OER Foundation.
Kim appreciate the thoughts and contributions -- you have lots of experience in building visionary projects --- AKA Libre Knowledge Communities etc.
Cheers Wayne
Hi Wayne,
The strategies (of WE and the OERF) go hand in hand and perhaps their development should be an on-going parallel process with timelines for versions 1.0.
The list of questions under development for WE 3.0 is a good place to start.
A next step could be to structure the questions with sub-headings (on a separate page). Some of the questions are strategic and suggest revisiting direction, core values, vision, mission, strategy and modus operandum.
Strategic sessions are easier to facilitate face-to-face, but it is seldom possible to bring together a fully representative group of people from around the world.
One possible approach is to have champions convene local face-to-face sessions while sharing their proceedings on-line and contributing to a collectively developed draft strategy document (all on WE of course) to be discussed and finalised in September.
Suggested process (feel free to comment/adapt):
- On-line clarification of goal/vision (construct a concise statement/phrase), e.g. indicating
- What will be experienced by whom by when? or What will be in place? (WE)
- Who/what will the OERF be? What will be happening?
- A core team could look at the questions raised and formulate a draft statement (x2) for comment
- Why are we not there now?
- Cluster the answers and consolidate these obstacles and show stoppers
- Reformulate them as intermediate objectives (IOs) or (3-5) critical success factors
- Recursively ask "Why are these IOs are not already met?"
- Cluster the answers and consolidate
- Reformulate these necessary conditions or lower level intermediate objectives and
- draw up a hierarchical map of IOs. Structure the intermediate objectives showing dependencies.
- Check and recheck each branch, re-drawing the tree if necessary.
What happens next depends on what comes out of the above process. It might be different for WE and OERF. For WE the actions might be more technical, while for the OERF they may be more about relationship building and policy making. For both it should be possible to define strategic actions (or project concepts) to meet the IOs.
For both, be clear about which IOs the participants can address and which should be delegated to some other community (e.g. connectivity) and reword the relevant IOs to state that some process is in place to help mobilise and/or keep in touch with that community (for example).
The above may be refined as we get going with it (or some variation). A first version for discussion in September could probably be developed over 5 weeks via a mailing list + wiki.
- Weeks 1 - 4: vision/goals, critical success factors, necessary conditions and IO map, actions.
- Week 5: polish up the draft strategy document.
The above becomes a pre-September activity and the agenda item becomes: Discuss Draft Strategy Document(s).
