[Marketing] [support-gang] [Grassroots-l] Information flow problem

[Marife Mago]

Guys,

I really don't know ...how you connect this to this thread if it has
something to do with organizing our OLPC's information flow management....as
to attract more collaboration, participation...etc...

http://laptop.org/team/index.php/OLPC_Eco-system

Just soliciting ideas here.... I'm open to any process, system that's why
I'm excited to see what's Sameer's group is doing.

Cheers,
~mafe

*"We can't do everything but we can do something"*

On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Sameer Verma <sverma at sfsu.edu> wrote:

> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 7:16 AM, Bastien <bastienguerry at googlemail.com>
> wrote:
> > Just to make sure: maybe I misunderstood Sameer's email.  My point was
> > about fixing OLPC's information flow management, not Sugar's.
> >
>
> The focus/scope of our project this semester has been the Contributor
> Program at OLPC. Although many other constituencies plug into this
> map, we simply didn't have time to do justice to all of them,
> Sugarlabs included. I'll be the first to point it out that the
> analysis is by no means complete, but it does provide a good degree of
> clarity to the process. I hope we can do the same for other
> constituencies in the next few months. After all, OLPC is still
> Sugarlabs' largest customer, and Sugar seems to be the only viable
> source for OLPC XOs in the field - they have to be connected.
>
> cheers,
> Sameer
> --
> Dr. Sameer Verma, Ph.D.
> Associate Professor of Information Systems
> San Francisco State University
> San Francisco CA 94132 USA
> http://verma.sfsu.edu/
> http://opensource.sfsu.edu/
>
> > Frederick Grose <fgrose at gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >> According to http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs#Principles,
> participants
> >> and contributors will.
> >>
> >> One problem might be where best to document. The pending reports should
> help us
> >> sort out that issue.
> >>
> >> === Principles === In order for Sugar to be successful, it needs the
> >> participation of a large number of people who share common goals while
> >> maintaining independence, so that each participant has the ability to
> act
> >> independently. For these reasons, Sugar Labs subscribes to the
> principles
> >> described [http://flors.wordpress.com/2008/05/04/
> >> the-paradigm-of-the-open-organization/ here], which are the author's own
> >> translation of an [http://web.archive.org/web/20050317231119/http://
> >> interactors.coop/organizacionabierta original text in Spanish.]
> ====Identity===
> >> = * Clear mission – Fully disclosed objectives. * Declared commitments –
> >> Affinities and aversions explained. * Declared outside connections –
> >> Relationships with other organizations explicitly listed.
> ====Structure==== *
> >> Horizontal organization – Teams and facilitators work on
> responsibilities and
> >> agreements. * Identified contributors – Who is who, people are
> reachable. *
> >> Clear responsibilities – Who is in charge of what. * Activities
> described – All
> >> of the ongoing work is acknowledged. See [[
> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/
> >> Wiki_Team/Guide/Wiki_Structure | Wiki Structure]] for a guide to how the
> wiki
> >> models Sugar Labs' structure. ====Operation==== * Open participation –
> Anybody
> >> can access the information and get a first responsibility. * Meritocracy
> –
> >> Responsibilities are acquired (or lost) based on one's skills, results,
> and
> >> contributors’ support. * Voluntary (non-)engagement – Nobody is forced
> to be
> >> involved or to keep responsibilities. ====Information==== * Regular
> reports –
> >> Reported activities and future plans allow monitoring and participation.
> *
> >> Information accessible – Even internal operational information is
> available by
> >> default. * Explicit confidentiality – It is explained what matters are
> >> confidential, why, and who can access them. ====Goods==== * Economic
> model –
> >> Feasibility and sustainability plans are exposed. (Please see/contribute
> to the
> >> discussion [[Sugar Labs/Funding|here]].) * Resources – Inventory of
> items
> >> detailing who contributed what and why. * Public accounts – It’s clear
> where
> >> the money comes from and where it goes. * A special [[Sugar Labs/Thank
> You|
> >> thanks]] to our contributors.
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 6:12 AM, Bastien <bastienguerry at googlemail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>     Sounds interesting.
> >>
> >>     It's a useful first step.  IMHO the second step is to attribute
> clear
> >>     responsabilities to real human beings: who does what when it comes
> to
> >>     sending/receiving information.
> >>
> >>     I helped with maintaining the OLPC News page on the wiki for a
> while.
> >>     It was not clear who was in charge of this; now that I declined
> doing
> >>     it, it is still not clear who have to do it.
> >>
> >>     Sameer Verma <sverma at sfsu.edu> writes:
> >>
> >>     > Information flow is a critical problem for any organization. Some
> >>     > researchers even point out that an organization is shaped by how
> >>     > information flows within and outside of it. Free flow of
> information
> >>     > builds networks. Restricted flow of information builds
> hierarchies. In
> >>     > the OLPC context, information flow happens over several channels:
> >>     > mailing lists, IRC, Talk pages, Wiki pages, phone calls, RT,
> >>     > face-to-face, and IM (did I miss anything?). We all have
> preferences
> >>     > for channels and applications. One can largely divide the channels
> >>     > into synchronous (IM, Phone, etc) and asynchronous (e-mail, wiki)
> and
> >>     > the applications that support these channels. We also tend to have
> >>     > preferences for applications: wiki, forum, mailing list, IRC etc.
> >>     > Then, there's the element of public vs private conversations. As a
> >>     > researcher in Information Systems, I find these problems very
> >>     > interesting.
> >>     >
> >>     > Two problems arise:
> >>     > 1) too many channels (example: if I wasn't on the phone
> conference,
> >>     > I'll miss out the details via IRC) lead to lack of critical mass
> and
> >>     > fragmentation
> >>     > 2) The application (wiki or IRC or mailing list) is a hammer and
> every
> >>     > problem looks like a nail that it can fix. "Throw it on the wiki"
> is a
> >>     > source of a lot of misery!
> >>     >
> >>     > Then there is the element of fashionable social networking
> (flickr,
> >>     > twitter, tumblr, etc)...as if e-mail, IM, IRC, and chatter at
> cafes
> >>     > aren't social networking! That topic is for another day :-) My
> >>     > approach is that we figure out the problem first, and then find a
> tool
> >>     > to fix it. Activity centric as opposed to application centric.
> Sound
> >>     > familiar?
> >>     >
> >>     > So, this semester, I worked with five of my graduate students who
> >>     > undertook a Information Systems Analysis and Design project to
> analyze
> >>     > the OLPC information flow problem and come up with some design
> >>     > concepts. All the students were new to the problem. This was
> useful
> >>     > because their perspective was quite new and they asked some very
> good
> >>     > questions.
> >>     >
> >>     > They used phone interviews, e-mails, in-person interviews, and
> >>     > observations on the mailing lists, phone conferences, and the RT
> >>     > system to gather data. A huge thank you to Adam Holt, Seth
> Woodworth,
> >>     > SJ Klein and a bunch of other who contributed and facilitated.
> >>     >
> >>     > In brief, they have pulled together the following:
> >>     >
> >>     > A general problem mind map (Freemind)
> >>     > Context map (Dia)
> >>     > Data Flow Diagrams (Dia)
> >>     > Entity-Relationship Diagram (Dia)
> >>     > Prototype (Drupal)
> >>     > Report and presentation (OpenOffice)
> >>     >
> >>     > Their semester ends next week, and the report and presentation are
> due
> >>     > on the 21st. However, given that SugarCamp is this weekend, we'll
> try
> >>     > to post bits and pieces on the wiki in the hope that it will help
> with
> >>     > some of the discussion (marketing at sugarlabs cc'd). In the spirit
> of
> >>     > keeping things open and generative, we have decided to release the
> >>     > documents, slides and diagrams under a CC license and also release
> >>     > source files to make modifications easier. We've also stuck with
> FOSS
> >>     > titles and open formats for all documents - this was a bit of a
> >>     > struggle because some of the tools are not as mature as their
> >>     > proprietary counterparts (Dia vs Visio) and the students were a
> lot
> >>     > more familiar with the proprietary ones (Visio vs Dia).
> >>     >
> >>     > There are some unfinished pieces, which will hopefully be worked
> on in
> >>     > the next few months to add better definition to the overall flow
> of
> >>     > information. Stay tuned to this thread for updates.
> >>     >
> >>     > cheers,
> >>     > Sameer
> >>
> >>     --
> >>      Bastien
> >>     _______________________________________________
> >>     Marketing mailing list
> >>     Marketing at lists.sugarlabs.org
> >>     http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/marketing
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Grassroots mailing list
> >> Grassroots at lists.laptop.org
> >> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/grassroots
> >
> > --
> >  Bastien
> > _______________________________________________
> > Marketing mailing list
> > Marketing at lists.sugarlabs.org
> > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/marketing
> >
> _______________________________________________
> support-gang mailing list
> support-gang at lists.laptop.org
> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/support-gang
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/marketing/attachments/20090514/5ef21b91/attachment-0001.htm