We’re currently in the Intermission period (01—31st May), where we’re putting together a plan for Season 3 that focusses on the next phase of Good Growth. We want to collectively explore and decide what we’re doing in Season 3 - therefore the direction we’re proposing was informed by two ongoing pieces of research conducted by Governance Team and Recelerator Team, plus a Community Workshop with members on 11th May. You can find our research findings here. These inputs have made clear our need to go deeper into good growth, to make it more clear, tangible and measurable for members and the team. Considering this, we’d like to use this forum to discuss the potential benefits, challenges and required resources for Season 3 in the context of Good Growth.
- Forum Discussion, 12-19th May — open for discussion & builds
- Town Hall, 16th May — Presenting this direction & space for discussion
- Open Discussion, 19th May — An voice call to discuss and refine the pathway
- Draft Season 3 proposal, 24th May — Posted to Forum for tweaks
- Snapshot vote, 27th-31st May — Final approval of Season 3 Direction and Budget
- Season 3 Launch, 1st June — LFG
for illustrative purposes
Democratise good growth by creating space/s to explore, discuss and define what good growth means. Create clear processes for members to add to, edit, build the definition of good growth. Introduce clear indicators and metrics for projects to measure themselves against gg standards. Collaborate with projects inside and organisations outside the community to create clear guides and measurements for achieving good growth.
The below pros and cons have been grouped and refined from the Community Workshop.
- It feels like an important step in our decentralisation process and allows the definition to be shaped and developed by more voices.
- Good growth isn’t deeply understood by members (and even core team to some extent), this pathway would give us a clear, tangible output that would allow for better communication.
- This feels like a foundational step towards delivering good growth in a meaningful way. And will provide a solid base for us to build on top in a format we believe is appropriate (e.g. recelerator v2, online dashboard, project directory.
- there may need to be a re-organisation of the current teams & pods - firstly, as it’s not yet clear how all teams will contribute to this pathway and secondly to transition from centralised to decentralised moderation.
- this definitely feels like a more technical approach, how can we play to our communities strengths?
- an important question raised is: is our reputation good enough to assess other organisations?
- if this approach is building clarity in what good growth means, what comes next?