Should we get rid of role of Core Connector?
This has been on my mind for while. so I'd like to see what others think:
Ever since we introduced the notion of core connectors, it seems to me like the usefulness of this additional role never really proved itself and has become increasingly obsolete. In 2014 in Berlin we introduced the role of Core Connectors, and every since never "officially" added any new ones, with the process we created to do this (which is the same as the Connectors process)
>> SEE WHAT A CORE CONNECTOR IS HERE.
Having to officialize new Core Connetors seems like a lot of overhead and effort for very little value, which was mainly in being able to explain to people better why there were large differences in how involved Connectors are (since some are only doing this as volunteers in their free time, and others as a full time job).
So even though at the time I felt it was important, I now come to the conclusion that it adds unnecessary complexity and a level of hierarchy that does not actually reflect reality (there are active members that work full time on OuiShare, on specific projects).
To me it seems like a more accurate description of currentl existing roles in OS would be members >> active members >> Connectors.
Is this a shared sentiment? How do Connectors who are less active feel about this?
Should we just get rid of it?
P.S. Of course, this hints at a larger discussion needed about probably reviewing the roles & responsibilities of Connector as well - but I thought that it would be good to start with this one.
Maud Tue 5 Jul 2016 8:36AM
Hello; thanks for starting this discussion @francesca it's indeed an important one that we started having at the 2 last summit without getting anything formalized out of it;
About the core connector, I agree with the fact that it's not needed anymore; but indeed we have to think a way to recognize people who dedicate most time and energy to OuiShare. What kind of recognition do you want? a title or something else ? And is this for giving clarity to people outside OuiShare, or a way to thank people when we cannot pay all the work in a more classic way ?
Concerning the deeper discussion on all other aspects of connector (and I agree with @albertcanigueral that, as we grow and get more mature as a community, we also need to discuss "out" options in parallel of adjusting "in" options), maybe we can keep it here (and renaming the discussion, if it is possible?) for the moment, but then it could be worth to move on a shared document where we could list all the questions we have here concerning the connectors process and the different reactions on it ? To first have a complete view ?
Benjamin Tincq Thu 7 Jul 2016 3:52PM
it seems there is a consensus that we get rid of the Core Connector as it is today but maybe we should do a formal Loomio decision for something like this @francesca ?
And yes, for the more general re-definition of what is a Connector, and more generally about the roles, responsibilities and level of involvements in OuiShare, would need a separate Loomio Thread I believe.
For me the key parts, taking inspiration from Enspiral:
Re-defining levels of involvement and the roles and responsibilities attached to each of them: members, contributors, connectors, etc
Updating the appointment process for Connector (and whatever other level involvement) for instance to be invitation-based rather than request-based
Phasing out the "Smurf Effect" i.e. working toward "operational titles" instead of on "connector" as a generic title for everyone (while keeping connector in the background)
I still believe there is a need for a least two (clearer) levels of involvement, and @myriamboure I don't think it classifies a "hiearchy" (which means that you take orders from someone else) but more on different ... levels of involvement :) Enspiral has a clear distinction between Members (innermost circle) and Contributors (2nd circle) but that does not exactly qualifies them as being a hiearchy
Simone Cicero Thu 7 Jul 2016 4:00PM
loved this "smurf effect" ROTFL
Samuel Roumeau Mon 11 Jul 2016 9:17AM
I share this feeling that the role of Core Connector - as it is now - is kinda obsolete, @francesca. It tends to put a bias on regular connectors who may think "there'll be someone to take care of this & this". For me, it's really correlated of the discussion we had during France Summit : taking care of the Commons. A connector not only brings projects but also take care of the commons. Otherwise, you're more like a contributor.
We're facing another problem as we're growing quickly : we don't know each others yet within the connectors group like @benjamintincq said. I would suggest to encourage ways to communicate & share with others among connectors. I agree with @simonecicero on "downgrading" although I wouldn't use this negative word. I would rephrase it as "actualizing" the state of art of current connectors, maybe every year based on both qualitative & quantitative aspects (summits attendance, projects contributions, Commons taken in charge...).
Simone Cicero Mon 11 Jul 2016 5:13PM
Taking care of the commons is a great way to say: governance. Agree with Sam.
Il 11 lug 2016 11:31 AM, "Samuel Roumeau (Loomio)" ha scritto:
Samuel Roumeau ti ha citato mentre discuteva su "Should we get rid of role of Core Connector?"
I share this feeling that the role of Core Connector - as it is now - is kinda obsolete, @francesca. It tends to put a bias on regular connectors who may think “there’ll be someone to take care of this & this”. For me, it’s really correlated of the discussion we had during France Summit : taking care of the Commons. A connector not only brings projects but also take care of the commons. Otherwise, you’re more like a contributor.
We’re facing another problem as we’re growing quickly : we don’t know each others yet within the connectors group like @benjamintincq said. I would suggest to encourage ways to communicate & share with others among connectors. I agree with @simonecicero on “downgrading” although I wouldn’t use this negative word. I would rephrase it as “actualizing” the state of art of current connectors, maybe every year based on both qualitative & quantitative aspects (summits attendance, projects contributions, Commons taken in charge…).
—
Rispondi direttamente a questa email oppure guardala su www.loomio.org ( https://www.loomio.org/ahoy/messages/9T8gZnrRtjV0MzNla2WzE7Eq7W2kLXcy/click?signature=1456f6bfbc3be5c89943f3695b7a0e179cd614aa&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.loomio.org%2Fd%2Fu7pDVgS0%2Fshould-we-get-rid-of-role-of-core-connector%3Futm_campaign%3Dthread_mailer%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Duser_mentioned%23comment-1073235 ).
Cambia le tue opzioni email ( https://www.loomio.org/email_preferences?unsubscribe_token=T1cefLM_S2jgnj84y1uT&utm_campaign=thread_mailer&utm_medium=email&utm_source=user_mentioned ) per disiscriverti da queste email.
Lucía Hernández Tue 19 Jul 2016 11:29AM
Hi,
Agree with the obsolescence of core connector title, agree with redefining the connector role and levels of involvement and because all written here and my personal/community experience I think is actually more important the role of connector, a person who has the OuiShare culture integrated, who knows well the organization and its members, a person who is able to represent the brand with all its values and knowledge, works to develop the organization and takes care of the commons how Samuel said.
Simone Cicero · Thu 7 Jul 2016 4:00PM
so to say that for me working on governance is essential to be in this inner circle