About the collaborative governance scheme, I think we need to think in terms of roles, to create a structure as flat as possible, and that can leave beyond the people. I’m really inspired by holacracy (http://holacracy.org/), which thinks the organization in circles.
I tried to design a first draft of how we could envision the role repartitions in OFN. It’s just a first attempt to open the discussion on the global governance. We don’t have to pay allegance to any model, but we can inspire from here and there, and I kind of like the holacracy spirit.
I first wanted to do that in the holacracy scheme, using their software (https://glassfrog.holacracy.org/organizations/5) but we really don’t want to support their close model, and it’s a bit unadapted to our “two dimensions > functions & regions” organization.
So here is a first attempt to describe the roles, and in which we can, with agility, adapt the role descriptions to the reality in real time. It needs to be discussed, and improved, of course!
- A role can be shared by various people. In that case, precise what is done by one and the other (can be a different target group, a different geographic zone, etc.). Two people will never do exactly the same thing, or that would mean there is a redundancy and someone is wasting his time.
- Someone can (and will probably) have various rôles, in different circles.
- Some roles may not be applicable everywhere (choose then “Not applicable”)
- If there is a role needed and not yet taken, you can choose “Someone needed” and the cell will appear in red
- Some roles will be only in the local instances, some others only mutualized functions, and some will be both local and mutualized (for coordination for example)
- I have not put everyone in the tab “People”, feel free to complete
I have not written anything in term of governance processes (governance meetings, etc.), this is just a first attempt to describe our global organization.
Please enjoy, and I’m looking forward to your feedbacks