[Global Fundraising Circle] The way we work (our tools, n. meetings, people)

Just trying to set a bit of structure and coherence for our Circle. If this is to work, we need some consensus on how we will work. In this topic are a couple of very basic and initial ideas but please let us know what other aspects we could be including.


Is everyone happy to keep using Slack for short conversations and updates, Discourse for bigger discussions and google docs for archiving?
  • Yes
  • No

0 voters

If, you clicked [No], could you please specify what other options you would prefer?


How often should we meet?
  • once every 3weeks
  • once every 4weeks
  • other

0 voters

Who are the key people who should be present at this circle? (Just to be sure we are communicating with them or at least keeping them in the loop)

Please do add a couple of other items that you feel are not only important but also a priority.

My answers are qualified as follows:
To question 1 I agree, with the addition of Google Docs for collaboration, as long as collaborative docs are pointed to in discourse or on slack.
I am happy to meet either ever 3 or every 4 weeks.

I think the people who should be involved are initially the ones int he #global-ofn-fundraising Slack channel, which is invite-only.


100% aligned with @lauriewayne1

1 Like

Kalimera from Greece!

My answers on the above (together with some comments)

  1. Agree with the suggested tools for the respective communication formats.
    My comment : Further to discussions, commentary and contemplation, it’s also important to transfuse all these to actions & deliverables. From my discussion with @ferrazfil , and upon following some discussions on Slack, I have realized that there is a gap between discussion/communication and action/participation. I also speak for myself here, given the fact that currently me and my team we’re trying to set up the local instance for Greece as a side activity to our main jobs/labor/ income earning activity.
    Most of the times, it’s not easy to instantly follow/attend/comment/provide input to a discussion/circle etc.
    If the outcome of these discussions, was transfused to tickets/tasks/assignments on a task management tool (e.g. Notion, Asana, or other) it would be a lot easier to engage more people and call them to action.

  2. Once every 3 weeks / month is adequate time for me and my team.
    My comment : Catching up frequently is important to create and maintain the sense of community and inner circles, especially for newcomers. What’s even more important is the timespace in between these meetings, so again I’m referring to the comment of the previous question

  3. To answer this question, it should also come with the key attributes/responsibilities that each of us should have, so a list of these together with a clear view of the SOPs (Standard Operating Procedures) would be super beneficial to this purpose. If such things don’t exist, then we might as well start working on those. I would be happy to contribute to that, based on my experience in light project management, business development, strategy and in general sectors and functions that require detailed planning and deployment.

1 Like

My own views on the matter below
tools: I agree with @lauriewayne1, although I believe that for some particular work which might become confidential we should probably try to use a systems that allows for collaboration but maybe more control over our data (maybe collective.tools would be good on the long term) and with @Petros_OFN_GR in terms of using a good planning system for tasks

On cycle
After trying to prepare this first initiative I would prefer to extend the meetings for a bit longer in time for the whole group (maybe 4 weeks), however with short “buddy sessions” in between.
The buddy system is basically pairing everyone in the circle in groups of 2. These pairs or buddies, discuss items as they see fit (synchronously by meeting online OR asynchronously by chat or voice mesgs).
The intention of the buddy system was to provide an opportunity to discuss the items more in-depth with one more person from the circle. This would allow for:

  • people to actually have a chance to meet and talk to each other (we should pair up with another person after each circle meeting)
  • provide enough time to clarify questions before the circle meeting
  • see where everyone stands on each of the discussion items
  • take effective decisions during the meeting time which would in principle not be over an hour.

In any case, happy to follow other options if people think that is best.