We have set the preliminary name for the UNDP Nepal gig to “Future Makers Nepal” yesterday. (It has a nice, and intentional, double meaning: Nepal’s future makers, or the future-makers of Nepal?). However, reading through some Spot the Future MENA / Belarus documents got me the impression that the intention was to establish “Spot the Future” as a brand for our UNDP foresight business. Do we, and how important is that? Because if not overly important, I would suggest that “Spot the Future” does not really fit for the Nepal gig’s situation.
P.S.: Note how this content is cross-posted to two private groups. Please do similar with future content for this project, and I’ll also cross-post the existing pieces so they are available to the UNDP Nepal project’s team (which means Natalia, at this moment).
Mm I think we should keep Spot the Future and futurespotters. We have a backlog of communication materials, videos etc that make it easier to show what this is about. Pick a new name and you have to start from scratch…
The Nepal project group is invite-only I see… and denies access to logged in users. Can we change it please? I wouldn’t want any more talks about closed groups anymore… given the criticism.
There are two groups: Nepal project group (all public), and Nepal project coordination group. The latter is meant to contain all the little coordination related things that would cause information overload for people participating in the exercise.
The advantage of opening the coordination group would be that our engagement manager and whoever else likes to get more involved can join the public coordination group, not causing information overload for the “normal” participants. The disadvantage is that we don’t have all the coordination info in one place, because non-public info would have to go into the admin group, and we’d add Natalia to that group.
Any financial info should be going into the financial dashboard anyway so everything is neat and up to date. Data can be extracted from there if and when needed.
I would rather keep the admin group accessed only by exec and non exec directors. So we have clear rules that apply to everyone.
The groups are both open now. Until now, our Google Drive folder proved to be a good tool (due to per-document per-user sharing options) for everything else that really can’t be “just public”, including communication that includes personally identifiable information about others.
…that shows on the contract: “Alternative leaders etc.” The name can be changed to fit our own naming strategy, but at a minimum this needs to be agreed with UNDP.
You can use a provisional name for now; meanwhile, agree on something to propose to UNDP; and finally, after agreeing it with them, roll out most of the communication. Works?
The “Alternative leader etc.” name was in the ToR, it did not make it into the final contract. But right, since it means they thought about the name already, so we’ll agree on something together. Good point.
