During the consortium meeting I suggested could do a fellow ship program as a way of acknowledging and rewarding different kinds of participation in the project. The above are the components of information that need to be in place in order for a participant to understand the project and know how to participate in it if we are going to go ahead with the Fellowship. But I feel that we did not get a clear response as to whether the rest of the partners are behind this or not…including weMake?
Noemi and I proposed that we ought to run theme-issue focused campaign, and started discussing some possible topics. Halfway through I realised that something was still missing. I came to London to connect with Patrick, test some ideas I had and to have a deeper conversation with Ezio about direction and curation. I have summarised what I think I understood from our conversation here: https://edgeryders.eu/en/comment/22010#comment-22010
So perhaps it is time to join one of the call to tighten up coordination of communication and engagement efforts?
But I really appreciate something like a clear (or at least simple, essential) landing page that can be not scary for newcomers.
Is the work in progress in the Op3ncare section goes in that direction?
The landing page on the workspace right now is pretty confusing
I’m not good to design these kind of things but the friction to jump in is a little too high in my opinion.
About this I’d suggest:
let’s focus on a streamline landing page with the essentials. Later on we’ll implement all the add-on information that will came from the further advancement.
One last thing about the Topic/Room that i suggest to implement in some way in the workspace. The flow of the posts is very very diverse (from admin issue, to strategic and core discussion, to Local Activity …) and therefore, in my opinion, messy. Is there a way to have topic / hashtag to differentiate the view for a general public?
During consortium meeting we discussed about weekly online meeting and we decided not to have them.
That’s why I interpreted the weekly google hangouts you proposed ,as meeting you were organizing for new people to be involved, and not internal meeting.
If we want to discuss specific topics let’s do a doodle to see when’s the best moment to hangout.
I agree with Costantino on the fact that it would be very important for communication strategy to allow people to distinguish what is internal/team communication and what is communication to involve new people and understand more about the project. That’s because we, as a consortium team, are developing a specific language and insights discourse that are becoming often unclear to whom are not in the topic or didn’t follow the discussion since the beginning.
In order to finalise and be able to go live with the Project Participation Space, we need to ensure that we have a coherent engagement engine to power participation in it.
From you and all the other partners we need to understand the following
we also need to receive the call for participation for partner's activities much further in advance than has been happening so far. please post all your intended activities as events here: https://edgeryders.eu/en/op3ncare/op3n-meetups
We need much better documentation from the partners events than people have been posting so far. As this helps people to both understand and build research insights from the contents of those events. Think LOTE5 type documentation. We need both transcripts of what was said/discussed as well as more reflective, thoughtful blogposts for each event). As a reference please have a look at: https://edgeryders.eu/en/lote5-doc.
At the consortium meeting we proposed pooling together required contributions, activities etc and rewards into a fellowship program that can be offered to would-be participants. This would need to be tweaked again to meet the requirements of the partners, but roughly: https://edgeryders.eu/en/op3ncare/the-op3ncare-fellowship-program
This is the time we have agreed we can be available. Any and all topics for discussion can be had during those calls. They are for the coordination of the work, but in the spirit of truly open those calls are open for anyone who wishes to drop in. If there are questions or ssues or things to work on together, that is the available slot. We do this to cut down coordination costs, doodles etc. Same day same time every week.
I think it was during the actual consortium meeting. 16:30 CET is a time that works well across several timezones. I am hosting the weekly calls and only working one day a week on OpenCare. If you prefer the Monday instead that is also an option. I don’t care which day, only that it is the same day same time every week otherwise things get very messy very quickly. And early in the week = can plan for rest of it.
We are not going to change all the content of the opencare group. What we can do is redirect the opencare.cc domain so it points to https://edgeryders.eu/en/op3ncare/home
Regarding categorisation/ structuring of the workspace this is on the way, but the priority is finalising all the content of the public facing website i.e this: https://edgeryders.eu/en/op3ncare/home
If you are unhappy with that landing page, by all means produce a new landing page and all the related pages (design, copywriting, concept etc) and send it to me by the end of the week. We can do an A/B test for the landing page and loo at conversions. But I require the answers o the questions I and Noemi have already asked, but not yet recieved responses to.
Hi all, first thanks for your points addresing the online spaces and where we lack clarity. Listening to the comments, like @Massimo says, is a first step forward.
As the person primarily responsible with community management - includes the OpenCare people already on Edgeryders but also new ones in the team and the broader network - I am putting together a community management plan that helps us:
navigate the project space ourselves (a routine as per Zoe’s suggestion in Brussels; incorporate also hash-tags as per Costa’s suggestion)
understand how to welcome new people (we are all community builders in OpenCare and I suspect we will learn to do it better and better, even if you don’t yet see yourselves as such).
It should be more relevant as we finish the public participation space (Op3nCare) where simple information will be posted to help you guys welcome people into the project. But that is dependent on your answers to the questions listed by Nadia above… so looking forward! We will slowly move into our team routines as that info becomes clearer.
only now we’re starting to understand the implementation of these actions.
This approach was really hard to understand for many reasons:
during the consortium meeting you announced to us that you’re working on a bunch of documents and a prototype of the websites
during the last weeks there were some posts asking for feedbacks on single pieces of this bigger plan (not having the proper feedback as you probably noticed)
the folder Op3nCare Outreach and Engagement in the Opencare consortium shared Drive was not visible (at least to me) not giving me the opportunity to see that all these documents (and feedback) was part of a bigger thing
During the consortium meeting we explained to you WeMake’s roadmap, doing our best to summarize at least the following months (these months) in a single slide of our presentation
I expected some concise and understandable explanations about the Outreach strategy for a while then I tried to rise the flag kindly posting this post.
I think that we really need to have some moments or tools or format (written or live) to let the other partners be informed about the next months implementations of the project having the 10 miles overview in order to allow us to plan participation.
We, as a consortium, have already planned the next open call of April 28th.
I hope to find better (in terms of effectiveness) and more fluid (frictionless) information strategy.
I re-read the proposal (recommended, it’s very very useful) and put together a short description of the engagement strategy, mapped onto the delivery structure contained in our Grant Agreement:
