Content on this document is Creative Commons (BY NC SA). Only SENSORICA logo is copyright.
This document is co-creative
What is your interest?
See also Metamaps equivalent doc.
We recognize three types of documents. Every document should be tagged with a type, which will govern how people will interact with it.
You create content alone and clearly identify it as your own opinion. You can post this content anywhere on our platform: website, wiki, social media, etc.
NOTE: you cannot claim that your content reflects the opinion of a majority of SENSORICA affiliates, or claim that you represent SENSORICA.
You coordinate with a few other individuals on content creation, for example you write a section and someone else write another section of the same doc. You make it clear who wrote what and clearly state that the content is the result of a collaborative process and it only represents the opinion of the authors.
NOTE: you cannot claim that your content reflects the opinion of a majority of SENSORICA affiliates or to claim that you represent SENSORICA.
You call on everyone (even non-affiliates) to participate in the creation of content. The content is created and evolves like on wikipedia. The main distinction between co-creation and collaboration is that at the end of the co-creation process it is very difficult to identify the work of every participant, since everyone can modify everyone else's input. It is not mandatory to have all the participants’ name and the document should state that the content might not reflect the opinion of all the participants.
NOTE: you cannot claim that the content reflects the opinion of a majority of SENSORICA affiliates, or claim that all participants represent SENSORICA.
NOTE: Don’t forget to update the Last Modified date in header.
add content here…
This categorization was introduced after a discussion between Tibi and Yasir, in 2013. Before that, Tibi was trying to establish a culture of co-creation. Yasir was not comfortable with co-creation. His arguments were that co-creation was messy and sometimes slow, because it introduced a lot of debates, discussions… Yasir’s opinion was that our content management tools were not advanced enough to allow effective co-creation. Tibi’s argument was that it was a matter of skills and culture, and that once we learn how to do it properly we can become very effective. He agreed with Yasir that better tools can improve the effectiveness of co-creation. In the end, Tibi thought that some people were not capable of evolving within an environment of co-creation. This can be from insecurity, from a strong sense of ownership of one’s creations, etc. etc. This discussion lead to a diversification of creation spaces, to allow different types of individuals to create value. The accent is kept on openness (allow participation) and transparency (access to read and perhaps comment), but that can be delayed. In the end, everyone is creation shared digital assets. Later, this split proved to be effective.
We noticed that people share differently for different good reasons. We decided to create 3 categories of spaces for creation: individual, collaboration and co-creation. Not everyone is able to co-create. We should not force these individuals into one way of creating content.
Authors are those who contribute to the text in a direct manner. It is mainly the responsibility of every contributor to add his/her name in the list of authors. The order of authors in the list should reflect effort and is negotiated within the group.
Make sure you attribute ideas properly to their authors. Attribution is also a form appreciation and of reward, but it is also valuable in itself, because it links to the source.
More on documentation and attribution
Capture - registering new value added in a value network's registry
Surfacing - bringing valuable inputs from one context to another or increasing information quality (find greg rader's quadrant on this). An example of bringing from another context. is sharing value from outside the OVN into the OVN - this may be *participation *contribution or *delivery depending on its use to the OVN and whether a request existed for it. An example of increasing information quality is taking content from a low quality form (email conversation) to a higher quality one (group documentation)
Attribution is linking a source to content - this may re-characterize capture as surfacing
The open and collaborative nature of documents creates a very fuzzy situation when it comes to evaluating individual contributions. A lot of individuals can get involved in creating a document with a wide spectrum of involvement levels. Moreover, ideas are continuously remix in the process. It is very difficult to create metrics for separating contributors according to their value added to a document. Hence, the order of authors in the authors list is decided subjectively and negotiated among contributors.
As Kurt pointed out, organizations are not very good at keeping history. This means that information about how ideas developed is lost. Yasir proposes to add a history section to documents and to the wiki too.
NOTE: before doing anything, read the Introduction, History and Rationale behind the rules and procedures sections. Make sure you are not proposing something that has already been considered in the past.
Only active SENSORICA affiliates can change rules. See organizational structure.
To modify these rules contact the SENSORICA affiliates by using SENSORICA’s main communication channel Sensorica@googlegroups.com to propose your changes. Your message should have the following subject: IMPORTANT - governance - change of rules!
Have a discussion on the rules and try to reach a consensus. You can use Loomio for consensus building. If a consensus is reached, apply lazy democracy to institute the rules: create a form, send it to everyone using the same communication channel, the SENSORICA’s main communication channel Sensorica@googlegroups.com and invite everyone to vote. You can place this decision on SENSORICA’s decision making page. Decisions are also listed on the Working space page. If a consensus is not reached, submit the different versions of the rule to a vote using lazy democracy as described above. Majority wins.
NOTE: New rules are proposed and created only in response to problems. You need to present a pattern of problems or to justify the proposition of new rules based on a pattern that can lead to problems in the future.
Only active SENSORICA affiliates can create new rules. See organizational structure.
Use the (S) New rules document - Template to create the space for the new rules. Do not use directly the template, make a copy and place it in ...GOVERNANCE/NORMATIVE SYSTEM folder. Contact the SENSORICA affiliates by using SENSORICA’s main communication channel Sensorica@googlegroups.com to propose your new rule. Your message should have the following subject: IMPORTANT - governance - new rule!