Success criteria for a Statipedia pilot project
From Statipedia
(Difference between revisions)
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
With this list we're not setting a specific bar, but rather illustrating the kinds of things we can report on after a year. We do not prejudge what our managers want to do at that time. | With this list we're not setting a specific bar, but rather illustrating the kinds of things we can report on after a year. We do not prejudge what our managers want to do at that time. | ||
| - | # | + | # a dozen active contributors; |
| - | # | + | # 100 logins to interested readers ; |
| - | # | + | # 1000 plainly useful pages (meaning a user could demo them and it would be clear to a member of our community why the page is useful) ; |
| - | # | + | # no coercion or extraordinary inducements |
| - | # | + | # high morale |
| - | # | + | # low levels of conflict (taking as given that this is a system for CHANNELING conflict constructively) ; |
| - | # | + | # near-zero expenses ; |
| - | # | + | # effective process for extending and using functionality (add-ons) |
| - | # | + | # no rule-breaking (e.g. inappropriate content online ; sharing of a login id) |
| - | # | + | # it was useful to somebody – e.g. we get a fan letter from a new person |
| - | # | + | # new users do not need to invest a lot to use it (training is effective, or not needed) (goal: easy to learn & easy to use) |
| - | + | # works adequately with existing systems (interoperability) | |
| - | # | + | |
Revision as of 19:46, 8 September 2010
With this list we're not setting a specific bar, but rather illustrating the kinds of things we can report on after a year. We do not prejudge what our managers want to do at that time.
- a dozen active contributors;
- 100 logins to interested readers ;
- 1000 plainly useful pages (meaning a user could demo them and it would be clear to a member of our community why the page is useful) ;
- no coercion or extraordinary inducements
- high morale
- low levels of conflict (taking as given that this is a system for CHANNELING conflict constructively) ;
- near-zero expenses ;
- effective process for extending and using functionality (add-ons)
- no rule-breaking (e.g. inappropriate content online ; sharing of a login id)
- it was useful to somebody – e.g. we get a fan letter from a new person
- new users do not need to invest a lot to use it (training is effective, or not needed) (goal: easy to learn & easy to use)
- works adequately with existing systems (interoperability)
