I like the idea of rewarding action or accomplishment, but mere communication makes the site successful in itself.

I think the Soap Project in Ned Uganda is a great example. It is already successful in the sense that it lays out the critical elements of a profitable (and non-trivial) undertaking.

If the plan is implemented, can <ned> take the credit? I think ned can only take credit to the extent that it had a critical role in the implementation. I think though, that if the people making soap share their experiences here in a way that makes it easier for the next group, that ongoing aggregation of practical knowledge and personal contacts is a clear sign of ned's success.

We could encourage (give recognition to) volunteers who edit knowledge into a book-like form.

So my thought is that we measure one aspect of success by how many workspaces aggregate practical howto experiences.

Yes, I agree with you Jim. Mere communication is a success story in itself.

I personally want NeD to be place, a community, a center, or whatever you want to call it where I can come and meet with the people I am working with and communicate and colaborate and plan in a safe and friendly environment. I want to be able to ask advice from other members and get honest but positive responses. Even if the answers are that my plans are full of holes and won't work, that criticism can still be considered positive because it is given with honesty and respect.

I will measure the success of NeD at the end of 12 months if these conditions still exist. If open planning and communication is still possible. And if this happens, I know that successful actions will be the result.

Luke said >>ned.com's success will need to be measured on collective goals -- unless ned.com is an entity unto itself. This is a real consideration, and something someone mentioned in another thread. Is there a difference between ned.com-the community and ned.com? I'd say that's a question for Mark to answer, since he does own this domain. It's not unlike omidyar network vs. omidyar.net. So, Mark, is ned.com a different entity than this community?<<

Ned.com is a community and the community of whomever shows up and participates and collaborates within the ned.com web site. I guess there might be a conglomeration of combined personal, project, organization goals that exist over the ongoing development of this site. As goals are tied to actions and accomplishments that might also better help people and people with groups and organizations define what their measurement of success in participation over time might be.

The ned.com site will be online for at least five years (assuming the technical wherewithal to make sure it stays online) at a minimum. I could easily foresee as the board develops its simple guidelines, governance and oversight issues that the site could live on for years beyond much of our engagement here. There is no intent to sell it or roll it up with other sites for some major liquidity event. I could foresee renewing the domain for one of the 100 year renewals. I could see an evolving and changing trusted board of advisors that could go on well past the 5 years. Well past.

Jim said >>I like the idea of rewarding action or accomplishment, but mere communication makes the site successful in itself. I think the Soap Project in Ned Uganda is a great example. It is already successful in the sense that it lays out the critical elements of a profitable (and non-trivial) undertaking. We could encourage (give recognition to) volunteers who edit knowledge into a book-like form. So my thought is that we measure one aspect of success by how many workspaces aggregate practical howto experiences.<<

Zactly. Doing the soap making is one action. Providing links to web sites that can help with soap making is another. Selling the soap is another. Openly sharing what worked and what did not from those on the ground is another. Editing into a format in a workspace others can follow is yet another. Funding is also an action I suppose.

Evvy said >> ((really great thoughts and)) I will measure the success of NeD at the end of 12 months if these conditions still exist. If open planning and communication is still possible. And if this happens, I know that successful actions will be the result.<<

Well said Evvy. And I believe with the core group of members that are inhabiting the initial launch here...we can all help guide that very success and goals of honest and open response and communication...not void of criticism, but tempered with tact, kindness and the desire to be honestly helpful to each member and helping each other get their work done in an open collaborative environment.

Ditto on Success = Action, Accomplishment and Sharing the Love (aka- how you got it done). But, also, sharing the trials and tribulations and lessons you faced along the way. When I see others grow and learn, I grow and learn along with them.

Looking back over the quantum leaps made in my brain (started from scratch, I did) over my years at Omidyar, I see the greatest gifts I received were:

• reading about other people's travels (Andy Carvin) opened up my life to travel;
• experiencing "strangers" coming together to help others (Mini-Action Network) expanded my life to community;
• watching new experiments blossom (StopGenocideNow) along with the people who are moved and transform their lives (Gabriel Stauring)inspired me;
• spreading my own wings and getting wonderful, constructive, kind advice (Sir Marcus Grimes, Lord Peter Rees, etc.) helped me grow and stay motivated;
• there's more, but you get the idea.

All these things would again be success in my mind, but, leaving out the line noise that befuddled my brain would make it a huge success!

Jim Carroll said:

So my thought is that we measure one aspect of success by how many workspaces aggregate practical how to experiences.

This thought is along the lines of what I have been advocating as Local Organizing and the Planetary Mind. I haven't figured out how to set up a group yet - but I would be interested in a group that collected success stories - also along the lines of Catalytic Communities Community Solutions Database.

I can measure the success of Ned by; If these members posting here or rather those who have joined will still be coming to Ned to Communicate and collaborate.To see people posting is a success.

I agree with Moses.

I'm inclined to resist comparisons with The Other Place but the first very significant achievement for <Ned> must surely be a greater number of people returning regularly to this place to contribute in whatever way they find appropriate.... and then maybe finding new ways to contribute from simply reading, listening and hanging around here.

Mere communication is indeed a success, but what is our target? How many users/groups/posts does it take to spell success?

I'd also like to think we can measure more. Funds raised, ideas implemented, ned-branded projects selected, offline events held...

What do we want to achieve by coming here to communicate? and how much of that do we need to achieve in 12 months to feel we've done it satisfactorily?

Ned aims to be the nexus of a set of connections (bridges) between the people who participate. Bridges are maintained between individuals as a function of the value exchanged over the bridge. The volume of the exchange makes the bridge wider, the duration of the exchange makes the bridge stronger. Value comes in lots of flavors - from feeling good about helping others, a feeling of belonging to a group, information, understanding, opportunities . . .

To the extent Ned is the relocation of the "lost in the food chain" group, the value was in mutual support for developing social entrepreneur projects. Will it be a success if it "only" continues in that role? Does the group want to expand that role?

Christina, in order to achieve or measure anything I think we first need to attract and retain good people with a wide range of talents and interests.

I think your other 'targets' (important as they are) could follow from that - but first we need sufficient people of goodwill to populate this place and make lots of different things happen.

I think it would be a milestone and a significant achievement if <Ned> could attract and retain more than the 200 or so people who were active in The Other Place at any one time.

Maybe we can all assist in achieving that modest target by inviting others to join us here ?

~ John said: ~

~ I think it would be a milestone and a significant achievement if <Ned> could attract and retain more than the 200 or so people who were active in The Other Place at any one time.

Maybe we can all assist in achieving that modest target by inviting others to join us here ? ~

I'm still having a serious problem with this focus of measuring success as a function of number of members.

Quality not quantity is what matters most ... imho

If a year from now it is just those 200 or so people who were active in The Other Place and we are still communicating, collaborating and uplifting each others' projects/efforts, are we not successful?

Whoever shows up are the right people.

Whoever shows up and stays are the right people.

Whoever shows up and moves on are the right people, for somewhere else ...

>>Quality not quantity is what matters most ... imho<<

I agree with that 100%

Focus on quality. Focus on action. Focus on collaboration. Focus on connection. Focus on measurable results. Focus on making good things happen.

Scale and quantity can follow.

Meron and Mark, I agree with you both but my point about the 200 good and true in The Other Place is that they were never consistently the same 200 !

Too many came and went. That's all.

Ah...OK, I see now.

~ John said: Meron and Mark, I agree with you both but my point about the 200 good and true in The Other Place is that they were never consistently the same 200 ! ~

Can't say I totally agree with that observation ... seemed pretty consistent to me.

If you consider the most active members...

Many either worked from home, were self-employed, retired, student, stay at home parents, or very in control of their own 9-5 work schedules.

Another vote for the "quality" not "quantity" model here. There are so many factors that influence participation in an online community. Numbers can lie about impact.

At The Other Place (hey, we mean o.net, right?) I didn't necessarily consider it a failure when people left. In my own experience, it meant I was getting more successful and leading a fuller life. When I started there I was online all day long. I absorbed it like a sponge. I was also not that busy. Now, I've got more projects than I know what to do with: Art Heals, Camp Twin Lakes treehouse, City of Atlanta Taskforce on Play, MakingCoolStuffHappen.com. I'm newly married with new (to me) twin 11-year-olds. I just don't have the time I used to have.

Does my absence mean that o.net failed me? Quite the contrary. That's why I agree with Meron that it is dangerous to measure our "success" in numbers. Perhaps we articulate a clear (-ish) picture of what we hope to achieve here. At the end of a year we could take an opinion poll measuring membership satisfaction. At o.net it was the clear, albeit nubulous (?) goal of helping individuals make good things happen. What are we doing here? What is important? I value the friendships alone, but there is more. Action and growth (or vice versa).

Perhaps we encourage members to articulate their own goals and pay attention to them (like the monthly goals we have/had at Food Chain). For me it is to work more effectively, make more concrete achievements, and always remember that it IS important that I keep my heart aligned with my work and not get distracted by what someone else tells me is important. I'm learning that personal happiness and satisfaction is a good gift to give to the world.

End of rambling.

Measurable goals are so hard to formulate. One problem is the temptation to make goals where counting suffices.

I agree with the sentiment that quality matters. Indications of quality can be created, but it takes more work than making goals where the counting matters.

I hope this thread will flow for a while to allow for some brainstorming.

I see this platform as being different from Facebook and Razoo. One of the differences is that it will be a platform for some fairly complex group undertakings like NEDUganda, The Worldwide Connectory, Peace Tiles and others. All of these working groups depend on a fairly tight working group: people who are up to speed on the project and with whom them participants have established rapport and trust.

As many have mentioned they don't want the noise here. To a large extent reducing the noise will mean that groups will actively engage their membership. Indeed, people may want to be rather careful about who they invite here. I have linked to this site at Razoo, but have basically been as quiet as a church mouse about it, because there's a certain logic--at least sentiment-- for it being exclusive.

David Bale mentioned that he planned to use Razoo for getting new participants. I think it's a pretty sensible idea to have alternate venues for your causes where leaders can selectively look for new members to invite here. New membership is essential for the health of this site.

Moses Kariuki's point about measuring success by active engagement is a good one. And in a sense the point system provides a fairly accurate measure of this.

People enjoyed the fun threads at Omidyar.net, and I note that R&R is an early group here. But when the word "safe" is used, I hear it as "business professional." It's pretty hard to get away from the the stereotype that fun stuff has nothing to do with business. There was always a little battle underneath at Omidyar.net between fun and no-fun.

Figuring out where the principals of Ned stand about fun is important for the quality of your success here. One possibility is to have fun spaces here where you can send people if fun breaks out in a group. A playroom of sorts. Then fun can be separated out from the metrics used for success.

But if the ethic of this place is rather buttoned downed, it will trend towards an older demographic. I would hope that the younger people here can be active in associated ways with the projects here at sites where there are more young people and a looser quality to the place.

Chris Macrea over at Omidyar.net has a thread Will Posterity recall 100 omidyan projects? he's cross posted the effort at Facebook and at Razoo. The format of that might be a model to measure the success over the next year here. One hundred projects is a lofty goal, even twenty-five would be, but it's the kind of goal that a number can be reasonably applied. A snippet:

"Our format puts the equivalent of 5 projects on one page- so we would need to keep the project summaries brief. One possible format would be:

bookmark or founder contact; and project name

and brief answers to 3 questions:

1. what's the purpose of this project that has become the mission of the founder for life or as long as it takes to sustain in its service origin
2. does the project have an accomplishment story to date that is unforgettable and in tune with the project purpose
3. what are the challenges or the collaborations the project needs next or to ensure its sustainability or scaling as far as the founder (or project community) wishes

what I will do is post some projects that I have come across my memory of this community in the last 3 years that I believe posterity could benefit from; if you are prepared to report one or more project, please post at least its name, a link and your contact detail before sept 6 so we can subsequently work up the details . Let's see if we can get 100 projects that posterity might not have kept webbing if this community had never breathed>"

What a prissy pants I can be sometimes! That sniping about where "fun" comes in here!

I think I left that part in the above post with a little bit of seriousness, but perhaps not for the reasons people think. The important point, is that I feel there needs to be some ongoing brainstorming when it comes to goals. Goals often seem pretty linear. Twelve months is a long time in a growing group and it seems not easy to anticipate exactly how the group will evolve. Being free to imagine different scenarios is useful.

Chris Macrae's post about looking back at Omidyar successes seems a good model for looking forward here because it encourages a narative, a story. Stories are a good way of evaluating project success.

In my opinion laughter and tears are two medicines to which Ned.com will not be successful without. Ned.com has got to have heart. How to make that a goal? And to measure it?

Taking a big step back to look at the big ned picture and business plan, I'm wondering the following:

• How many physical ned locations do we want to develop within which timeframe?
• How many ned-branded global initiatives do we want to see emerge?
• How many ned products do we want to be selling, by when?

Seems to me the ultimate goal here is to build the ned business plan. Participation here is part of a larger thing that's developing. So I'm thinking that the measurable goals here should align with the goals for the bigger thing that we want ned to become.

That said, getting there is a process in which fun, laughter and tears and engaging action all have to be a included, I think.

My post above probably sounds like I'm harping on quantity instead of quality - I'm not trying to do that. I guess I believe intrinsically that what we want ned to become represents (and demands) a very high quality, focused effort. ned will only achieve the bigger picture if we keep an eye on where we are going. we will only attract and keep high quality members who can make it happen if we think about how to best engage each other in the process.

Another thing I was thinking about, particularly with regard to possibly selecting projects as ned-branded initiatives that are promoted beyond the online community space. On Onet one of the things that really bothered me about the awards and money distribution games was that they were not scheduled in advance. If ned is going to have a community selection process of some kind then I think it would be really useful to have a yearly schedule published in advance.

This ties into the questions I posted above. For example if we knew we wanted to select 12 ned projects and 12 ned products to promote in 12 physical locations by the end of next year, then it seems to me we'd be on-target in setting up some measurable goals and expectations at the same time. To me it really isn't about how many people stay or how many projects or ideas or discussions get started, but whether we're able to engage each other and other people we don't know enough to make ned grow into what we think it can be.

The magnet I got and Ben & Jerry's in Vermont with Cathleen Torres, Anne Marie and their kids says...

If it's not fun, why do it?

Will give more thought to fun, goals, actions and laughter.

Seems to me the ultimate goal here is to build the ned business plan.

I agree, Christina, though I know that makes the hairs on Mark's neck stand on end.

I had a nice visit with Lars last week (hope you made it home safely, buddy!), and one thing we talked about, when the kids gave us a break -- poor Lars -- was Ned and how difficult it was to pin down exactly what it was and how it was going to do it. The thing is that both of us get it to a degree, as do most of you who have participated on omidyar.net and Lost in the Food Chain, but I think it would take an awfully long elevator ride to make a concise elevator pitch. (I know that Mark has a 100-word description, but I don't think it fully explain everything that's stewing in the pot.)

It doesn't need to be a typical and bland business plan, but it should be something that outside folk, yes, investors included, should be able to read and understand, and then evaluate the venture's merits and potential (along with its challenges).

~ Luke said: when the kids gave us a break -- poor Lars -- ~

Poor Lars, nothing!!! I bet he was worse than the kids. Happy you two had a nice visit.

Not really trying to add noise to this thread, sorry if I have and continue too. But I wanted to chime in where Christina wrote: "My post above probably sounds like I'm harping on quantity instead of quality - I'm not trying to do that."

Certainly I don't take what Christina wrote as advocating quantity over quality; measurable goals are important. And it seems to me that Luke's point about hammering out a business plan is right on.

Now that there aren't so many users here, there's a tendency to think that everyone here is a leader. I'm not a leader, more of just general readership. I can't figure out how to make the distinction I'm going for, but I think that hammering out the Ned business plan would best be done among a select--if self-selected-- group of people.

Everyone might have something to say about goals for this site for the next year, but not everyone will be engaged in a focused project like formulating the business plan. So a workspace or separate group might be good for that.

This is off topic, nonetheless when I read Luke's post it seemed to me something that some members at Omidyar.net Alums at Razoo would be interested in. Luke was an early adopter of the blog feature at Razoo and got a lively conversation going on in one of his blog posts. So I subscribed to his blog, I suspect others may have too. In any case, for those of you who are signed up at Razoo, using your soapbox is a way to get people's attention there for goals and projects here.