Skip to main content

Cookie settings

We use cookies to ensure the basic functionalities of the website and to enhance your online experience. You can choose for each category to opt-in/out whenever you want.

Essential

Preferences

Analytics and statistics

Marketing

Changes at "15th Metadecidim Operative Session (SOM)"

Avatar: Alicia Mullor Alicia Mullor

Description (Castellano)

  • +

    CONTEXTO DE LA 15ª SOM

    Fecha: 25-10-2018.

    Duración: de 17 a 19h.

    Objetivo: Explorar posibles modelos organizativos.

    Facilitadores: Alicia Mullor y Núria Baldrich.

    CONTENIDOS DE LA SESIÓN

    Apertura: Presentación de la sesión y de la Agenda.

    Historias Decidim: Adrià Duarte (Observatorio Internacional Democracia Participativa)

    Haciendo Decidim:

    Verificate! Explicación del proceso de verificación (Carol).

    Contexto y Presentación Modelo Sentilo, Mapeo + Criterios (Elisenda).

    Explicación de la dinámica participativa y que queremos extraer: explorar posibles modelos organizativos coherentes con los criterios. División en pequeños grupos de trabajo y exploración paso a paso: ¿Qué te parecen estos criterios? ¿Añadimos/eliminamos alguno? Buscar evidencias (cada grupo trabajaba dos criterios): ¿Cómo sabríais/ notariais vosotros o el entorno que este "criterio" es un hecho? Creación de posibles modelos organizativos (mapa visual): ¿Cuáles pensáis que deberían ser los órganos que representen y gobiernen la Comunidad Metadecidim? ¿Cómo se relacionan entre ellos?

    Socialización de la cosecha de los subgrupos y plenario: se han colgado los trabajos de cada subgrupo (trabajo de los criterios y mapas de modelos organizativos elaborados). Un/a portavoz de cada grupo ha presentado el trabajo realizado en su grupo, poniendo énfasis en cómo el modelo responde a los principios. Una vez vistos todos los murales, se han colgado postits destacando: a) Lo que todos los modelos tenían en común y b) Lo que desde su punto de vista es incompatible con los principios.

    Cierre y evaluación de la SOM de hoy: se ha utilizado una diana en la que a través de postits se valoraba el grado de alineamiento de la metodología utilizada en relación al resultado que se buscaba.

    RESULTADOS:

    Nuevos criterios que se han añadido a los previos.

    Evidencias específicas de qué significan los criterios (como sabíamos/notaríamos nosotros o alguien externo que el criterio es un hecho real.

    Tres mapas de posibles modelos organizativos.

    Lo común en los tres mapas elaborados e ideas detectadas que podrían ser incompatibles con los resultados. A continuación, se recogen los postits que los y las participantes han generado (se recogen todas las ideas, a pesar de algunas se repitan: las ideas repetidas son ideas fuerza):

    Lo común:

    • Financiación ciudadana, crowdfunding (más independencia).
    • I + D + I: Modelo de gobernanza.
    • Comunidad.
    • Comunidad.
    • Sostenibilidad = desarrollo + económico.
    • Sostenibilidad económica.
    • Sostenibilidad económica.
    • Gobernanza democrática.
    • Sistema democrático.
    • Sorteo (asamblea).
    • Preponderancia de la comunidad en gobernanza.

    Incompatibilidad con los criterios:

    • Modelo existente. Comité ejecutivo.
    • Replicar modelo existente con adaptaciones.
    • Nuevos lenguajes = pedagogía.
    • Funciones personas.
    • Rol de la asamblea, comunidad vs patrocinadores.
    • Sobrerrepresentación de los patrocinadores a dependencia de los patrocinadores.
    • La usuaria final forma parte de la comunidad.


Description (English)

  • -

    CONTEXT OF THE 15th SOM

    Date: 10-25-2018.

    Length: from 17 to 19h.

    Objective: Explore possible organizational models.

    Facilitators: Alicia Mullor and Núria Baldrich.

    CONTENTS OF THE SESSION

    Opening: Presentation of the session and the Agenda.

    Decidim Stories: Adrià Duarte (Participatory Democracy International Observatory)

    Doing Decidim: Get Verified! Explanation of the verification process (Carol)

    Context and Presentation Sentilo Model, Mapping + Criteria (Elisenda)

    Explanation of the participative dynamics and that we want to extract: to explore possible organizational models that are coherent with the criteria. Division into small groups of work and exploration step by step: What do you think about these criteria? Do we add / remove any? Look for evidence (each group worked on two criteria): How would you or the environment know that this "criterion" is a fact? Creation of possible organizational models (visual map): What do you think should be the organs that represent and govern the Metadecidim Community? How do they relate to each other?

    Socialization of the harvest of the subgroups and plenary: the works of each subgroup have been posted (work of the criteria and maps of organized organizational models). A spokesperson from each group presented the work done in their group, emphasizing how the model responds to the principles. Once all the murals have been seen, postits have been posted highlighting: a) What all the models had in common and b) What from their point of view is incompatible with the principles.

    Closing and evaluation of the SOM of today: a target has been used in which, through postits, the degree of alignment of the methodology used in relation to the result sought was assessed.

    RESULTS

    New criteria that have been added to the previous ones.

    Specific evidence of what the criteria mean (as we knew / would notice ourselves or someone external that the criterion is a fact.

    Three maps of possible organizational models.

    The common in the three maps developed and ideas detected that could be incompatible with the results. Next, the postits that the participants have generated are collected (all the ideas are collected, although some are repeated: the repeated ideas are "strength ideas"):

    In common:

    • Citizen financing, crowdfunding (more independence).
    • R + D + I: Governance model.
    • Community.
    • Community.
    • Sustainability = economic + development.
    • Economic sustainability.
    • Economic sustainability.
    • Democratic governance.
    • Democratic system.
    • Draw (assembly).
    • Preponderance of the community in governance.

    Incompatibility with the criteria:

    • Existing model Executive committee.
    • Replicate existing model with adaptations.
    • New languages ​​= pedagogy.
    • People functions.
    • Role of the assembly, community vs sponsors.
    • Overrepresentation of the sponsors to dependence of the sponsors.
    • The final user is in the community.
  • +

    CONTEXT OF THE 15th SOM

    Date: 10-25-2018.

    Length: from 17 to 19h.

    Objective: Explore possible organizational models.

    Facilitators: Alicia Mullor and Núria Baldrich.

    CONTENTS OF THE SESSION

    Opening: Presentation of the session and the Agenda.

    Decidim Stories: Adrià Duarte (Participatory Democracy International Observatory)

    Doing Decidim:

    Get Verified! Explanation of the verification process (Carol)

    Context and Presentation Sentilo Model, Mapping + Criteria (Elisenda)

    Explanation of the participative dynamics and that we want to extract: to explore possible organizational models that are coherent with the criteria. Division into small groups of work and exploration step by step: What do you think about these criteria? Do we add / remove any? Look for evidence (each group worked on two criteria): How would you or the environment know that this "criterion" is a fact? Creation of possible organizational models (visual map): What do you think should be the organs that represent and govern the Metadecidim Community? How do they relate to each other?

    Socialization of the harvest of the subgroups and plenary: the works of each subgroup have been posted (work of the criteria and maps of organized organizational models). A spokesperson from each group presented the work done in their group, emphasizing how the model responds to the principles. Once all the murals have been seen, postits have been posted highlighting: a) What all the models had in common and b) What from their point of view is incompatible with the principles.

    Closing and evaluation of the SOM of today: a target has been used in which, through postits, the degree of alignment of the methodology used in relation to the result sought was assessed.

    RESULTS

    New criteria that have been added to the previous ones.

    Specific evidence of what the criteria mean (as we knew / would notice ourselves or someone external that the criterion is a fact.

    Three maps of possible organizational models.

    The common in the three maps developed and ideas detected that could be incompatible with the results. Next, the postits that the participants have generated are collected (all the ideas are collected, although some are repeated: the repeated ideas are "strength ideas"):

    In common:

    • Citizen financing, crowdfunding (more independence).
    • R + D + I: Governance model.
    • Community.
    • Community.
    • Sustainability = economic + development.
    • Economic sustainability.
    • Economic sustainability.
    • Democratic governance.
    • Democratic system.
    • Draw (assembly).
    • Preponderance of the community in governance.

    Incompatibility with the criteria:

    • Existing model Executive committee.
    • Replicate existing model with adaptations.
    • New languages ​​= pedagogy.
    • People functions.
    • Role of the assembly, community vs sponsors.
    • Overrepresentation of the sponsors to dependence of the sponsors.
    • The final user is in the community.

Confirm

Please log in

The password is too short.

Share