Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Next revision | Previous revision Next revisionBoth sides next revision | ||
| manual:interviews:session1 [2016-08-22 11:46] – created michka | manual:interviews:session1 [2016-08-22 12:05] – michka | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| ====FoAM v1 - Starlab non-profit spin-off - ([?] Before october 2001 ? - [?])==== | ====FoAM v1 - Starlab non-profit spin-off - ([?] Before october 2001 ? - [?])==== | ||
| - | - [?] Date ? | + | |
| - | - Starlab started a non-profit for proto-FoAM | + | * Starlab started a non-profit for proto-FoAM |
| - | - FoAM is a starlab spin-off | + | * FoAM is a starlab spin-off |
| - | - Maja helped design the mission of this spin-off, but they did not wanted her to be on the board | + | * Maja helped design the mission of this spin-off, but they did not wanted her to be on the board |
| - | - The mission of this spin off was to | + | * The mission of this spin off was to |
| - | - Connect Starlab’s scientific research with art & culture¨ | + | * Connect Starlab’s scientific research with art & culture¨ |
| - | - Put Starlab’s research out in the world | + | * Put Starlab’s research out in the world |
| - | - Explore forms at the frontier between art & technology | + | * Explore forms at the frontier between art & technology |
| - | - The members were | + | * The members were |
| - | - Maja, Lina and Nik | + | * Maja, Lina and Nik |
| - | - They spent their 6 first months without being paid as core members | + | * They spent their 6 first months without being paid as core members |
| - | - Quickly make an organization in Belgium to receive money for the project (from Flemish government + Ars electronica) (October 2001) | + | |
| - | - Create a structure to work with others in the Netherlands (April 2002) | + | * Create a structure to work with others in the Netherlands (April 2002) |
| - | FoAM v2 | + | ====FoAM v2 - Non-profit with possible commercial spin-offs |
| - | Non-profit with possible commercial spin-offs | + | |
| - | (October 2001 [?] - 2010) | + | |
| - | - [?] October 2001 | + | |
| - | - This structure was designed by FoAM’s crew, in the post-Starlab era | + | * This structure was designed by FoAM’s crew, in the post-Starlab era |
| - | - A non-profit with possible commercial spin-offs | + | * A non-profit with possible commercial spin-offs |
| - | - Non-profit as a playground | + | * Non-profit as a playground |
| - | - Develop services and products that could generate income | + | * Develop services and products that could generate income |
| - | - Feed part of the money back in the non-profit | + | * Feed part of the money back in the non-profit |
| - | - The creation of spin-offs was not a core mission, but an economic feedback implementation to get revenue in case one was created | + | * The creation of spin-offs was not a core mission, but an economic feedback implementation to get revenue in case one was created |
| - | - Creating multiple FoAM studios rather than one big FoAM | + | * Creating multiple FoAM studios rather than one big FoAM |
| - | - The mission of this organization was | + | * The mission of this organization was |
| - | - Still focused on art & technology | + | * Still focused on art & technology |
| - | - However, opening to very broad collaborations across disciplines (not only art & technology) in an open way | + | * However, opening to very broad collaborations across disciplines (not only art & technology) in an open way |
| - | - Wrapping it up, the new elements brought in in this new form of structure | + | * Wrapping it up, the new elements brought in in this new form of structure |
| - | - Broader than art & technology | + | * Broader than art & technology |
| - | - Open source | + | * Open source |
| - | - Formally, regarding membership | + | * Formally, regarding membership |
| - | - It started with Nik, Lina, Maja on the board + 1 belgium person in the general assembly | + | * It started with Nik, Lina, Maja on the board + 1 belgium person in the general assembly |
| - | - Strictly minimal legal requirement | + | * Strictly minimal legal requirement |
| - | - But funders did not like it | + | * But funders did not like it |
| - | - Funding schemes pushed towards a certain kind of governance, even though it was not a legal requirement | + | * Funding schemes pushed towards a certain kind of governance, even though it was not a legal requirement |
| - | - Informally, regarding membership | + | * Informally, regarding membership |
| - | - Very horizontal way of working | + | * Very horizontal way of working |
| - | - Everyone involved was invited to be part of the decision-making | + | * Everyone involved was invited to be part of the decision-making |
| - | - The group came together when it was needed, people not wanting to come did not | + | * The group came together when it was needed, people not wanting to come did not |
| - | - All kind of decisions were taken in these assemblies | + | * All kind of decisions were taken in these assemblies |
| - | - Yearly meetings for organisational planning | + | * Yearly meetings for organisational planning |
| - | - Meetings adressing project design & planning | + | * Meetings adressing project design & planning |
| - | - Before submitting to funders | + | * Before submitting to funders |
| - | - After getting the project, to decide how to work together | + | * After getting the project, to decide how to work together |
| - | - Who would do what ? | + | * Who would do what ? |
| - | - How would money be shared ? | + | * How would money be shared ? |
| - | - About 8-10 people were gathering around the table, up to 20 when gathering all the participants of an EU project | + | * About 8-10 people were gathering around the table, up to 20 when gathering all the participants of an EU project |
| - | - It worked well when things were working, but an implicit power structure (mostly based on legal responsibilities) was revealed as soon as difficulties were showing up | + | * It worked well when things were working, but an implicit power structure (mostly based on legal responsibilities) was revealed as soon as difficulties were showing up |
| - | - Maja was involved as implicit facilitor, usually also as money handler, too many hats ! | + | * Maja was involved as implicit facilitor, usually also as money handler, too many hats ! |
| - | - The core members realized they were exhausted, but without understanding why until 2009 | + | |
| - | - A lot of experiments ([?] on organizational re-design ? ) have been designed ever since | + | * A lot of experiments ([?] on organizational re-design ? ) have been designed ever since |
| - | - Other FoAM studios based their statutes on FoAM Brussels statutes, but adapting to local situation | + | |
| - | 2001-2005 | + | * **2001-2005** |
| - | - The two main focuses were around | + | * The two main focuses were around |
| - | - Responsive environments | + | * Responsive environments |
| - | - Groworld, a project related to ecological art | + | * Groworld, a project related to ecological art |
| - | - These focuses both started at the same time | + | * These focuses both started at the same time |
| - | - Most of the activities were about these two main focuses, and workshops with invited people | + | * Most of the activities were about these two main focuses, and workshops with invited people |
| - | - No residencies at that time | + | * No residencies at that time |
| - | 2006-2009 | + | * **2006-2009** |
| - | - FoAM became an artlab | + | * FoAM became an artlab |
| - | - Which is a funding-driven organization | + | * Which is a funding-driven organization |
| - | - After the LETHA project (presented at the Fuckup night), the focus was re-directed on environmentally/ | + | * After the LETHA project (presented at the Fuckup night), the focus was re-directed on environmentally/ |
| - | - For instance, luminous green | + | * For instance, luminous green |
| - | - Which arose in 2004-2005, but became a project officially afterwards | + | * Which arose in 2004-2005, but became a project officially afterwards |
| - | - The mission was redefined around a broader social/ | + | * The mission was redefined around a broader social/ |
| - | - The circles were opened further | + | * The circles were opened further |
| - | - The work was distributed between | + | * The work was distributed between |
| - | - Projects | + | * Projects |
| - | - Sharing knowledge and skills | + | * Sharing knowledge and skills |
| - | - Both these aspects ran in parallel for a while, and then, both funding and people involved pushed FoAM’s own projects out | + | * Both these aspects ran in parallel for a while, and then, both funding and people involved pushed FoAM’s own projects out |
| - | - There were mostly artists wanting their own projects to be supported | + | * There were mostly artists wanting their own projects to be supported |
| - | - This change was quite imperceptible, | + | * This change was quite imperceptible, |
| - | - At some point, FoAM was just about nurturing, and not any more 50 % own work as it used to be | + | * At some point, FoAM was just about nurturing, and not any more 50 % own work as it used to be |
| - | - Pushed by EU, Flemish government and radical bureaucracy of funding, more and more reporting to do | + | * Pushed by EU, Flemish government and radical bureaucracy of funding, more and more reporting to do |
| - | - Agencies are outsourcing their reporting work on project-managing artist-run structures | + | * Agencies are outsourcing their reporting work on project-managing artist-run structures |
| - | - For instance for Grig, an EU project which lasted 3 years from 2006 to 2009 | + | * For instance for Grig, an EU project which lasted 3 years from 2006 to 2009 |
| - | - [? TBChecked] FoAM had to manage 5 times its operational budget | + | * [? TBChecked] FoAM had to manage 5 times its operational budget |
| - | - The mission also shifted contentwise | + | * The mission also shifted contentwise |
| - | - The world situation was quite optimistic at that time | + | * The world situation was quite optimistic at that time |
| - | - Climate change was becoming mainstream | + | * Climate change was becoming mainstream |
| - | - Multidisciplinarity was being praised for in Davos | + | * Multidisciplinarity was being praised for in Davos |
| - | - And then, all came back as it was previously !!! | + | * And then, all came back as it was previously !!! |
| - | - This led to the “resilients/ | + | * This led to the “resilients/ |
| - | - In late 2009, FoAM became a lab for speculative culture | + | |
| - | FoAM v3 | + | ====FoAM v3 - Funding-induced structural change |
| - | Funding-induced structural change | + | |
| - | (2010 - now) | + | |
| - | - A hierarchical structure was imposed by funding in 2010, extension of board + membership) | + | |
| - | - The funders requested | + | * The funders requested |
| - | - An extension of the board | + | * An extension of the board |
| - | - A larger general assembly | + | * A larger general assembly |
| - | - This change brought extreme excitement and hope, at the idea of finaly sharing benefits AND responsibility across more people (about 20 people involved in all studios) | + | * This change brought extreme excitement and hope, at the idea of finaly sharing benefits AND responsibility across more people (about 20 people involved in all studios) |
| - | - The idea was to map a circle-based flexible and hierarchical structure on the legal one, including the others studios in the structure | + | * The idea was to map a circle-based flexible and hierarchical structure on the legal one, including the others studios in the structure |
| - | - The structure intertwined the board and a core team | + | * The structure intertwined the board and a core team |
| - | - The board included a member of the core team (Maja) | + | * The board included a member of the core team (Maja) |
| - | - The core team included all project leaders and a board member (Nik, for oversight) | + | * The core team included all project leaders and a board member (Nik, for oversight) |
| - | - Its role was overall stewardship of the organization on a daily basis ([?] including other studios ?) | + | * Its role was overall stewardship of the organization on a daily basis ([?] including other studios ?) |
| - | - The general assembly was made of | + | * The general assembly was made of |
| - | - All people working in FoAM ([?] Brussels ? Working as “paid” or as “participating in projects” ?) | + | * All people working in FoAM ([?] Brussels ? Working as “paid” or as “participating in projects” ?) |
| - | - New members were involved by co-optation by the general assembly | + | * New members were involved by co-optation by the general assembly |
| - | - [?] Did some inclusion created debate ? | + | * [?] Did some inclusion created debate ? |
| - | - Members could also be excluded by the general assembly | + | * Members could also be excluded by the general assembly |
| - | - They had few self-exclusions from voting members | + | * They had few self-exclusions from voting members |
| - | - They also had few exclusions for inactivity | + | * They also had few exclusions for inactivity |
| - | - The inclusion of other studios was designed by involving | + | * The inclusion of other studios was designed by involving |
| - | - A member of Brussels in the (board [?] or general assembly ?) of each studio | + | * A member of Brussels in the (board [?] or general assembly ?) of each studio |
| - | - A member of each studio in the (board [?] or general assembly ?) of Brussels’ studio | + | * A member of each studio in the (board [?] or general assembly ?) of Brussels’ studio |
| - | - But soon, quorum issues appeared, because the distance made it tricky for people to come at each General Assembly | + | * But soon, quorum issues appeared, because the distance made it tricky for people to come at each General Assembly |
| - | - So the statutes were changed so that members from other studios would be non-voting | + | * So the statutes were changed so that members from other studios would be non-voting |
| - | - The main default of this structure still was that the three core board members were responsible for everything and everyone | + | * The main default of this structure still was that the three core board members were responsible for everything and everyone |
| - | - General Assemblies looked like a farce | + | * General Assemblies looked like a farce |
| - | - Reasons for this structure not working may include | + | * Reasons for this structure not working may include |
| - | - Members not wanting to be involved in governance, but just wanting to get the benefits | + | * Members not wanting to be involved in governance, but just wanting to get the benefits |
| - | - Space access, visibility, etc | + | * Space access, visibility, etc |
| - | - Most of the people involved were there because they could get something out of FoAM | + | * Most of the people involved were there because they could get something out of FoAM |
| - | - When “reciprocity time” came, there were a lot of tensions | + | * When “reciprocity time” came, there were a lot of tensions |
| - | - [?] If you had to iterate, would you select exclusively people wanting to get involved in governance to join aboard ? | + | * [?] If you had to iterate, would you select exclusively people wanting to get involved in governance to join aboard ? |
| - | - Starting from a crisis start up (bankruptcy), | + | * Starting from a crisis start up (bankruptcy), |
| - | - It induced good processes to flow money & energy out ([?] how ?) | + | * It induced good processes to flow money & energy out ([?] how ?) |
| - | - No “giving back” to the organization was formally structured | + | * No “giving back” to the organization was formally structured |
| - | - [?] How would you structure it now ? | + | * [?] How would you structure it now ? |
| - | - Lessons learned include | + | * Lessons learned include |
| - | - Think it from the beginning ([?] How ? Don’t you have to fail to realize it ?) | + | * Think it from the beginning ([?] How ? Don’t you have to fail to realize it ?) |
| - | - Be very selective about the people you invite aboard ([?] how ?) | + | * Be very selective about the people you invite aboard ([?] how ?) |
| - | - Untill 2012 [?] > very unsustainable practice | + | * Untill 2012 [?] > very unsustainable practice |
| - | - Money for project costs (materials + people) | + | * Money for project costs (materials + people) |
| - | - The “core team” was being payed under minimal wage until 2012 ! | + | * The “core team” was being payed under minimal wage until 2012 ! |
| - | - Rates as low as 1,5 € / hour sometimes ! | + | * Rates as low as 1,5 € / hour sometimes ! |
| - | - Share responsibility and benefits of all | + | * Share responsibility and benefits of all |
| - | - If people are on the board and general assembly, then they should be interested in governing the organization | + | * If people are on the board and general assembly, then they should be interested in governing the organization |
| - | - Core team | + | |
| - | - ([?] TBChecked) This institution is designed to manage FoAM Brussels laboratory on a daily basis | + | * ([?] TBChecked) This institution is designed to manage FoAM Brussels laboratory on a daily basis |
| - | - This institution was created in 2010 | + | * This institution was created in 2010 |
| - | - Before 2010, this role was informal | + | * Before 2010, this role was informal |
| - | - Its size stayed in the 4-8 people range | + | * Its size stayed in the 4-8 people range |
| - | - The representation of projects was stopped in 2012-2013 | + | * The representation of projects was stopped in 2012-2013 |
| - | - Centralizing the core team on people running the organization | + | * Centralizing the core team on people running the organization |
| - | - Board | + | |
| - | - This institution is designed to be in between FoAM and the external world | + | * This institution is designed to be in between FoAM and the external world |
| - | - It started by including FoAM members only, and then some external advisors were added ([?] post-2010 ?) | + | * It started by including FoAM members only, and then some external advisors were added ([?] post-2010 ?) |
| - | - Its size stayed in the range of 6-9 people | + | * Its size stayed in the range of 6-9 people |
| - | - General assembly | + | |
| - | - [?] Did you propose to any project contributor to become a member ? | + | * [?] Did you propose to any project contributor to become a member ? |
| - | - Its sized stayed in the range of 10-20 people | + | * Its sized stayed in the range of 10-20 people |
| - | - In 2010, Maja and Nik went away for 6 months sabbatical, because burn-out was showing up | + | |
| - | - The first version of the manual was written at that time | + | * The first version of the manual was written at that time |
| - | - When they came back after 3 months | + | * When they came back after 3 months |
| - | - The studio looked trashed, uncared for, people were having arguments | + | * The studio looked trashed, uncared for, people were having arguments |
| - | - Maja and Nik spent the next 3 months with more online presence | + | * Maja and Nik spent the next 3 months with more online presence |
| - | - When coming back from the sabbatical, at the beginning of 2011, things were getting better, but FoAM’s reputation was declining | + | * When coming back from the sabbatical, at the beginning of 2011, things were getting better, but FoAM’s reputation was declining |
| - | - Many comments of people saying “you cannot let this happen” | + | * Many comments of people saying “you cannot let this happen” |
| - | - This is when the Resilients project started in June 2011 | + | * This is when the Resilients project started in June 2011 |
| - | - From late 2009 onwards, FoAM Brussels is still running 100% in the “nurturing regime” - almost no “own work” | + | |
| - | - FoAM had its own projects, but was still nurturing other people within the projects, and not working with other skilled people on a “shared” basis | + | * FoAM had its own projects, but was still nurturing other people within the projects, and not working with other skilled people on a “shared” basis |
| - | - Realization by the end of Resilients & PARN that most of the work was still about nurturing | + | * Realization by the end of Resilients & PARN that most of the work was still about nurturing |
| - | - The projects always started perfectly | + | * The projects always started perfectly |
| - | - The content was co-designed during a workshop | + | * The content was co-designed during a workshop |
| - | - Clear responsibilities were established | + | * Clear responsibilities were established |
| - | - The timing was made clear too | + | * The timing was made clear too |
| - | - But then, it did not work as expected | + | * But then, it did not work as expected |
| - | - Maja & Nik felt restricted | + | * Maja & Nik felt restricted |
| - | - They were waiting for people to catch up | + | * They were waiting for people to catch up |
| - | - They were spending a lot of time explaining things | + | * They were spending a lot of time explaining things |
| - | - The partners were “the people who were there”, not the perfect purposed-design crew | + | * The partners were “the people who were there”, not the perfect purposed-design crew |
| - | - It would have been better to work with people who really cared about the topic AND knew how to work on it | + | * It would have been better to work with people who really cared about the topic AND knew how to work on it |
| - | - It felt like some of the partners did not really had something at stake in the project | + | * It felt like some of the partners did not really had something at stake in the project |
| - | - The mistake was maybe to have picked people FoAM had pleasantly worked with in the past, but which were not appropriate for these specific projects | + | * The mistake was maybe to have picked people FoAM had pleasantly worked with in the past, but which were not appropriate for these specific projects |
| - | - These projects were a failure regarding FoAM’s expectation, | + | * These projects were a failure regarding FoAM’s expectation, |
| - | - All partners were satisfied too | + | * All partners were satisfied too |
| - | - The audit came ([?] for Grig ?) in 2012, and induced a breaking point | + | |
| - | - One year and half have been spent on the audit ([?] TBChecked) | + | * One year and half have been spent on the audit ([?] TBChecked) |
| - | - The first report from the auditors was asking 600 k€ back ([?] TBChecked) | + | * The first report from the auditors was asking 600 k€ back ([?] TBChecked) |
| - | - At the end of the process, they were asking “only” 300 k€ back, but after a lot of work, stress, etc ([?] TBChecked) | + | * At the end of the process, they were asking “only” 300 k€ back, but after a lot of work, stress, etc ([?] TBChecked) |
| - | - In 2013, the decision was made to actively split nurturing activities and own work | + | |
| - | - Nurturing activities were residencies | + | * Nurturing activities were residencies |
| - | - FoAM’s own research project was “Future Fabulators” | + | * FoAM’s own research project was “Future Fabulators” |
| - | - This project worked much better than the previous ones | + | * This project worked much better than the previous ones |
| - | - It was a “shower moment” from Maja, then shared with everyone else | + | * It was a “shower moment” from Maja, then shared with everyone else |
| - | - A good example of a successful feedback loop from “nurturing activities” is the “Future of Unconditional Basic Income” project | + | |
| - | - The nurturing activity was to train me on the methodology | + | * The nurturing activity was to train me on the methodology |
| - | - The feedback is to get the results from the workshop | + | * The feedback is to get the results from the workshop |
| - | General comments | + | ====General comments==== |
| - | - Overarching principles of FoAM’s organization | + | |
| - | - Invest in the minimum required for legal compliance | + | * Invest in the minimum required for legal compliance |
| - | - Regarding structure | + | * Regarding structure |
| - | - Regarding funding | + | * Regarding funding |
| - | - Regarding reporting | + | * Regarding reporting |
| - | - In order to have the smallest effort for administration needed | + | * In order to have the smallest effort for administration needed |
| - | - The loop regarding content can be summed up as this | + | |
| - | - Crowdsourcing interests and questions from the members | + | * Crowdsourcing interests and questions from the members |
| - | - Craft a research program within the core team | + | * Craft a research program within the core team |
| - | - Feed it back to the network | + | * Feed it back to the network |
| - | - Looking back on the relationship with the other studios | + | |
| - | - FoAM Brussels is the Generalists’ studio | + | * FoAM Brussels is the Generalists’ studio |
| - | - Other studios focus on specific aspects - usually with a five years delay | + | * Other studios focus on specific aspects - usually with a five years delay |
| - | - This organisation happened that way, not intentional | + | * This organisation happened that way, not intentional |
| - | [?] | + | ====[?]==== |
| - | - Do you think that a better matching between legal responsibility and decision-making power within the structure would have been better ? | + | |
| - | [TODO] | + | ====[TODO]==== |
| - | Look at Maja’s doc sent by email | + | |
| - | It is now saved in the same folder as the text you are currently reading | + | * It is now saved in the same folder as the text you are currently reading |
| - | Charter (txt) | + | * Charter (txt) |
| - | Organisational diagram (pdf) | + | * Organisational diagram (pdf) |
| - | FoAM blurbs (txt) | + | * FoAM blurbs (txt) |
| - | [?] Dates of each blurbs | + | * [?] Dates of each blurbs |
| - | There are two other online docs to be read | + | * There are two other online docs to be read |
| - | FoAM projects | + | * FoAM projects |
| - | FoAM mirror (inquiry through foam network) | + | * FoAM mirror (inquiry through foam network) |
| - | Group questions | + | * Group questions |
118.210.12.173