Radical transparency

From EcoReality

Jump to: navigation, search
This has been agreed among those involved by unanimous consent on 20150228.
Since it has been agreed, the page is locked.
Contact WikiSysop to make small corrections (spelling, grammar, etc.) or add an agenda item to re-visit this agreement at an appropriate meeting.

Radical transparency is a management approach in which decision making is carried out in public, and that most records are available to the public, as defined by WikiPedia.

This is one of our core values, to which all members are expected to agree.

Exceptions are typically a matter of confidentiality, rather than secrecy, such as when tendering bids of a competitive nature, or when discussing civil or criminal legal proceedings. Other exceptions may have to do with personal security (as noted in our privacy policy) or potential conflict of interest of members, directors, and others associated with EcoReality.

  • Prevents undue harm to the organization and its assets, including volunteers, board members and staff.
  • Is reconcilable with transparency; in effect, stakeholders are allowed to know enough.
  • Is reconcilable with accountability, wherein stakeholders can question the processes and the outcomes.
  • Requires, but does not strain, trust.
  • Attempts to protect someone or something from scrutiny.
  • Cannot be reconciled with transparency.
  • Attempts to prevent accountability.
  • Demands, and then misuses, trust.

For a discussion or ageement to be exempt from radical transparency:

  • One must request that it be placed on the agenda as "in camera," citing the specific reason, such as "pending litigation," "personal security," "competitive situation," etc.
  • The facilitator will note that the meeting is "in camera" when that point in the agenda is reached.
  • Minute-taking will cease. Participants should not keep their own notes, and must not disclose any agreements nor discussion.
  • Any agreements made during the in-camera portion of the meeting are written down, but not entered into the minutes.
  • When discussion (and possibly, agreements) is complete, the facilitator notes that the meeting is leaving "in camera."
  • Minutes will then reflect the vague sense of any agreements made, without violating confidentiality, such as "Herman will draft a letter detailing our position," or "The Members agreed on an action plan."
  • At the following meeting, the facilitator will again go "in camera" during approval of the minutes.
  • Any written minutes detailing agreements will be read aloud, and those at the prior meeting will be asked to approve them, possibly with changes agreed by those present.
  • If no agreements were recorded, those at the prior meeting need only approve that an in-camera session took place.
  • The facilitator will then note that the meeting is leaving "in camera."
  • The minutes will note that the in-camera portion of the previous meeting was approved.

Radical transparency does not mean "radical time-suckage." We provide data as-is on this website. Requests for research, analysis, or formatting beyond what is provided may be subject to administrative charges of $60 per hour.

†From Dalhousie University guidelines on in-camera sessions.

Share your opinion

blog comments powered by Disqus
Personal tools
Get our newsletter!
Email Address:

entry points
help (off site)
This server and other
EcoReality operations
are 100% wind powered.
Powered by Mac OS X Powered by Mac MediaWiki Powered by MariaDB