What is Colab?

[uxte]

In order to define the initial structure and content for this version of Colab as a framework I started by breaking it down into categories and updating the naming according to my most updated perception of it.

For now I'm using a FigJam board to chart everything wich will eventually progress to docs/text, graphics, and other distributed files. @andreaadao is also looking for ways of managing all this on How to structure documentation?.

Research: What is Colab? [Link →]

I will use this thread to update on the progress and ask for feedback.

Related tasks
Define initial structure / content for Colab
Write description for Colab
Propose structure for the documentation

Repository
colab.at/colab

[uxte]

Updated the task Define initial structure / content for Colab with a To do list.
CC @andreaadao @Kako29-03 @riikkaeveliina @anatitakomuhn I've added also the parts that you are working with.

[andreaadao]

@uxte Should we make the updates of the parts we're working on here in this thread also? I'm thinking that creating a separated discussion can be confusing, but not doing it can be even more confusing for your process here.

[uxte]

@andreaadao Let's start with a comment per part and use the replies for questions/feedback. As we progress to other files we may need a separate discussions.

[uxte]

The initial proposal for the framework logic is based on this Colab's philosophy > practice loop.

Its elements are:

Principles

The learning principles that guide the approach.

flowchart LR;
    A[Make open]-->B[Apply autonomy]-->C[Upgrade collaboration];

Loading

Patterns

Fundamental theories that apply to the principles.

Proposals

Tools, methods, approaches, technologies to support the desired progresses.

Cases

Case-studies, models to build on top of, inspiring examples.

[uxte]

At this point I'm still unsure with the naming of "Patterns" and "Cases".

Patterns could also be "Theories" or another synonym like "Notions". But I prefer the perception of a pattern that you can follow or promote to achieve a certain design.

Cases could then become "Patterns" as in examples for others to learn with.

[uxte]

The principles

These are the three learning principles that guide the approach:

Each premise evolves into the next one signalling a progressive path: Share > Involve > Progress
Here is my proposal for one-sentence propositions for each principle that give a general understanding of each principle and hopefully create interest to learn more.

Make open

Embrace the open source way to enable learning capacity and encourage more diverse participation.

Apply autonomy

Share power and distribute agency to reach the full value of everyone’s contributions.

Upgrade collaboration

Welcome complexity and empathy to keep progressing into more robust and sustainable versions of the human and the group.

[riikkaeveliina]

First impression: Nice, really good iteration and evolution to what has been. The sentences add to each of the principles and give hints of the most important values we carry.

Nitidypickidy:

• "open-source way" sounds a bit clumsy to me. Is it used widely like this in other references than programming world? Does the audience understand easily what it means?
  

• Can one ENABLE learning capacity? I think you mean making it possible for it to evolve and thrive, but like this it sounds weird and I'm not sure if it passes the right message.
  

• "to keep progressing into more robust and sustainable versions of the human and the group". This is one of those things that is wholly true, but yet I cringe. How do other people perceive this? Or maybe it is me who needs to find peace in moving on the grey area and learning to communicate it better.
  

[uxte]

@riikkaeveliina

1. I agree with the feelings toward "open source way". Not sure it's clumsy but sure could be more clear/explicit. I think "open source" as a concept is pretty disseminated but only by searching it people with less experience with it would understand all its parts. Agree we can do better and I think next iterations on the framework logic will solve that.

2. The meaning of enabling is to make something possible so I would argue it has the right meaning.

3. What exactly makes you cringe? Maybe other people feel the same. At this level is important that the meaning is true but also that connects with people interested in Colab's purpose.

[riikkaeveliina]

@uxte

2. What is learning capacity? How do most people perceive it? Do we need to define it in order to be more clear what we mean here?

3. In lack of finding better words, I'm reluctant of people thinking less of Colab's power, if mistaken with movements seen by majority as "nonsense", like hippyism or new ageism. Because they are the kind that most have been used to hearing using this type of language.
   At the same time, I do acknowledge we need to use the right language to pass all the message, and it probably includes the sentence you wrote.
   I was going to write whether we could be radical and neutral at the same time, but already answered to myself that maybe the solution is to be even more radical, so strong and sure about the language that it could be seen as pioneering.

[anatitakomuhn]

I've started listing Learnings.

Learnings: Things we learned, observations, experiences

They are organised by principles and some keywords are highlighted to help with reading and connections with the sections above (Principles and terms/keywords).

There are for sure learnings still missing so need to iterate and continue to add to it.
Anything you find missing? Feedback and questions are good to continue to iterate. 👀

You can check it here

---

Related task: Define initial structure / content for Colab

[andreaadao]

Outcomes

What can be with radical collaboration?

I'm listing/ writing down Colab's framework outcomes for communicating and sharing a better understanding of what can be with radical collaboration.
You can find the first version in the same Figjam board @uxte shared (grey block, see the discussion's first image), or in the doc I've created in colab repo, named Outcomes.md.

[andreaadao]

For now, all of them are organized by principles of Make Open, Apply Autonomy, Upgrade Collaboration (check @uxte 's proposal for The Principles proposal).
It helped me think if there was anything missing, if it was easier to come up with outcomes for one of the principles than the others, which were the most obvious or easier to understand, etc.
But that doesn't mean that to present them we have to have them categorized like this.

[andreaadao]

Next step is refining them.

What's important to keep in mind while giving feedback, building on top and/or adding more?
- Write a title to all of them (and a description later) 
- Clear and direct language
- Is it clear what do you get from it? Do you want it?
- Is care there? How is it showing (context/words)?

[Kako29-03]

Mission, Vision and Purpose.

I'm trying to write Colab's Purpose, Vision and Mission, and this is what I have so far:

Purpose:
Colab is a framework designed to help groups work together more effectively and efficiently. Our goal is to empower groups to work better together and achieve their goals with ease.

Vision:
A world where people have the power to continuously improve the processes associated with the things they do, unlocking their full potential for innovation and progress. By promoting connection, distributing power, and providing tools that adapt to each group's needs, Colab can empower people to work together in ways that are more creative, inclusive, and impactful than ever before.

Mission:
Colab's mission is to empower groups of people to collaborate more effectively and achieve their goals with ease. By being built on a foundation of human-centered design, Colab is designed to adapt to the unique needs of each group that uses it, and it provides tools and guidelines that respect the diversity of its members. It offers the chance to unlock the full potential of its participants by enabling participation at any level, distributing power and promoting connection.