Great questions!! Will fold into the next version and also will help a lot for the context / intro for it.
> How much is it intended to represent "what happens now" vs what a community-centred tech ecosystem could be? (there is the "Existing ecosystem" part on it, but not clear exactly what it refers to)
The "existing ecosystem" i'll rename - this just refers to that fact that everyone does in fact, live in a society. The explicit goal of the CTP approach is to create reciprical relationships with this network of groups you'rea already in. To contrast, a usual client/studio relationship doesn't care about anyone else, or soley sees them as a site to extract from (i.e. the wider ecosystem is ignored, exploited, or is competition). So its kinda both - its a way of mapping out the context you already exist in, and then it poses the question of what we want to do / who we want to invovle next.
> if I understand it correctly, how we work in Karrot largely merges the Curator with the designer/developer boxes - and I personally like this model, to have a long term "in-house" team that understands and is responsible for the core infrastructure (in our case product development), and can still have a network/suite of agencies/studios/collectives that can be called on for other things
Eee yeah this is a bit fiddly as I think its about hats. I think the curator role is more about the community side of it detatched from any one app. So in your case, there is a partnership of karrot admins that exists irrespective of the software that you coordinate and arrange meetups and trainings for for and lead (I'm guessing!), and there will be a bunch of other software you use to do this right (gsuite / trello / notion?). I think in PlaceCal's case we prob need to think about doing this map per-instance as well as for the whole network. The development is therefore commissioned not just becuase of what Karrot wants but because of all the work you to do fold in client demands and this bit is just meant to represent the karrot software (and running instance) itself. I'll have a think if there's a way to represent this better - the affinity publisher arrow tool leaves a lot to be desired, sob.
> accountability is a big topic to me, how to ensure accountability to the community, rather than the funder/curator/others? it is present there in that the community steers the research and design process, but wonder if there is space/interest for a stronger sense of accountability?
i think the whole point of this approach is to create reciprocal accontability between tech and community, with the eventual goal being shared ownership, actually!! that might be the cleanest def yet of what "the point" is. i think the arrow labels need a bit of work.
> I was looking at the tech4good south west theory of change (
https://tech4goodsouthwest.org/theory-of-change), and in some way the CTP model could be a theory of change in itself, at the network level, and I could see a space for gfsc to be present in the CTP model itself too, as a guide for how to enact the model, and learn from other CTPs - although that might get more and more complex diagram! so, perhaps this point is more about "who is this diagram for, and what is the role of you/gfsc in the model?"
The "program model" section is the theory of change to be clear. i guess the idea of this map is that if we all did it we would be better able to see who we are all working with, what the commonalities and shared goals are, etc.
Thanks for feedback - like i said will iterate this and try and get a blog out next month about it, and try and make a worksheet version too. If people have energy to do some worked examples for their project with me that would be sweet!!
Kim
I like it! A few points/questions/thoughts:
- How much is it intended to represent "what happens now" vs what a community-centred tech ecosystem could be? (there is the "Existing ecosystem" part on it, but not clear exactly what it refers to)
- if I understand it correctly, how we work in Karrot largely merges the Curator with the designer/developer boxes - and I personally like this model, to have a long term "in-house" team that understands and is responsible for the core infrastructure (in our case product development), and can still have a network/suite of agencies/studios/collectives that can be called on for other things
- accountability is a big topic to me, how to ensure accountability to the community, rather than the funder/curator/others? it is present there in that the community steers the research and design process, but wonder if there is space/interest for a stronger sense of accountability?
- I was looking at the tech4good south west theory of change (https://tech4goodsouthwest.org/theory-of-change), and in some way the CTP model could be a theory of change in itself, at the network level, and I could see a space for gfsc to be present in the CTP model itself too, as a guide for how to enact the model, and learn from other CTPs - although that might get more and more complex diagram! so, perhaps this point is more about "who is this diagram for, and what is the role of you/gfsc in the model?"
Generally though, I think it could be extremely useful for a community/network organiser who is trying to understand how to "deploy some tech" to support the community, especially if for each part you can then go and find actual people/orgs/tools/resources in alignment with the model.
I also wonder about some easy "low hanging fruit" steps for people trying to enact it, like "how do I just get a website with a list of things/events/orgs in the community?" as a first step... I met up with a local community co-ordinator in bath, who had heard of Karrot, but I thought it was pointless just to try and use it without understanding these needs, ... and they ended up with a normal kind of website from some agency, but perhaps not rooted in this deeper model.
Cheers,
Nick
On Wednesday, 19 March 2025 at 15:47, Kim Foale <kim@gfsc.studio> wrote:
OK I got a bit carried away (100% not procrastination I swear!)
Have attached a neat and tidy version of the diagram I shared in the meeting with more context.
Lemme know what you think! Next step is then writing out how to use it I think.
Kim
--
Working hours: Mon-Wed 10-5pm.
If anything about this email is confusing or unclear please let me know. I am happy to provide information in different ways such as clearer language, over a phone call, with a voice note, or in plain text. Please don't feel the need to ever apologise for responding to my emails at your own pace.
Those who do not move, do not notice their chains.