Difference between revisions of "PR Vision Sandbox"
m |
|||
Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
(Now that RAD "ownes" CPs should this SWOT be moved to http://securewiki.freegeek.org/index.php/Community_Partnerships? [[User:Luiz|Luiz]] 00:48, 22 April 2009 (UTC)) | (Now that RAD "ownes" CPs should this SWOT be moved to http://securewiki.freegeek.org/index.php/Community_Partnerships? [[User:Luiz|Luiz]] 00:48, 22 April 2009 (UTC)) | ||
+ | |||
+ | I don't think RAD "owns" this. It will always involve PR, especially in the initial phase, since PR is the one bargaining chip we have. What we offer is PR. They offer money and stuff. We need to get on the ball in order to demonstrate we have something to offer at all. The swot is a clumsy tool and it could be moved. But the discussion about what we can provide is squarely in our basket.[[User:Tonyc|Tonyc]] 03:55, 26 April 2009 (UTC) | ||
{{SWOT | {{SWOT |
Revision as of 19:55, 25 April 2009
Information may change rapidly as the event planning progresses.
(Do we want to move any of the meta-meeting minutes content (from RT) to this page? Luiz 00:48, 22 April 2009 (UTC))
The PR committee's regular meeting on May 9, 2009 has been set aside to be a long-term strategic planning session.
This page is a place to hold discussion to this end.
OK! Go!
Check out the PR Plan page to see where this discussion was left last.
Objectives
What do we want to achieve?
SWOTs
What is the current internal/external situation regarding each of our Objectives?
A place to throw around as many SWOTs as needed. The first one I'm starting is specific to PR's role in building Community Partnerships.
Community Partnerships
(Now that RAD "ownes" CPs should this SWOT be moved to http://securewiki.freegeek.org/index.php/Community_Partnerships? Luiz 00:48, 22 April 2009 (UTC))
I don't think RAD "owns" this. It will always involve PR, especially in the initial phase, since PR is the one bargaining chip we have. What we offer is PR. They offer money and stuff. We need to get on the ball in order to demonstrate we have something to offer at all. The swot is a clumsy tool and it could be moved. But the discussion about what we can provide is squarely in our basket.Tonyc 03:55, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Good (for Free Geek) | Bad (for Free Geek) | |
---|---|---|
Internal (to Free Geek) |
Strengths: Strengths are advantages we have that are internal to Free Geek and helpful to achieving the objective. (Good things we do.)
|
Weaknesses: Weaknesses are problems we have that are internal to Free Geek and harmful to achieving the objective. (Things we do poorly or not at all.)
|
External (to Free Geek) |
Opportunities: Opportunities are advantages we have that are external to Free Geek and helpful to achieving the objective. (Good things that will or could happen to us.)
|
Threats: Threats are problems we have that are external to Free Geek and harmful to achieving the objective. (Bad things that will or could happen to us.)
|
See also Trends and Attributes | What do we want to do?
Next Steps
Based on analysis of our objectives, what do we want to do?