[General] governance principles #4 and #5 have been added

[Mitchell Kapor]

1.  We are an agreement-seeking culture.

At OSAF, we have an agreement-seeking culture.  That is, we endeavor  
to make plans and reach decisions based on achieving wide-spread  
agreement.  Agreement-seeking  is not the same as consensus, as  
consensus tries for universal agreement, which is elusive, if not  
impossible.

Agreement-seeking as a central principle is also different than  
majority rule. While voting can play a constructive role as an  
advisory means of expression of preference, binding procedures of any  
kind can underemphasize and even undermine the critical role of  
discussion and deliberation in the shaping of plans.  Voting on  
mailing list is consultative, not binding.

For agreements to be meaningful it is important that those with a  
stake in the outcome be participants in determining the course of  
action. So, for instance, it's a matter of common sense that those  
with technical expertise should be intimately involved in technical  
decision-making.

Further, given that OSAF is focusing on software for non-technical  
users, it is also important that end-user interests be represented in  
the process of creating products and services.


2.  Leading is a matter of taking responsibility, not imposing one's  
will.

We believe in making progress  through giving clear responsibilities  
to individuals.  Taking responsibility for something can also be  
called owning an issue or being a driver.  It should not be assumed  
that owners and drivers typically operate by imposing their own  
decisions.   Driving is primarily a matter of attending to a project  
with a goal, and taking steps to ensure the goal is reached (or,  
occasionally, redefining or setting aside the effort).  Owners  
typically solicit input and proposals, enable active participation,  
and facilitate discussion.  In some but not all cases the owner will  
also be an active content contributor to the matter at hand.

The owner has a responsibility to take multiple points of view into  
account and to try to reach widespread agreement.  If there is  
disagreement, she or he should use methods to shed more light on the  
issue, e.g., by taking it to a wider group such as a mailing list.

However, it is also the owner's responsibility to see that a decision  
is made, and he or she has the right in the end to make that call if  
in his or her judgment that's the right course of action.

In principle, someone not on OSAF staff could earn an owner / driver  
roles.  We will have to work out a process and ground rules for this.


3. Legitimate decisions are made with reference to the the vision,  
mission, and values of the organization.

All decisions, but particularly ones about which there is  
disagreement, should not be made arbitrarily but should be in keeping  
with the vision, mission, and values of the organization.     
Decisions gain legitimacy when they can be linked to an underlying  
set of core beliefs widely shared by the participants.

OSAF's original mission is to create and gain wide adoption of  
innovative open source application software of uncompromising  
quality.  In 2006 it would be appropriate to consider replacing  
"application software" with something like "software products and  
services which serve end-users".

OSAF's core values include:

personal integrity and accountability
individual initiative
respect
responsible risk taking
openness and transparency
teamwork
sustainability

Applying these to mailing list behavior we might say, "Rude and  
personal comments on mailing lists are disrespectful and not  
acceptable. Constructive criticism on the other hand is warmly  
encouraged."


4. Project proposals need to win community buy-in before implementation

A good proposal or project plan not only sets out what is to be done  
and why, but also how, i.e., it addresses execution issues and seeks  
buy-in from those who will be implementing it.  This is always  
important, but especially so when the proposer's plan requires  
significant resources not under his or her direct control, which will  
typically be the case.


5. Governance principles are more important than ownership

In working through situations of disagreement, it is better to focus  
on applying governance principles over figuring out who who has  
ultimate authority, as over-reliance on the latter can short-circuit  
opportunities to rely on and expand the use of healthy, open processes.