TransforMap has a working structure - Get involved!

alt On 11 and 12.02, the TransforMap community met in Potsdam, hosted by PIK for its General Assembly. One of the outcome was the agreement on a working and decision-making structure (check the wiki entry here). And that was no easy task! As a self-organized initiative agreeing on ways to take decision and organize is always a difficult endeavour.

So here it is!

Our General Assembly meets at least once a year decides on the working structure, and change our mission statement. It is our constitutional assembly.

Then work and most related decisions are distributed among 6 circles that are open to participation:

Each circle should report every month to the Coordination Circle (or the Conference of the Animals). That Circle has authority to take all decisions that aren't the realm of the General Assembly. It should ensure work from various Circle are coordinated and that the TransforMap community is kept up to date.

Values. We insisted that work should be as transparent and accessible as possible, regularly documented. Circles should always be open to new comers, but require reasonable commitment from participants. Circles should work whenever possible together, and being a member in different circles is not only encouraged, it's almost unavoidable. We also use consent to take decision within all circles: this means we don't have to reach everyone's agreement, we ask whether everyone can live with a decision. That makes collective decisions easier and keep the ball rolling. Finally we want to be agile, because the nature of TransforMap requires constant adaptation of our plans.

So why animal names?
Good question! At the end of our two days intensive meeting, we must have gone completely berserk, and maybe agreeing on animal names helped us to cut the never-ending dicussion about Circles names short (other names could have been "working groups", "workshops", "fireplaces", "working desks", "teams", "hubs", etc.).

Why talking of circles?
We had some lengthy discussion about the kind of working structure we want. Somehow we wanted to show that circles aren't separate groups of people but rather poles that concentrate a set of activities and have regular participants that may overlap from one Circle on another. The "Circles" comes also from sociocracy from which we borrow the consent concept.

Wanna contribute? Check out the links for each circles. You'll find a link for each to the forum page, feel free to start a question. Or ping us on Twitter @TransforMap