Project time based contribution logs

Recording contribution logs for a projects execution outputs after a set period of time

Overview

Project time based contribution logs are when contribution outputs are submitted together in a single project submission to capture what has happened over a certain time period such as every month. This could be for addressing an existing priority or executing an idea.

Low contribution measurability (Score - 2)

This approach does have time consistency as it is being recorded every month. However what it lacks is scope consistency. The number of people involved in each initiative can be different meaning it is now much harder to compare the submissions from different projects as the scopes involved in each submission can be vastly different. This now makes it harder to work out the best and worst performers across the ecosystem and also makes it more difficult to understand whether the ecosystem is improving in its contribution outputs over time or getting worse.

Low contribution log accuracy (Score - 2)

It is far easier to lose information with this approach as the information is submitted as a single submission. This could result in a lack of depth being added to better understand who exactly did what and how much effort was made by each of the individuals involved. This makes it harder for the community to look back in time and know exactly who was responsible for what without further questioning.

Moderate reputation building usability (Score - 3)

Teams would build up their reputation based on time based contribution logs. Keeping a consistent amount of time between each contribution log can help with making it easier to compare the performance of different teams and the same team over a period of time. The contribution logs could then be more useful as a reputation building tool for these teams. Each team can have a different amount of contributors involved in the execution of each idea. This can make it more difficult to easily compare these contribution logs which would limit the effectiveness of this information for reputation building as it is less easy to compare. Without using individual contribution logs it would be difficult to have high confidence that a team's reputation will still be relevant and accurate if the team changes.

Low performance measurement usability (Score - 2)

A team's contribution efforts recorded in time based logs can limit the usability of these logs for performance measurement. If the team changes over time it will be difficult to know whether this was a positive or negative outcome for the team in terms of future performance when the performance of each individual is not well known. Team based contribution logs also do not help with solving the problem of fairly distributing the compensation between the contributors in that team. Using time based contribution logs across multiple teams can at least help with comparing those teams and their performance more easily however as contribution efforts are grouped together from different sized teams this comparability is somewhat limited.

Moderate future voting usability (Score - 3)

Project time based contribution logs would be more useful when the team stays the same and the ideas they are executing are similar. If the team or ideas change over time there is a reduced amount of relevance for the contribution logs being a good indicator on whether the team will be effective at executing a more recently suggested idea. As teams and ideas change over time the value of previous contribution logs for voting could be limited. The advantage of project time based contribution logs is that a fixed time period could help with making the logs more comparable with other teams logs and with the same teams historical contribution logs. Increased measurability can help with making it easier for voters to make more informed voting decisions on which teams have been the most performant.

Moderate game theory risks (Score - 3)

Groups of contributors working on a single project would not be able to manipulate the time period for when each contribution log is being submitted. However what they can manipulate and more easily exaggerate is how long the work took in total as all of the outputs for that project are combined into a single submission. This makes it more difficult to track exactly how long each individual spent on each area which then also makes it harder for a moderator to know whether this was fair and reasonable and whether this was good or bad performance compared to the average.

Low verification time required (Score - 2.4)

Moderators would only need to verify the submissions made by each project which could consist of efforts made by multiple contributors. This reduces the number of total submissions to handle so reduces the overall time. If these submissions are made monthly there would still be at least moderate verification time required. The average time required to verify submissions for any verification approach should reduce over time as the tools and processes improve.

Low submission effort (Score - 2.4)

Only one person in a group of contributors needs to bring together the information requested about what was done in a certain time period of contribution. More than one contributor could of course still be involved in the creation of any given submission.

Total score = 19.8 / 36