On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Steven Walling <swalling(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Dario Taraborelli
<dtaraborelli(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
Given that background research on article creation is not limited to data
analysis or testing for features developed within Growth it's important that
this reaches the latter type of audience and I believe a little bit of
redundancy doesn't hurt.
Yeah I don't mind redundancy on principle, however, I do want us to be very
careful about viewing R&D as separate from our actual team work. For
instance, we might learn things about article creation in general that are
of broad interest, but we did it in order to provide a solid background for
product changes by Growth. The primary purpose of the analysis is informing
change, with educating the community or organization at large a tertiary
goal.
If there is analysis work, such as traffic analysis, that doesn't fit within
a single team's scope but impacts the entire organization... well obviously
that makes sense to put in an overall Analytics report.
Can't comment on the
specific issue being discussed here, but it may
be worth pointing out that the monthly engineering reports have
contained an Analytics section for quite a while. (For those who are
not familiar with these reports, they can be found at e.g.
https://blog.wikimedia.org/c/technology/wmf-engineering-reports/ .
They are usually published at the day of the metrics meeting; and I
believe Dario is working to fill out the gap at
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_engineering_report/2014/January#An…
.)
Like the general monthly WMF reports, the engineering reports are
generally organized along team / department lines. And it's quite
frequent that inter-team work is reported both in the section of the
client team and of the supporting team (e.g. if, say, the Wikipedia
Zero team launches a new partnership and we in the Communications team
put out a press release about that, then it's going to be mentioned in
both sections).
But just like the UX
team does not have a separate report, but instead reports what it does
through and for our cross-functional teams, I feel very strongly that
reporting about analysis work should be done through normal team reporting
whenever possible. This keeps our analysis conceptually tied to measuring
outcomes and trends relevant to product work, rather than just generalized
R&D.
--
Steven Walling,
Product Manager
https://wikimediafoundation.org/
_______________________________________________
Analytics mailing list
Analytics(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
--
Tilman Bayer
Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications)
Wikimedia Foundation
IRC (Freenode): HaeB