DISCUSS: Matching Buddies and Newbies

In order to save everyone’s time at the forthcoming meeting, here is a synopsis of my thoughts on the subject:

The Buddies program’s main goals may be:

  • To help new Contributors find their way around SUMO and how they can best contribute
  • The train and guide the new Contributors so their contribution is of as good quality as possible.

If ONLY (1) above is the goal
The only thing that we need to do is to make sure that no new Contributor is left without a Buddy. There is no need to do anything else since the Newbie will (hopefully) keep asking questions, and the Buddy will (hopefully) keep answering them until the Newbie finds what he/she wants to do.

Furthermore:

  • the program does not have to be obligatory for all new Contributors,
    since there may be some who do not need a guide.
  • we do not need to keep track of anything since the program will depend basically on the
    willingness of any new Contributor to participate or not. Keeping track of progress etc. could only serve statistics IF there is a serious follow up of the quality of contribution of trained Vs untrained contributors.

If (2) above is ALSO a goal
If this is the case, then I don’t see how we will choose NOT to make the program obligatory for ALL new Contributors. How can we decide to train only those Newbies that decide to register with the program and allow the rest to contribute irrespective of their contribution quality?

So, IMHO, the meeting should first decide what the actual goals are. Any further action should be based on those goals. A “mix” of the above (we only train SOME of the new contributors; therefore, we need to keep track of their training etc.) does not make sense. “Chasing” untrained newbies in the fields and putting out fires, instead of developing a fireproof system, is counterproductive and more time-consuming in the long run.

Thank you for your time! :smile:

1 Like

Very well formulated post, CAKCy. I’m adding the possible goals to the top post and let’s keep discussing what they should be.

I think that even if only (1) is the goal, tracking progress of new contributors is important to see whether the program is actually making a difference. Additionally, it could help us learn what’s a realistic and comfortable level of contribution for the average SUMO member (even though maybe that last point is not really that relevant).

I hope @madalina chimes in and we can hear more from her :slight_smile:

For the sake of making the meeting as productive as possible:

I wonder if answers to both of your questions:

  1. Does the program make a difference?
  2. What is a realistic and comfortable level of contribution for the average SUMO member?

can be extracted from the previous run of Buddies. From what I’ve seen there was data recorded for each Newbie registration.

Thinking out loud:
I think that to get the answer to the first question we need to compare the performance of trained with that of untrained contributors. Are we in a position to do that with the past data available?

To get the answer to the second question we need to do a follow up of Newbies trained already in the Buddies program and see what is their contribution level today (after they have graduated from Buddies). Is this data available?

I’m not opposing collecting fresh data but it wouldn’t make much sense to start collecting new data if we are not in a position to utilize the data collected in the past. :smile:

Hi folks,

Here are some thoughts:

  1. I think one important thing to keep in mind is that the goal of the Buddy program is contributor retention
    We have a lot of people who contact us because they want to get involved, more than we can actually handle at the moment, but the biggest problem is that more than 90% of these people drop out after a making a contribution or two.
    The main reason for that is that it is hard in the beginning to get around so people get discouraged and leave.

So when we think of tracking the impact of the Buddy program we need to look at the number of contributors that are still contributing after “x” amount of time and basically calculate the retention rate. If we can also look at contributors who make quality contributions after x amount of time, that’s even better.

2 I agree with CACKy that we need to look at previous data, unfortunately we do not have a lot of previous data as the program only ran for a very short amount of time and it was never really official. So we might need to run a bit in the dark at the beginning until we have real data we can count on. We did a bit of tracking in the past and I know at least two contributors who really stepped up after being onboarded through the Buddy program but we have very little data.
It might be useful to go through what we have and do a rough estimation though.

2 Likes

I agree with you @madasan on the retention part of the program. Once we get the buddy program off the ground, we need to make sure we have some type of retention program in place. I hate to see people start dropping of the face of the earth, because we didn’t have some type of retention program in place. Thats my take of things, but I like everyone’s ideas including @vesper and @CAKCy. You guys rock!

Hello Madalina,

Question: Where/how these people contact you/us? Are these contacts on a private basis? Are those interested redirected to the SUMO fora?

With all due respect I disagree with your statement that the goal of the Buddy Program is contributor retention. If this is actually the goal as defined by SUMO Management then I’m in the wrong program! :stuck_out_tongue:

The problem of retaining contributors cannot be limited to, and cannot be solved by the Buddy Program (BP) alone. BP has a role to play (to make the entry of a new contributor easier) but that is only the first step. I think that the current “rewards” and “recognition” system within SUMO has to be re-evaluated and re-built from scratch. It is a different discussion altogether but it’s one closely related to the evolution of a “Newbie” to a “fully grown contributor” to a “Buddy” and the longer we postpone it the longer SUMO will suffer unnecessary losses of contributors. One cannot expect the Buddy Program to be effective as a stand alone program loosely connected with the rest of SUMO reality.


Understood! :smile:

What I can share is the experience I gained running the AoA (much smaller) version of the Buddy Program. This, of course, is based on my own observations and there is no statistical data recorded. :wink:

This experience may have an answer to some questions like:

  • What are the reasons that drive a person to joining SUMO (or any other help community)?
  • What do new contributors feel they have to offer when they join SUMO?
  • What do new contributors expect to gain when they join SUMO?
  • How is involvement with SUMO going to affect new contributors personally (short term/long term)
  • What are the current standards within SUMO (as those are demonstrated by current/older contributors)
  • How is the contribution of a new contributor evaluated and what are the rewards if any?
  • How is a new contributor treated by the current contributors/paid personnel?

etc.

1 Like

This is the “whole SUMO” approach (and IMHO the best approach towards raising retention and quality):

1 Like

CAKCy, awesome…

Hey Jay! :smile:

Thank you for your kindness! I would appreciate your giving it some thought when you have the time, and hitting me hard on the head with any problems you may see. Please don’t hesitate to be as critical as possible! For SUMO’s sake! :slight_smile:

(Hopefully we’ll attract some more people in the discussion so we have something before the next meeting. I’m afraid that, meetings are too short for any real results.)

@CAKCy, I really like the flow chat concept. So basically, the new contributor would have interaction first with the buddy, than, they would start the training session in the their contributor area?

Hey Robert! :smile:

Yep! That’s the general idea. The introduction and training by the Buddy will be “non-specific” but informative enough for the new contributor to choose where he/she wants to start contributing. The CA will then take over and train the new contributor for their specific area. This way we ensure that the “output” quality of new contributors is as high as possible.

Thanks @CAKCy! Excellent work on the the new concept. I think the initial training will help the contributor.

ORGANIZATIONAL NOTE: Madalina is going to be the steward for this topic, because we need some balance in nature :wink:

@vesper, Do we need madalina for this?
I mean, Buddy Mentor can Match the Buddy and Newbie right

Yes, Madalina will only take care of this thread - but all the matching is done by Buddies on their own :slight_smile:

1 Like

Cool, Thats great

1 Like

Everything here looks AWESOME! :slight_smile:
Just one quick thing, are ALL buddies required to PM the newcomer after picking them up in the “New Contributors” forum?
I believe we should stand by Mozilla’s mission of keeping things open.

Hi Andrew! :smile:

The method to contact the newcomer should be up to the buddy to decide. The reasons I suggested a PM were:

  • It enables me to give to the newcomer contact information of mine that I wouldn’t post in a public forum (e.g. my e-mail address)
  • The newcomer may feel uncomfortable to show “ignorance” in a public forum.
  • It helps to build a “trust bond” between the buddy and the newcomer.

I don’t disagree with keeping things open but sometimes too much openness may have undesirable results. :smile:

+1 to what CAKCy said.

Any method of communication between Buddies and New Contributors makes sense, as long as it works for both sides of the conversation. Picking one that is easy to access for the New Contributor is definitely a friendly gesture, right from the start of your relationship.