# Governance Readiness Working Group

**URL:** <https://discourse.sustainoss.org/t/governance-readiness-working-group/298>\
**Category:** Governance\
**Created:** [March 27, 2020, 11:01am UTC](https://discourse.sustainoss.org/t/governance-readiness-working-group/298 "2020-03-27T11:01:29Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 55

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![greggish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/dc4da7/32.png) [@greggish](https://discourse.sustainoss.org/u/greggish)\
**Post date:** [October 16, 2020, 3:53pm UTC](https://discourse.sustainoss.org/t/governance-readiness-working-group/298/55 "2020-10-16T15:53:06Z")

</div>

Hi folks - sorry for the long delay between actions, it’s a challenging time for everyone i assume 😐

I’ve taken some steps to align [the Principles of Governing OSS Commons workgroup output](https://discourse.sustainoss.org/t/principles-of-open-source-institutional-design/62/16) with the output from this group, which I think are different aspects of the same idea.

As mentioned before, the Principles group took Elinor Ostrom’s principles of Institutional Analysis and Design, from _Governing the Commons_, and translated those jargony principles into language that resonates with OSS communities. In our last workshop, we started developing a matrix in which each principle could be considered across the various layers of resources in an open source community – the code, the documentation, maintainers time, the brand/reputation, etc. I finally found time to go through the questions/checklist from this Governance Readiness working group, to see how these questions might align with the matrix.

See [the result here](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ya_flgj83ki46genn2b-QiXPxMrDrqjmTgmKIWJgLu4/edit#gid=0), and in [a table in our original source document as well](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OLjzRT9u-vjswnVj4AVYtmI8-eYkQPszigkYEkzcH-k/edit#heading=h.beg34j7lxamm).

Note that I exercised some editorial judgment both in sorting different questions into different parts of the matrix, and also in suggested revisions to some of the questions. (ofc I’m not an authority; I assume these suggested revisions should themselves be subject to review 😉

Moving forward, I’m eager to hear feedback – does this alignment seem to make sense? Both in the aims/outputs of the two workgroups, and also on a topical basis? How can this be made more useful, and how should we iterate on it?

Thanks! greg

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.sustainoss.org/t/governance-readiness-working-group/298)._