F2: F., researcher barca
- reduce information asymmetry; a platform can be useful in that regard, especially when a small group of high-profile people rely on networks rather than platforms. 2. A platform can help when you have a small group of high-profile people who work via influence, but for some contexts, relationship and influence matter more. Platforms may be less effective when the key drivers are personal
networks and executive influence rather than structured dialogue. 3. We aim to map knowledge gaps and use that to guide future work.
F3: M., Digi
getting everyone to see the same information and be able to provide feedback, for example
on an “advert” (announcement/vacancy/posting) that has to be sent out. Sometimes we work in
Teams so everyone can comment on the document, but some people download it, add
comments, and send it back, and then you have to process it. Similar for other documents and
presentations. Ideally you’d work simultaneously in one place, but you work with many
organizations and not everyone has Microsoft, so you have to involve them differently. Top priority: being able to work on more formal documents and export something you can share
externally. Now we often use a screenshot of the whiteboard and put it elsewhere to show what
we’re doing. It would be great if you could really get something off the platform to share more
broadly and in multiple settings. There are notes/memos where you can type together, but it’s still
a memo, not a document. If that were possible, I’d say we wouldn’t need Teams anymore.
Government work requires formal documents; that won’t stop soon.
Second priority: real collaboration adoption—how to bring along the people who are less quick/
less comfortable digitally.
F5: A., PBA
You also have to be ready for change throughout. Personnel turns over, and external events can shift the direction entirely. Good documentation is essential for continuity — when a new person steps in, there should be a clear record of what was agreed, what’s been done, and why. For digital tools, the most useful categories are: tools to assess an organisation’s overall partnering strategy, tools to evaluate individual partnerships, and information management tools. One area still underserved is partner scoping — using criteria to identify the right organisations, which is where AI could add real value. The real need isn’t more theory — there are already plenty of models and frameworks out there. What’s actually needed is the practical work: taking objectives, finding the right partners, and facilitating their collaboration. In that sense, both words — broker and facilitator — capture something real. Brokering is about finding organisations and convincing them to work together; facilitating is about making that collaboration actually function. Those are the two core needs.
F6: A., Signalen - VNG
The main tools are Teams for everything community-related and email for the newsletter and steering group updates. In principle everything needed is already there, though it could be better organised. The product owner in Amsterdam largely relies on me to relay what’s happening in the community — he doesn’t look in himself much.
F7: L., PBA
Since she is working with developing countries, there should be some usability when the internet goes down so that it will add the information to the server when you’re back online. Possibility of low data mode for people to use it on their phone. Direct messaging is the main communication tool so should be there as well.
F8: A.
A platform like Alkemio shouldn’t primarily be thought of as a project management tool — its real value is in giving the community ownership of the project and the space to connect and communicate independently. In our projects, people would only come together when we organised something. An online space lowers that barrier significantly. For community members, the added value would be threefold: coordination around shared activities, inspiration and ideas for new initiatives, and — perhaps most importantly — a living history of what has been tried, what worked, and what didn’t. If someone proposes an idea that was already tried and failed, a shared record could prevent that wheel from being reinvented. Reporting to donors always came down to two things: showing exactly where the money went, and demonstrating whether the project was on track. That’s straightforward in a construction project, but much harder when you’re trying to show impact on something like social services. A platform with open access for donors would let them see for themselves — going deeper than any report could.