I think it is helpful to imagine how the organization would look if this product would be off the ground and to than slowly work towards that goal.
Let us imagine 100 ministries are using the product.
Setting the horizon
The team would have more staff: a comparison, DonkeyMobile a dutch native app for Churches has 350 churches using their product. They are active since 2020. They have 15 staff members.
- 4 business developers
- 3 Developers
- 2 developer interns
- 1 UX designer
- 1 success manager
- 1 technical support
- 1 content strategist
- 2 marketing and communication
- Currently 8 open positions
To have a similar amount of people working on LightNet would require funding in place. It is simply not possible to recruit only people that raise their own funds. We have seen that within MediaWorks that it simply does not work time wise, it would take too long and people would be gone before a whole team is complete. On one hand these are people that have expert skills and not necessary fundraising skills and on the other hand it is important to keep this people for the long term with the organization. I think the current model puts too much strain on individuals, it did to me.
So how to get 100 ministries to use LightNet? And all these people working for LightNet? A business plan has to be created to make sure there is a maintainable future. The idea of giving away LightNet is something I think is not possible or a big angel investor should come in. This all has to be examined, thought through and written down so that the whole LightNet team can agree. Also when new people join it might be helpful that they would have to agree and conform with a business plan.
I think it would help to make things clear up front so people know what they are saying yes to.
The MediaWorks context
One other very important factor is that LightNet is embedded in MediaWorks. I think significant change might need to happen to get LightNet off the ground.
I think the following roles should be there to be able to continue development:
- A dedicated product owner
- A dedicated business developer / fundraiser
- At least one or two software engineers extra
- Marketing person for LightNet with end responsibility.
- I think a clear cut has to be done with all the OM standards regarding the LightNet product. The communication standards for internal communication or public OM communication should not apply to the LightNet product.
I think there are some things that need addressing. I think everyone in MediaWorks has good intentions but unfortunately I also observe some unhealthy patterns.
- Micro management
- Strong hierarchies without clear role definitions
- The focus is sometimes lost, what is really important? And what are risks we can take and learn along the way? Too much things are discussed and brought in to discussions.
- Often there is high context communication. My advise would be to do some courses with the whole team and learn about how to establish a low context culture. Culturally, a low-context environment is essential, as outlined in the culture map.
- The fundraising model looks problematic to me. I think it is not sustainable and puts strain on the team. Make clear to all what the model is and to what changes MediaWorks is open and to what changes it is not open.
- Alignment with the OM vision might not be the best strategic. Maybe the product needs to be sold to rich churches first.
- Question the relevance of the OM International rules (such as not using the word church,) especially those intended for fields, in the context of a software development team.
- A lot of time is spend on other things than development. I think a lot of time could be won by having a close look on these activities and remove some of those.
- Revise approaches to volunteers, recognizing the unique demands of software development. Bringing in a couple hours each months does not actively bring the product further as the mentoring hours should be considered too.