Hi folks. I wanted to provide an update on the trajectory vs. my initial post.
As you may know, our current model is a single/flat layer of user data—effectively, what is in a user’s profile. My initial post proposed a “multi-dimensional” CRM-like model, where each project could have “agency” over their view of their user’s data (organization, title, name), while seeing any updates to a corresponding public user profile as a proposed (not automatic) update.
There have been a lot of additional feedback in this thread around committee management in this thread, but I don’t believe there has been any feedback on the concept of multiple per-project “dimensions” of user data (which was my main point for this post, along with how it would support searching and updates).
Our core data team is now moving forward with rolling out a simpler model: only 2 “databases” of user profiles: one being the user self-managed profiles, and the other a single, PCC-wide “CRM-like” contact profile. This will still allow PCC admins (including non-staff community managers) to make updates to committee member contact data. However, when any admin for any project can make a change to the “CRM” profile in their project, it will now affect the view for all other project admins. In addition to being simpler, this provides better consistency.