# Proposal: Asia Pacific Working Group (APWG) **URL:** \ **Category:** Proposal\ **Created:** [17 September 2021 04:26 UTC](https://gov.indexcoop.com/t/proposal-asia-pacific-working-group-apwg/2691 "2021-09-17T04:26:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 17
**Author:** ![anon10525910](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/97f17d/32.png) [@anon10525910](https://gov.indexcoop.com/u/anon10525910)\ **Post date:** [23 September 2021 20:26 UTC](https://gov.indexcoop.com/t/proposal-asia-pacific-working-group-apwg/2691/17 "2021-09-23T20:26:39Z")
**Brief Table setting** - I’m putting on my “Funding Council” hat to pose questions (See [Q4 Working Group Guidance](https://gov.indexcoop.com/t/q4-working-group-guidance/2743) to learn more about Working Group proposal) - My intent is to ask the questions that ping in my mind with the hope that they help the entire Coop better understand the proposal and thinking behind it. - Questions are pretty much posed in the order the topic appears in the post - If a question doesn’t make sense or is entirely off-base, do call it out 🙂 * * * > [@lee0007](#): > > **Key Considerations:** Geographic expansion requires translation of existing resources Curious, why is translation of existing resources the single “key consideration”? It seems like this group has aspirations far beyond translations, so I find myself wondering why this is front and center. > [@lee0007](#): > > In the weeks since inception (6 July 2021), APAC community calls have shown a steady increase in the number of participants and contributors. We had 11 participants at the most recent meeting on 14 September, up from an [initial five](https://gov.indexcoop.com/t/index-coop-apac/1797/9) and now consistently upwards of nine. That is exciting to hear that APAC community calls showing a steady increase! As a thought exercise, if we wanted to double the number of participants from 9 to 18, what do you think would need to be done? Baked into that ^ question is an assumption that increasing call participation is important. That assumption may be wrong. > [@lee0007](#): > > official WeChat and Weibo channels I am noticing that some of the channels (including the linked Facebook & Twitter) are still quite early in developing a following. Which channel(s) are believed to be the highest impact? Is this ^ even a useful question? I could see one answer being, “it really depends on the specific country.” > [@lee0007](#): > > Geographic Expansion: we hope APWG might provide proof of concept (PoC) for creating multiple, geographic-specific working groups, each functioning as independent and autonomous teams. We believe this form of organisation will facilitate efficient, effective geographic expansion. No question here, just very interesting. > [@lee0007](#): > > We proposed to undertake the following broad functions through data-driven decision-making and a relentless, results-orientated growth focus. > > 1. Business Development Research, Strategic Planning & Coordination > 2. Institutional Business Research, Strategic Planning & Coordination > 3. Localized Product Marketing Content & Events (AMA +Airdrops) > 4. Community Growth & Capacity Building This seems like lot to tackle at once. Also, recognizing that they are each, indeed, important. Which of these 4 areas does this group believe will need the most focus in Q4 in order to reach your goals? > [@lee0007](#): > > WG Specific Activity: Looking specifically at this section, a similar question. It looks like ya’ll intend to pursue 15 different activities. As a thought exercise, what are the 5 activities that if focused on exclusively, you all believe will produce the most impact? **On Budget** - Looks like you expect to add a few team members (“expected headcount”) – what roles are you all expecting to add? Why? - Partnerships - what exactly does “partnership” mean in this context? --- _[View the full topic](https://gov.indexcoop.com/t/proposal-asia-pacific-working-group-apwg/2691)._