When selecting tools for use by the collectives I worked with in India, we had to consider the following factors due to the unique context and limited resources available. Tools like Papad, for instance, had to be evaluated against every one of these criteria:
- Export Capability:
- Does the tool allow for easy export of data or content?
- Compatibility with Other Tools:
- Do the export options work well with other tools commonly used by the collectives?
- Self-Hosting:
- If the collective has its own server, can the tool be self-hosted?
- Is there someone available to maintain and experiment with it?
- Device and Screen Compatibility:
- Is the tool usable on multiple devices and different screen sizes?
- Collaboration Features:
- Can the tool facilitate collaborative work among team members?
- Affordability:
- Is the tool relatively free or affordable for Indian collectives, with a monthly cost of less than 200-300 INR?
- Open Source:
- If the usage involves sensitive data, is the tool open source, providing transparency and security?
- Input Variety:
- Can the platform support different types of input, such as voice, text, and other formats?
- Input Delivery Options:
- Can the tool enable input delivery through various means, like phone calls for voice-based inputs?
- Efficiency vs. Accessibility:
- If there are multiple tools available, one being faster but more opaque, and another being slower but more accessible, which trade-off is more important based on the specific needs and limitations of the collective?
- Long Term Stability
- Is there some sort of way that the project itself fails in the long-term either by acquisition, abandonment or commercialisation
By carefully assessing these factors, the collectives aimed to choose tools that aligned with their specific needs, enabling efficient and effective collaboration while taking into account the limitations and priorities of the context in which they operate.
