Dries, Acquia, and the Drupal Association--Some Essential History

In recent weeks Drupal community members have raised many questions about the Drupal Association (DA). Can the DA serve as an effective balance to the powers of the project's dictator for life, Dries Buytaert? Why does Buytaert have his name written into the bylaws with a reserved board seat? Is the DA structured in such a way that it could reliably address potential conflicts of interest involving Buytaert's company, Acquia? What's the history?

Community members have also raised questions about transparency in the Drupal Association.

In the absence of reliable information, speculation has been rampant.

These questions come as the Drupal Association has announced plans to facilitate a process of community consultation around governance of the Drupal project. For these discussions, it's especially important that community members have access to frank information and perspectives about the DA.

In this piece I hope to help address the knowledge gap by filling in some of that missing background. I have years of experience in the two incarnations of the Drupal Association--the Belgian-based VZW (the first Drupal Association, which I'll here call DA-VZW) and the US-based Drupalcon Inc (the current Drupal Association, which I'll here call the DA). This experience includes:

That said, comments here are my own and in no way reflect the views of either DA-VZW (which, in any case, is now defunct) or the DA.

A bland backgrounder I compiled in 2012 may be useful by way of intro, but in what follows here I promise way more of the gritty detail!

Conflict of Interest in DA-VZW

By 2008 when I was elected as a permanent member of DA-VZW community members had raised concerns of potential conflict of interest related to Acquia, the company Buytaert had co-founded in 2007.

I proposed we as DA-VZW take a proactive approach that would include publicly acknowledging perceived issues. In March, 2008 I drafted and circulated internally a reflection: "What does Acquia mean for the Drupal Association?" I hoped we could use this draft as a springboard for something we would share publicly and use as a guide going forward, providing transparency to our community and clarity in distinguishing roles and responsibilities. See the end of this article for part of what I wrote.

I also drafted bare-bones conflict of interest guidelines for the DA-VZW, circulated them for review, and then posted them to the DA-VZW website.

The immediate response to my efforts was a wave of personal attacks against me. To say that attention to potential conflicts of interest and questions related to multiple roles of the Drupal founder were not encouraged would be an understatement.

In the absence of effective (really, any) response by the DA-VZW leadership, these attacks succeeded in shutting down discussion, let alone action, related to conflicts of interest or the multiple and potentially conflicting roles of the project founder and dictator for life. The tame and minimal conflict of interest guidelines I'd posted came down and were not soon replaced.

Transition to the Current Drupal Association

In 2011 a DA-VZW board committee proposed sweeping changes in the organization, including:

• Eliminate the voting membership, which until that point had elected the board.
• Merge most functions of DA-VZW into the DA, effectively moving operations from Europe to the US.
• Write Buytaert into the DA bylaws with a permanent, dedicated director class.

These discussions took place behind closed doors, with little or no information shared with the Drupal community until all details were effectively locked down.

I and several other members argued strongly against several aspects of the proposal. But in a heated atmosphere in which concerns and suggested changes were anything but welcomed, all significant proposals for change in the plan were denied. Multiple permanent members resigned.

By the time the proposed restructuring was posted publicly, it was pretty much a fait acompli. There was little or no Drupal community engagement on the key proposals. At the time in a public post I noted concerns with the restructuring:

It would see us eliminate the permanent membership, leaving the board as the sole decision making body. I'm concerned that this change could if anything increase the degree of centralization in the DA. Could we instead expand voting rights to the full membership, currently at over 2,000 individuals and organizations? I'm also concerned at the idea of relocating the DA to the United States. Would this increase the degree to which decisions in the DA come from a mainly US perspective?

Advisory board

As part of the structuring of the current DA, an advisory board was created. The current listing (from which, at my request, I was only recently removed) claims this "international network of trusted community members" was

selected for their acute experience, knowledge, expertise, and talents in many different areas including community management, policy, outreach, law, technology, project guidance, or education.

The actual story is a lot more prosaic.

As part of the restructuring of the DA, we as DA-VZW permanent members could opt to stay on as members of an advisory board. Of those permanent members who hadn't already resigned (in protest or otherwise), many did choose to stay on. Since that time, no new members have been added to the advisory board, though some (me among them) have resigned.

First Drupal Association conflict of interest committee

I served as a member of the inaugural DA conflict of interest committee.

Given the confidential nature of reporting, I can't discuss specific allegations that were brought to our attention. I can say, however, that after months of what appeared to me futile and ineffectual effort I concluded we as a committee lacked the mandate or institutional backing that would be required to minimally meet our responsibilities. Feeling my continued membership on the committee could only lend legitimacy, I tendered my resignation.

First Drupal Association Board Nominations

In 2011 I also served on the nomination committee that selected a first slate of candidates for the reorganized DA.

Our committee was composed overwhelmingly of cis-gender male developers, me being one.

I did outreach and worked my networks, focusing especially on female-led organizations, grassroots nonprofits, and the global South. After a long process involving compromise all around, we as a committee put forward a slate of candidates representing our unanimous agreement. While largely status quo, the resulting slate did include some expertise and representation that would address key gaps in the DA.

However, the three-person DA board overruled our recommendations and did not accept the full set of candidates we put forward, with the result that sectors and areas of expertise were not - and have never since been - directly represented on the DA board.

Then as now, Buytaert was a member of the nomination committee and also a board member who voted on the resulting slate.

Following the board appointments, I wanted to provide our community with detailed information on our process, information that would serve to keep our community in the loop and also could inform future nomination processes. Removing all personally identifying information on candidates or other sensitive information, I prepared an extensive writeup on the process with details including our selection criteria. My effort had support on the nomination committee.

But, after extensive delays, the DA board forbade me to release the report.

Community elected board members

In 2011 I facilitated the process that designed and carried out the first DA at-large director elections. After years of closed-door processes where minority and critical voices were repeatedly drowned out and information sharing blocked, my first aim was to design a process that would be open and inclusive. Working with a skilled and dedicated team of community volunteers, we focused on facilitation, reflective and respectful debate, and building consensus.

From the start, every detail would be worked out in public. You can't block the release of what's not secret in the first place.

The DA's record

With reference to questions community members are raising, what does the current DA structure look like on the ground?

Here are some vignettes:

• By 2014, multinational corporate affiliations were front and centre when then executive director Holly Ross announced new DA board appointments:
  

  I’m excited to announce that the Drupal Association Board of Directors has filled two open seats on the Board. Please welcome Mike Lamb of Pfizer and Rob Gill of NBC Universal.

  Ross cited their "extensive experience as end-users of Drupal" representing "a perspective that currently isn’t fully realized on the board". Clearly, however, it was a very specific sort of end user that was deemed appropriate for board membership.

  Both Pfizer and NBC had been profiled as clients on the Acquia website prior to these board appointments. Mike Lamb took over the DA board executive position of secretary after Acquia employee Angela Byron left that position. Following his DA board appointment, Rob Gill was hired at Acquia, where he served as vice-president. He has since left the DA board.

• Acquia has a partnership program in which companies active in the Drupal space can apply for and achieve partnership status. More than 1,200 companies are listed as partners on Acquia's website.

  Today, according to company information on Drupal.org and Acquia's website, a third of the DA board members are staff or owners at Acquia partner companies, while a further board member is from a company that is part of the "WPP-Acquia Alliance", a "global partnership" with Acquia

• Drupal.org includes a "marketplace" section where companies offering Drupal services are listed. In 2015, the DA introduced a ranking system for marketplace listings. Prior to this change, companies were listed alphabetically, with a default filter based on demonstrated contribution to the Drupal project. A DA staffperson responsible for the new ranking system attributed the initiative to Buytaert: "Back at DrupalCon Austin (2014), Dries presented a sketch of an idea for highlighting organizational contributions to Drupal to myself and several business owners in the Drupal community."

  Since the algorithm was introduced, Acquia has perennially appeared first in marketplace listings.

  When the system was introduced, community members (me among them) pointed out an inherent bias towards large Drupal companies. Although many other adjustments were subsequently made to the algorithm, addressing that bias was not among them. Acquia retained its first-place ranking.

• In 2016 the Drupal Association introduced a new advertising program in which the first prominent link on the Drupal.org home page, "Try Drupal", points to a page with sponsored ads. At time of writing, Acquia is one of three companies in the "Try Drupal" advertising program (and is the only member of the "Signature" hosting supporters program, the highest level offered by the DA).
• The DA has a conflict of interest committee, described as an "independent body". The three members of the all-male committee, drawn from the advisory board, are executives or owners of their respective Drupal companies, two of which are Acquia partners. As former permanent members of DA-VZW, the three all could be described as longtime insiders.
• One of these insiders also sits as the only non-board member on the DA nominating committee, which is responsible for vetting and putting forward board candidates. Buytaert is also a perennial member of this currently all-male committee.
• Of the 12 DA board members, 7 are listed as being in the US. There is one board member from the global South, who was selected not thanks to the nominating committee but instead through community elections (which as mentioned fill only two of the board positions).

Inclusion/Conclusion

The DA today is calling for a respectful, open, facilitated, and inclusive dialogue around Drupal project governance. That's great. But these laudable ideals are far from the conditions in which the DA itself was formed.

In a recently-conducted informal "State of Drupal Poll", a majority of respondents indicated "there are conflicts that need to be resolved" regarding Buytaert being "at the top of both Drupal and Acquia" while nearly half of respondents indicated Drupal's leadership structure including the DA is either "broken and needs fixing" or "needs replacing in order to meet the needs of the community."

Returning to what I wrote more than nine years ago:

There is a potential concern that, consciously or unconsciously, the Drupal Association may select or carry out projects and activities in ways that disproportionately benefit Acquia or align with its particular corporate interests.

If, to many community members, the Drupal Association appears broken in terms of its ability to serve as a balance to the unchecked powers of the Drupal dictator for life, or to the corporate interests of his company, the outcome is not through mere oversight or omission. Rather, there is a very specific history, one in which those who have raised questions have repeatedly been shouted down, sidelined, and silenced.

I know there are many well intentioned and dedicated people working within the Drupal Association. But their presence hasn't altered the built-in structural problems of the organization.

I and others warned that, as designed, the Drupal Association would risk becoming an even more insular, US-centred body, dominated by a narrow set of interests and neither representative of nor accountable to its community.

Our warning presaged themes and issues community members are raising today.

But if in this article I've been speaking so far as a critic, I have to acknowledge I've also been part of the problem. If the DA is the product of an old boys' network, I was a longtime member. In some ways I still am.

More than that. Even after explicitly calling out inherent flaws, I stayed on in the misplaced belief that, as a supposedly critical voice, I could make a meaningful difference. Even the energy I brought to what I hoped was an inclusive, consensus-building process to design community elections arguably served only to legitimate, since - by design - the two elected community representatives on the board could never form more than a marginal segment of the otherwise self-perpetuating board.

I won't be participating in the community consultations the DA is convening. Given that on multiple occasions I've been targetted in the community in relation to critical perspectives I've raised, and that little or nothing has been done to acknowledge (let alone address) these attacks, there are many fora where I don't feel safe.

To belabour the obvious: an organization presided over by a dictator is not ideally positioned to lead an inclusive process of renewal.

The DA has yet to come to terms with the deep ways that it itself is a product of an authoritarian project structure or how it has been shaped by particular economic interests.

A good first step? Buytaert could step down from his role as president and as board member. That wouldn't do everything, but it would send a first essential signal.

[Draft prepared by Nedjo Rogers for discussion in March, 2008. Never adopted by the Drupal Association.]

The Association and Acquia

The Drupal Association was founded in 2006 with the mission of supporting and promoting the Drupal software project and the needs of the Drupal community. The Association receives donations and in-kind contributions from the Drupal community to support its work. A key requirement of carrying out its work and mandate is ensuring the Association both is and is perceived to be balanced and free from any particular private influence or motivation. Meeting this requirement includes ensuring that no particular group or interest receive special treatment or access.

Acquia, a new startup Drupal-based company, presents special challenges in terms of relations with the Association. Compared with other existing companies active in Drupal development, Acquia is special in two ways.

The first is Acquia's core strategy and aims. Acquia has announced goals that closely parallel those of the Association itself. Already Acquia has served as the largest single contributor to the Drupal Association's 2008 Boston Drupalcon.

The second is the position of Dries Buytaert as Acquia co-founder. Dries is the founder and ultimate decision maker in the Drupal software project. Dries is also a principal founder and current founding president of the Drupal Association. Dries' triple leadership role - in Drupal, in the Drupal Association, and in Acquia - creates unique possibilities and challenges. These challenges are increased as other leaders in Drupal development and in the Drupal Association converge in Acquia.

Challenges

The Drupal Association is aware of two main sets of potential concerns in relation to Acquia.

• The first concern area is about influence. There is a potential concern that, consciously or unconsciously, the Drupal Association may select or carry out projects and activities in ways that disproportionately benefit Acquia or align with its particular corporate interests.
• The second concern area is about role confusion or conflict. If the Association and Acquia are both active in the same areas or projects, there may be confusion in the community as to which capacity individuals are acting in.

Addressing Concerns

Dries and others in Acquia are respected as leaders in the Drupal community. Personal integrity is invaluable but is not in itself enough to provide full transparency and accountability.

The Association membership and directors are very concerned with the responsibility of impartiality. To address the possibility of conflict of interest, all directors and members are required to communicate about any potential conflicts and to recuse themselves from discussions and decisions that would put them in a real or perceived conflict.

Given the special considerations noted here, without unfairly penalizing Acquia, the Association is taking extra steps to review relationships with Acquia. The Association will [insert specific steps here].

The Association looks forward to working with Acquia as with other Drupal firms active in Drupal development and promotion. As always, open and direct communication with the Drupal community is a key part of understanding and addressing concerns. Please let us know how we're doing. You can address questions, concerns, or suggestions via the contact form at [link].