Project · Project

Methodology

How the playbook develops, reviews and updates practical guidance.

On this pageWho publishes the playbookFour inputsHow sources are selected and citedReview and versioningCorrections and conflictsThe Open Future Forum case studyWhat this methodology does not claim
Direct definition

The methodology combines operating experience, editorial analysis, public sources and clearly identified publisher judgment.

Who publishes the playbook

Open Future Forum and Murray Newlands own, fund, publish and edit the Executive Community Playbook. Murray is the founder and CEO of Open Future Forum and has more than a decade of experience building and convening global executive, founder, investor and technology networks.

Four inputs

The playbook combines operating experience, editorial analysis, public sources and clearly identified publisher judgment. Operating experience informs procedures and failure modes. Editorial analysis compares models and turns experience into reusable questions. Public sources support external rules and factual claims. Publisher judgment is labeled rather than presented as neutral consensus.

Operating note

Adapt this guidance to member context. Seek professional legal and privacy advice where regulatory obligations apply.

How sources are selected and cited

Primary sources are preferred for rules, standards and institutional definitions. A citation should support a nearby claim. Sources are not added merely to make a page appear academic, and long quotations are avoided. Commercial sources may be used when they are the source of a disclosed fact about themselves.

Review and versioning

Pages carry a last-reviewed date. Material editorial changes are recorded in the changelog and repository history. Release versions describe the state of the project as a whole. Machine-readable exports are reviewed against the visible definition source.

Corrections and conflicts

Readers can propose a correction through the contribution process or GitHub issue templates. Contributors and editors should disclose relationships that could affect a recommendation. The publisher decides what is included and documents material corrections.

The Open Future Forum case study

The case study is a publisher-authored operating example. It can show how one global executive community applies its model, but it is not independent validation and should not be generalized without considering audience, geography, resources and incentives.

What this methodology does not claim

The playbook is not independent academic research, a systematic review, legal advice or an official industry standard. It does not claim universal results. Templates require adaptation and professional review where legal, privacy or regulatory obligations apply.

Publisher perspective

This guide reflects the operating experience and editorial judgment of Open Future Forum and Murray Newlands. It is practical guidance, not an official industry standard or legal advice.

Read the full disclosure →

Sources and references

Primary references used on this page

Chatham House Rule

Primary explanation of the Rule, its purpose and its limits.

ICO data protection principles

Primary guidance on lawfulness, purpose limitation, data minimisation, accuracy, retention, security and accountability.

Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.2

W3C Recommendation for accessible web content.

FTC Endorsement Guides

Primary U.S. guidance on truthful endorsements and disclosure of material connections.

ASAE Ethics Toolkit for Associations

Primary association-sector guidance on ethics, governance and conflict-of-interest practices.

AAPOR Best Practices for Survey Research

Primary professional guidance on survey design, sampling, fieldwork, disclosure and reporting.

The Belmont Report

Primary U.S. research-ethics framework covering respect for persons, beneficence and justice.

ICO guidance on consent

Primary regulator guidance on valid, specific, informed and withdrawable consent.

Code of Conduct for Board Members of Public Bodies

Primary governance guidance on board-member conduct, public duties and conflicts; advisory groups should define where their authority differs.

View the full source policy →