Test 1: Infrastructures

That it would be possible to establish a legal architecture in synergy with governing, learning, organising and ecosystem strategy systems for a complex collaboration

What we tested

Built a sandbox environment – a simplified version of a complex collaboration – to test the systems, including the legal architecture.
Prototyped a contractual legal form (with the aim to not create an entity) where the funder could be a party, intending to replace the need for separate funding terms and conditions (aiming to still meet charitable obligations). Worked with funders to reduce risk of funder override of governance deep codes.
Designed the legal architecture as part of a deeply coded wider “full stack” (governing, learning, organising and ecosystem strategy systems), laid out in a contract and a digital portal/directory. Collaborators were partly onboarded.
Investigated the viability and limits of this legal form with tax and corporate law advisors.
The wider systems have to date been part tested by the collaboration

What we didn't test

Only gave minimal attention (“just enough”) to organising, learning and ecosystem strategy, to focus on legal architecture and governance.
Did not test legal architecture in full complexity :
Sectors: included philanthropic and civil society actors, but not public sector or universities.
Jurisdictions: limited to England, Scotland and Wales.
Risks: low exposure to data, safeguarding or IP risks.
Scale: fewer than 10 organisations involved.
Did not stress test legal mechanisms in court, so full legal implications and interpretations remain unknown.
Did not stress test governing mechanisms such as evolving role cards or IP registers.
Did not fully onboard collaborators into the daily operation of the system.