Port Donut pattern from old PR #38 into this, so that we can link to …

…the Donut pattern directly, rather than to the PR.

Also adapted pattern slightly to fit the current Pattern template better.

README.md

@@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ possible to either deploy the same service in independent environments with sepa
 * [Project Management Time Pressures](patterns/1-initial/overcoming-project-management-time-pressures.md)
 * [Organizational Mindset Change](patterns/1-initial/organizational-mindset-change.md)
 * [Bad Weather For Liftoff](patterns/1-initial/bad-weather-for-liftoff.md)
-* [Get Contributions Despite Silo Thinking](https://github.com/InnerSourceCommons/InnerSourcePatterns/pull/38)
+* [Get Contributions Despite Silo Thinking](patterns/1-initial/get-contributor-despite-silo.md)
 
 ## What are InnerSource Patterns?
 

patterns/1-initial/get-contributor-despite-silo.md

@@ -0,0 +1,105 @@
+## Title
+
+Incentive mechanisms to foster voluntary contribution
+
+## Patlet
+
+TBD
+
+## Problem
+
+In hierarchical and silo-organized organizations, getting voluntary contributions in InnerSource
+projects can be challenging. It is crucial to create mechanisms to incentivize managers to foster
+voluntary contributions. Consider the following story:
+
+Company A has started an InnerSource initiative. Their InnerSource concept expected to have
+associates voluntarily contributing to InnerSource projects, regardless of topic and regardless of
+home-business-unit alignment.
+
+After some time in activity, the core team realizes that their InnerSource project is not getting
+voluntary contributions. While engaging with potential individual contributors, the
+core team (pattern link) has consistently learned that the contributors in question were
+not allowed to contribute or have their participation in InnerSource projects rejected by
+their respective line managers. The reasons presented by management are:
+
+- the lack of strategic alignment between the InnerSource project goal and the business unit product/service portfolio,
+- managers have planned their developer's capacity 100% to the home business units projects.
+
+So, the management is not motivated to provide their scarce developer capacity to the
+InnerSource project.
+
+As a result, the total number of contributors remained restricted to the core team and the
+project cannot build a community of developers. Furthermore, contributions mostly originated
+in the same business unit the Dedicated Community Leader (link to Dedicated Community Leader)
+belonged to. Innovation did not happen in the expected scale. Top management is no longer
+convinced that InnerSource yields the expected benefits and abandons the initiative altogether.
+
+## Context
+
+- The InnerSource initiative is sponsored (budget) by top level management.
+- The managers (middle-management) have their bonus directly depending
+only on business units results under their responsibility
+- The capacity of every associate is usually planned by their superiors
+and 100% allocated to the home business unit projects
+- Cross organizational collaboration is not the norm.
+- Contributions to InnerSource projects are expected to be made during working
+  hours.
+
+## Forces
+
+- Managers of business units are held accountable for their results. Reducing
+  the capacity of an associate contributing to an InnerSource project rather
+  than the goals of the business unit will make it harder for them to reach or
+  exceed their goals.
+- The more time an associate spends on contributions to an InnerSource project
+  which does not benefit his day-to-day work, the more will the workload for
+  his teammates in his business unit increase.
+- The individual contributor would like to participate to enhance his
+  professional network within the company and gain knowledge and experience
+  with both the InnerSource method and the technical area he makes a
+  contribution to.
+
+## (Possible) Solution
+
+- The top management sets and communicates a corporate strategy where development
+  capacity are to be planned and committed to a maximum of 85% to home business units projects
+- A central funded formal contracting mechanisms, where line managers get
+  refunded by the percentage of associates work time in InnerSource is in place.
+- Managers (middle-management) have a percentage of their bonus associated to
+  contribution and the results of InnerSource projects not directly related/sponsored
+  by their business units.
+- Utilize any existing engineering-wide bonus that allots some percentage of each employee's
+  bonus to be aligned with Inner Source interactions. It could be # of commits, or commits +
+  issues + documentation + chat interaction, etc. Utilize some kind of personally-linked
+  statistic to fill, for example, 15% of each employees bonus. Note that this encourages
+  after-hours type work more-so than regular work-week hours, but if combined with other
+  solutions above, could hit the issue from multiple angles. (used partially @ RedHat)
+
+## Resulting Context
+
+- The top management communication of the strategic decision to plan and commit
+  85% of developers capacity and have 15% buffer for other company initiatives,
+  for instance InnerSource projects, shows their support and sets a clear sign
+  that InnerSource is part of the corporate goal and get executive air cover.
+- Allocation of corporate funds to business units for reimbursement of
+  development capacity makes easier for business units to contribute to InnerSource
+  projects without to commit their cost center budget.
+- Setting the bonus of middle-management partially depending on contributions and the success
+  of InnerSource projects, motivates managers to encourage their developers participate on those
+  projects
+- With a stable group of contributors, it is more likely that some of them will
+  eventually achieve trusted committer status and the InnerSource project will be able
+  to establish a healthy community around their project.
+
+## Status
+
+* Initial
+
+## Authors
+
+* Diogo Fregonese (Robert Bosch GmbH)
+* Georg Gruetter (Robert Bosch GmbH)
+* Robert Hansel (Robert Bosch GmbH)
+* Nick Yeates
+
+## Acknowledgements