At the GitLab Foundation, we believe that what we do is important - but how we do it is at least as important.

We aim to always show up with integrity, to be “rigorous but reasonable,” and to center our work around our core values: Collaboration, Results, Efficiency, Diversity & Inclusion, Iteration, and Transparency (CREDIT).

We have spent time as a team collectively defining our values and identifying these behaviors in a series of working sessions, in which we responded to the following prompts:

  1. What do we mean by this value?
  2. What do we NOT mean by this value?
  3. What behaviors exemplify this value?
  4. What behaviors go against what we mean by this value?

Collaboration

Valuing Collaboration means:

  1. Working together, valuing contributions, and co-creating with partners — seeking common interests and articulating shared goals
  2. Elevating and crediting others’ work — taking credit for successes collectively as a team, while also celebrating individual contributions
  3. Being transparent and intentional in stakeholder engagement — demonstrating humility and recognizing we don’t have all the answers
  4. Building and leveraging shared resources, platforms, and data
  5. Developing public goods that benefit the broader ecosystem

Valuing Collaboration does NOT mean

  1. Everyone must give input on everything - collaboration doesn’t require universal input
  2. DRIs must partner when making decisions; rather, they have authority to make decisions independently, while still welcoming partnership when needed
  3. Meetings for meetings sake; every meeting should have a clear objective and respect people’s time
  4. Guarding our policies, practices, models, and pipeline so that others don’t take our ideas - “we’re not competing to save the world”
  5. Trying to get input from a grantee’s clients without getting buy-in from the grantee first

Behaviors that exemplify what we mean by Collaboration

  1. Acting as thought partners to grantees and peers—brainstorming, sharing advice, and engaging as learners and contributors in both directions
  2. Inviting and integrating feedback from external partners to shape our strategies, and engaging in funder collaboratives to learn, co-create, and co-fund toward shared goals
  3. Building and investing in shared tools, staffing, outcome frameworks, and cohort-based models that strengthen the ecosystem and foster peer learning
  4. Proactively including others by pulling in team members early, sharing context and contacts, and using collaborative tools like ClickUp, shared calendars, and shared documents to support transparency
  5. Holding inclusive team discussions for critical topics, staying curious about diverse perspectives, and consistently sharing credit for collective wins

Behaviors that go against what we mean by Collaboration

  1. Rejecting offers of help or feedback, or being unwilling to learn from others
  2. Hoarding knowledge—failing to share learnings, resources, or tools that could benefit the broader team or ecosystem
  3. Having long toes (not being open to or dismissing feedback and input); “No ego, amigo”

Results

Valuing Results means

  1. Staying anchored in our North Star: prioritizing impact on lifetime earnings and holding ourselves accountable to real progress, not just good intentions
  2. Setting clear goals and OKRs, making plans to achieve them, and ensuring our team has the tools and resources needed to execute effectively
  3. Partnering with grantees to define meaningful outcomes, communicate expectations early, and co-design how success is measured and shared
  4. Building systems and feedback loops that help us — and our partners — continuously learn, improve, and share results transparently
  5. Taking [a page](https://hbr.org/2023/03/gitlabs-ceo-on-building-one-of-the-worlds-largest-all-remote-companies#:~:text=Success isn't measured in,want to meet those goals.) from Sid Sijbrandij, our board chair: “Success isn’t measured in input such as hours spent at an office; it’s about output—what you achieve”

Valuing Results does NOT mean

  1. Mistaking activity for impact — tracking meetings or dollars spent as if they’re outcomes, or using volume as a proxy for success
  2. Expecting grantees to have all the answers from the start, or penalizing them for learning, pivoting, or uncovering unexpected results
  3. Defining success unilaterally — disregarding grantee perspectives, enforcing rigid metrics, or creating top-down dynamics
  4. Over-engineering measurement — requiring excessive data collection or RCT-level evidence when it’s not feasible or aligned with the work
  5. “Juicing” our models to justify favored work, hiding negative outcomes, or making excuses when we fall short

Behaviors that exemplify what we mean by Results

  1. Acting with urgency and accountability — setting aggressive annual goals and quarterly OKRs, following through, acknowledging when we fall short, and holding ourselves, teammates, and vendors to high standards
  2. Partnering with grantees to define, track, and clarify outcomes — including building incentives for honest reporting, supporting data collection, and embracing what we learn
  3. Measuring what matters — investing in systems, platforms, and tools to track lifetime earnings, impact on living wage, and counterfactual estimates
  4. Taking a “rigorous yet reasonable” approach — trusting grantees while verifying data, exploring nuance, and adapting our methods to fit real-world constraints
  5. Investing in continuous improvement — conducting retrospectives, sharing insights through our Handbook, and committing to professional development that helps to drive better results

Behaviors that go against what we mean by Results

  1. Avoiding risk
  2. Requiring inordinately high levels of evidence or friction causing friction with grantees to prove results
  3. Not following committed guidelines and processes already established, or the authority of DRIs—undermining clarity and accountability.
  4. Demonstrating an unwillingness to accept uncertainty
  5. Forgetting our iterative / testing culture - letting perfection be the enemy of the good!

Efficiency

Valuing Efficiency means

  1. Trusting each other’s judgment, respecting DRIs, and stepping in to support when needed—collaboration and clarity fuel forward momentum.
  2. Embracing imperfect progress—prioritizing action over perfection, and being comfortable with MVPs and iterative improvements. (don’t let perfect be the enemy of the good!)
  3. Staying lean and thoughtful with resources—minimizing unnecessary costs while weighing the risk of underinvesting in what’s truly needed.
  4. Designing processes and meetings to be purposeful and low-burden—planning ahead, managing time, and respecting coworkers’ and partners’ time.
  5. Using the right tools, partners, and knowledge to work smarter—automating where possible, continuously learning, and distinguishing between what’s urgent and what’s truly important.
  6. Finding partners and co-funders to maximize the leverage of our dollars.

Valuing Efficiency does NOT mean

  1. Funding grantees or programs that are efficient, but that don't align with our North Star.
  2. Avoiding risk.
  3. Pushing grantees to work a certain way, cater to rushed timelines, or overemphasizing grantee overhead rates.
  4. Cutting out funds needed to build capacity, relationships, or conduct on-the-ground research—whether for grantees or staff.
  5. Aiming for perfection or assuming efficiency is always best—we recognize that “inefficient” actions often lead to greater learning, deeper relationships, and better transparency.

Behaviors that exemplify what we mean by Efficiency

  1. Following our DRI and decision making processes, using the Handbook as our single source of truth, and consistently adhering to (or improving) our documented ways of working.
  2. Communicating efficiently—keeping teammates informed through stand-ups, shared notes, and tools like ClickUp, and preparing well for meetings to maximize everyone’s time. Documenting calls and meetings; recording meetings when some cannot participate.
  3. Leveraging technology to automate routine tasks and streamline workflows—using tools like Calendly, Docusign, and GivingData to reduce friction and free up focus.
  4. Creating transparent, low-burden systems—developing clear file structures, templates, and reporting protocols that make information easy to find, share, and use.
  5. Keeping work moving—responding to feedback promptly, raising concerns early, and making timely, well-informed decisions to maintain momentum.

Behaviors that go against what we mean by Efficiency

  1. Stalling progress without clearly communicating a revised plan or next steps.
  2. Overlooking ownership—failing to name a DRI leads to confusion and inefficiency.
  3. Duplicating efforts or redoing work already underway by others.
  4. Prioritizing precision over progress—designing overly complex grant processes that delay impact.
  5. Resisting new systems, changes, or simplifications that would improve transparency and reduce burden—for staff or grantees.

Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging

Valuing Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging means

  1. Creating inclusive spaces where all people—across roles, backgrounds, and lived experiences—feel respected, empowered, and heard.
  2. Valuing the perspectives of those most connected to our mission, especially individuals with lived experience of economic hardship.
  3. Recognizing and addressing power dynamics—engaging with a “serve and support” mindset and partnering with local, diverse organizations and voices.
  4. Practicing transparency in how and why we make decisions, while actively inviting input from grantees, staff, board members, and community stakeholders.
  5. Working with local (in-country) and diverse sets of partners when it comes to research firms, advisors, and networks.
  6. Committing to continuous learning—challenging assumptions, honoring cultural norms, and acknowledging that bias exists and must be surfaced to be addressed.
  7. Allowing flexible work environments to accommodate unique schedules of staff (e.g., new parents)

Valuing Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging does NOT mean

  1. Avoiding hard conversations—respectful debate, disagreement, and critical feedback are part of inclusive and high-performing teams.
  2. Making decisions by consensus or following every preference—DRIs are empowered to lead, even while inviting input.
  3. Investing in “diverse” work only for optics—token efforts that exclude local or proximate leadership don’t reflect true inclusion.
  4. Overlooking performance, skills, or growth—diversity and excellence go hand in hand.
  5. Taking things personally or making assumptions—when concerns arise, we seek context and clarity rather than defaulting to judgment.

Behaviors that exemplify what we mean by Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging

  1. Broadening who we listen to and learn from—building relationships with those who work, think, and lead differently, and actively seeking input from grantees, team members, and the communities they serve.
  2. Investing in diverse geographies, groups, and leaders—including smaller or underrepresented organizations—and sharing power through trust-based, inclusive partnerships.