[Foundation-l] business developer hire - whose decision?

Sat May 19 01:03:31 UTC 2007

I disagree.  We really do not need to know the inner workings and what-not
of hirings.  Although, I do admit that yours is a valid question, though I
do not believe it is for the reason you provided.  It is a valid question
for the sake of questioning and knowledge's sake, not to be "an informed
voter".

Cbrown1023

-----Original Message-----
From: foundation-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:foundation-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Anthony
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 3:02 PM
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] business developer hire - whose decision?

On 5/18/07, GerardM <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hoi,
> In a perfect world, it would not need a board resolution to hire staff.

I'd say in anything less than a grossly mismanaged world, the hiring
of staff would not require a board resolution.  I'll let you guess at
where I'm going with that.

> Hiring staff except on a managerial level should be something that is
taken
> care of on the operational level of the organisation. Also, what are you
> asking for? Is it really necessary to have full public disclosure for the
> whole Wikimedia community to comment on??

I just want to know who made the decision.  There are two parts to the
decision, by the way, the decision to hire a part-time business
developer (with a particular job description), and the decision to
choose Vishal Pattel to fill that position.  I'm not really concerned
with the second half of that decision, but I am interested in who is
to blame for the first.

I certainly never meant to imply that a board resolution was
necessary.  If the answer is that X created the position and filled it
as part of his/her duties as Y, that's the answer I was looking for.

> I think that would be a really bad
> idea if we also want to get something done. You may also know that there
are
> weekly board meetings.. so I am sure that it was discussed on the
> appropriate level.
>
If the answer is that it was discussed among the board and they all
agreed it was a good idea, that's the answer.  Of course, if it has
already been discussed at a board meeting, why not have a vote?

> You may have missed it but the guy was a known quantity as he had been an
> intern prior to his appointment in this position. We were not told either
> what interns we have and how well they do.
>
Hiring an intern is one thing, hiring a business developer is quite
another.  And again, I'm not questioning the choice of whom should be
in the position so much as the choice to have the position in the
first place.  Ant's email is filled with question marks, and in my
opinion many of these questions should have been answered *before*
such a position was created.  So, to repeat, I just want to know who
to blame.

> Move on, it is not (y)our business.
>
As someone eligible to vote in the upcoming board elections, I think
it is my business to know whether or not any of the people up for
re-election were involved in this decision.

Anthony

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l