> Actually, I think that we should consider it a strength in an individual to
> refuse to consider applying for a position where every aspect of their
> career and personal life would be microscopically examined by thousands of
> people. Self-respect is a positive attribute.
>
> Risker
Risker, let's look on the bright side say that a high profile job like this
one requires resilience. (:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_resilience
Pine
>Jan-Bart de Vreede wrote:
>>...
>> a large part will never be contacted as a potential candidate,
>> simply because they are not close to matching the profile....
>
>Is the profile documented or subjective?
I think that this is the only written profile being used.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Executive_Director_Transition_Team/Position…
Pine
Jan-Bart de Vreede wrote:
>...
> a large part will never be contacted as a potential candidate,
> simply because they are not close to matching the profile....
Is the profile documented or subjective?
>... Most people who are already in a current job are not going
> to be willing to have open debates about the job opportunities they are
> seeking. Not only because their 'boss' will know but also because if they
> are in a public company that could cause large issues in the market etc....
Do we really want to select against people who aren't open to
discussion of their individual merits, even if that means selecting
against those who already have a job they want to keep?
This is additional support for the use of a (potentially mutual)
Co-director position, which would be an effective way to have a trial
period for any candidate. It doesn't have to be high-stakes up front,
and would be easy to revert in the case of bad fit or Board regret.
