It's not a reason to *dismiss* it, no, but it's definitely not a reason to entirely reorganise our plans for organisational governance in case it turns out to get traction at *some* point. And that's what you're talking about here; making monumental changes to the timetable, scope and demands of a very important hiring decision, because 'an idea [was] hatched by a few people'.
The new ED should know what the plan is. But at the moment, there *is* no plan. When you've come up with one, and people have agreed with it, it will be an appropriate time to stick a spanner in the works. Until then, what you're suggesting is massively over the top for the interest the plan has got so far.
I'll be honest and say I'm pretty disappointed by your approach's failure to consider the human cost of decisions here. The organisation is in some amount of chaos and uncertainty, with an associated cost in stress and ill-enjoyment for the people participating in it. You're suggesting perpetuating that chaos. Yes, Katherine is a great interim ED from everything I've seen, but I haven't seen you ask if she wants to do the job long-term, which is something your idea is entirely premised on: being able to put the burden on her, or someone like her, while we tilt at windmills. Some consideration has to be given to the human beings involved in this process - to the fact that this is not an abstract theoretical exercise in optimal governance, but for a lot of people 8-12 hours of their day, and disruptions to it carry heavy risks, particularly given how unpleasant things have been over the last 6-12 months.
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Andy,
Just because an idea is hatched by a few people isn't a reason to dismiss it. Otherwise, how would ideas get traction?
It seems to me that any incoming ED needs to know what the plan is, if there is a plan, regarding possible forks from WMF. It's also highly desirable that, if this is being actively considered, that the ED should be someone who has experience with forks. On the other hand if the plan is to continue with WMF in its current form, then maybe WMF should look for a unicorn again who can manage the wide scope of WMF's activities. So the question of whether WMF is thinking about forks is something that should go into the calculus of the ED selection process.
Given the history of WMF, it seems to me that a fork is something that the ED and the Board should have on their radar as possible and maybe even likely as a desirable option. Katherine seems to be quite capable as an interim ED, so it seems to me that this buys us some time to think carefully about the experience that we're looking for in the next longer-term ED (who might be Katherine); whether or not we're looking for experience with forks is something that I think would be prudent to consider at this stage.
I like a lot of the other ideas that are listed on https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Executive_Director_Tran.... It's this issue of what to do with regard to a potential fork that I'm trying to wrap my head around, and I hope that the Board and others are too. I tend to think that the concept of forking WMF should get serious consideration. That intersects a bit awkwardly with the ED transition, and I'm thinking that the best way to get those two processes to work together is to have the forking discussion (at least in the short term) happen first so that we know what we're looking for in the ED transition. I'm open to hearing other ideas; maybe Gayle could share her thoughts so I'm pinging her.
Regards,
Pine
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 4:21 AM, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
On 17 April 2016 at 21:52, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
But recent discussions have included the possibility of spinning off components of WMF and/or a breakup of the WMF organization, partly as a
way
to mitigate the systemic risk from a dysfunctional or underperforming
WMF.
So, should we be looking for an ED with the expectation that he or she
will
manage an organization with 250+ employees, or should we look for someone who has experience with spinoffs and/or breakups?
There has been a small amount of discussion of a vaguely-defined, hypothetical split, which has involved only a handful of people. The idea has not been tested with the wider community, much less developed as a formal proposal. That's not a good basis on which to appoint an ED.
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe