Hi everyone,
as you know, we have one vacant appointed seat on the Board of Trustees. We have asked m/Oppenheim Associates to assist us in finding a new board member and and we are reaching out to the community for suggestions and nominations.
The Board functions as a governance body that is ultimately responsible for the Wikimedia Foundation and its activities, supervises the disposition and solicitation of donations, and evaluates the organization’s Executive Director who leads all Foundation staff. As arguably the most influential and respected organization in the free knowledge movement, the Wikimedia Foundation and its Board have a great responsibility for setting policy deliberately and with due consideration for the diverse interests of a truly global community. To find out more about the responsibilities and workings of the board you can have a look at the Board manualhttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_board_manual .
As with any search process we will be communicating with a lot of potential candidates to see if we are a good match. The Board’s objective is to use this search to strengthen its competence with regards to board governance, grantmaking, strategy, and expertise with regions where Wikimedia is trying to make rapid strides in the growth of our projects.
Board terms are for a two year period. Compared to other boards the time commitment is very significant. The Board of Trustees meets four times a year, twice in San Francisco and twice in changing locations around the globe. Meetings take two days and travel can add another two days to each meeting. In addition, the Board communicates frequently by email and Internet Relay Chat (IRC) as it navigates policy issues. This can absorb 4-10 hours weekly. Board members also regularly engage with the Community through wiki pages.
We think that the WMF would benefit from a Board member who has experience with organizations that have grown and evolved rapidly, and who understands how boards can evolve to provide appropriate governance support in these changing circumstances. Experience with international, community-driven, consensus organizations is also important as the Foundation would not exist without the community.
We would like to call upon you to help us out with finding the right individual. A complete position description can be found herehttp://moppenheim.com/searches/links/Wikimedia%20Foundation%20-%20Board%20Member%20position%20description%20-%20final.pdfand additional information can be found at www.moppenheim.com and www.wikimediafoundation.org. Your suggestions and nominations are very welcome. Please feel free to reach out to your networks and distribute this note as you deem appropriate.
Interested individuals should contact Lisa Grossman lisag@moppenheim.com
I don't understand. The board hired and pays to a company to find a board member? Have we tried before via our networks, chapters, and via our advisory board to find such a person (as been done until now?).
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 1:55 AM, Alice Wiegand awiegand@wikimedia.orgwrote:
Hi everyone,
as you know, we have one vacant appointed seat on the Board of Trustees. We have asked m/Oppenheim Associates to assist us in finding a new board member and and we are reaching out to the community for suggestions and nominations.
The Board functions as a governance body that is ultimately responsible for the Wikimedia Foundation and its activities, supervises the disposition and solicitation of donations, and evaluates the organization’s Executive Director who leads all Foundation staff. As arguably the most influential and respected organization in the free knowledge movement, the Wikimedia Foundation and its Board have a great responsibility for setting policy deliberately and with due consideration for the diverse interests of a truly global community. To find out more about the responsibilities and workings of the board you can have a look at the Board manualhttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_board_manual .
As with any search process we will be communicating with a lot of potential candidates to see if we are a good match. The Board’s objective is to use this search to strengthen its competence with regards to board governance, grantmaking, strategy, and expertise with regions where Wikimedia is trying to make rapid strides in the growth of our projects.
Board terms are for a two year period. Compared to other boards the time commitment is very significant. The Board of Trustees meets four times a year, twice in San Francisco and twice in changing locations around the globe. Meetings take two days and travel can add another two days to each meeting. In addition, the Board communicates frequently by email and Internet Relay Chat (IRC) as it navigates policy issues. This can absorb 4-10 hours weekly. Board members also regularly engage with the Community through wiki pages.
We think that the WMF would benefit from a Board member who has experience with organizations that have grown and evolved rapidly, and who understands how boards can evolve to provide appropriate governance support in these changing circumstances. Experience with international, community-driven, consensus organizations is also important as the Foundation would not exist without the community.
We would like to call upon you to help us out with finding the right individual. A complete position description can be found here< http://moppenheim.com/searches/links/Wikimedia%20Foundation%20-%20Board%20Me...
and
additional information can be found at www.moppenheim.com and www.wikimediafoundation.org. Your suggestions and nominations are very welcome. Please feel free to reach out to your networks and distribute this note as you deem appropriate.
Interested individuals should contact Lisa Grossman lisag@moppenheim.com
-- Alice Wiegand Board of Trustees Wikimedia Foundation
Support Free Knowledge: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
my first thought when i read this was "should i use my free time to edit wikipedia so that somebody donates money to wmf, and they use it to pay oppenheim?"
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 9:28 PM, Itzik Edri itzik@infra.co.il wrote:
I don't understand. The board hired and pays to a company to find a board member? Have we tried before via our networks, chapters, and via our advisory board to find such a person (as been done until now?).
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 1:55 AM, Alice Wiegand awiegand@wikimedia.orgwrote:
Hi everyone,
as you know, we have one vacant appointed seat on the Board of Trustees. We have asked m/Oppenheim Associates to assist us in finding a new board member and and we are reaching out to the community for suggestions and nominations.
The Board functions as a governance body that is ultimately responsible for the Wikimedia Foundation and its activities, supervises the disposition and solicitation of donations, and evaluates the organization’s Executive Director who leads all Foundation staff. As arguably the most influential and respected organization in the free knowledge movement, the Wikimedia Foundation and its Board have a great responsibility for setting policy deliberately and with due consideration for the diverse interests of a truly global community. To find out more about the responsibilities and workings of the board you can have a look at the Board manualhttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_board_manual .
As with any search process we will be communicating with a lot of potential candidates to see if we are a good match. The Board’s objective is to use this search to strengthen its competence with regards to board governance, grantmaking, strategy, and expertise with regions where Wikimedia is trying to make rapid strides in the growth of our projects.
Board terms are for a two year period. Compared to other boards the time commitment is very significant. The Board of Trustees meets four times a year, twice in San Francisco and twice in changing locations around the globe. Meetings take two days and travel can add another two days to each meeting. In addition, the Board communicates frequently by email and Internet Relay Chat (IRC) as it navigates policy issues. This can absorb 4-10 hours weekly. Board members also regularly engage with the Community through wiki pages.
We think that the WMF would benefit from a Board member who has experience with organizations that have grown and evolved rapidly, and who understands how boards can evolve to provide appropriate governance support in these changing circumstances. Experience with international, community-driven, consensus organizations is also important as the Foundation would not exist without the community.
We would like to call upon you to help us out with finding the right individual. A complete position description can be found here< http://moppenheim.com/searches/links/Wikimedia%20Foundation%20-%20Board%20Me...
and
additional information can be found at www.moppenheim.com and www.wikimediafoundation.org. Your suggestions and nominations are very welcome. Please feel free to reach out to your networks and distribute this note as you deem appropriate.
Interested individuals should contact Lisa Grossman lisag@moppenheim.com
-- Alice Wiegand Board of Trustees Wikimedia Foundation
Support Free Knowledge: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the WMF has used Oppenheim before for senior level hiring (appointed board members and maybe C-suite level staff? I'm not sure about that last one, but I'm almost certain I recall the WMF has used Oppenheim for executive searches before.) My understanding is that the value in the prospect is simply because Oppenheim simply has a wider reach and base of contacts than the WMF does. If memory serves, they were the ones who found Geoff Brigham, and I believe they also found the replacement for Veronique as CFOO. I'm not really sure why this is suddenly a concern now, and not before, especially given the quality of success they've had in the past.
-Dan
Dan Rosenthal
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 4:21 PM, rupert THURNER rupert.thurner@gmail.comwrote:
my first thought when i read this was "should i use my free time to edit wikipedia so that somebody donates money to wmf, and they use it to pay oppenheim?"
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 9:28 PM, Itzik Edri itzik@infra.co.il wrote:
I don't understand. The board hired and pays to a company to find a board member? Have we tried before via our networks, chapters, and via our advisory board to find such a person (as been done until now?).
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 1:55 AM, Alice Wiegand <awiegand@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi everyone,
as you know, we have one vacant appointed seat on the Board of
Trustees. We
have asked m/Oppenheim Associates to assist us in finding a new board member and and we are reaching out to the community for suggestions and nominations.
The Board functions as a governance body that is ultimately responsible
for
the Wikimedia Foundation and its activities, supervises the disposition
and
solicitation of donations, and evaluates the organization’s Executive Director who leads all Foundation staff. As arguably the most
influential
and respected organization in the free knowledge movement, the Wikimedia Foundation and its Board have a great responsibility for setting policy deliberately and with due consideration for the diverse interests of a truly global community. To find out more about the responsibilities and workings of the board you can have a look at the Board manualhttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_board_manual .
As with any search process we will be communicating with a lot of
potential
candidates to see if we are a good match. The Board’s objective is to
use
this search to strengthen its competence with regards to board
governance,
grantmaking, strategy, and expertise with regions where Wikimedia is
trying
to make rapid strides in the growth of our projects.
Board terms are for a two year period. Compared to other boards the time commitment is very significant. The Board of Trustees meets four times a year, twice in San Francisco and twice in changing locations around the globe. Meetings take two days and travel can add another two days to
each
meeting. In addition, the Board communicates frequently by email and Internet Relay Chat (IRC) as it navigates policy issues. This can absorb 4-10 hours weekly. Board members also regularly engage with the
Community
through wiki pages.
We think that the WMF would benefit from a Board member who has
experience
with organizations that have grown and evolved rapidly, and who
understands
how boards can evolve to provide appropriate governance support in these changing circumstances. Experience with international, community-driven, consensus organizations is also important as the Foundation would not
exist
without the community.
We would like to call upon you to help us out with finding the right individual. A complete position description can be found here<
http://moppenheim.com/searches/links/Wikimedia%20Foundation%20-%20Board%20Me...
and
additional information can be found at www.moppenheim.com and www.wikimediafoundation.org. Your suggestions
and
nominations are very welcome. Please feel free to reach out to your networks and distribute this note as you deem appropriate.
Interested individuals should contact Lisa Grossman
lisag@moppenheim.com
-- Alice Wiegand Board of Trustees Wikimedia Foundation
Support Free Knowledge: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
On 17 February 2013 21:37, Dan Rosenthal swatjester@gmail.com wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the WMF has used Oppenheim before for senior level hiring (appointed board members and maybe C-suite level staff? I'm not sure about that last one, but I'm almost certain I recall the WMF has used Oppenheim for executive searches before.) My understanding is that the value in the prospect is simply because Oppenheim simply has a wider reach and base of contacts than the WMF does. If memory serves, they were the ones who found Geoff Brigham, and I believe they also found the replacement for Veronique as CFOO. I'm not really sure why this is suddenly a concern now, and not before, especially given the quality of success they've had in the past.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson%27s_law_of_triviality - any expense you think you understand is worth objecting to. http://bikeshed.org
- d.
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 6:37 PM, Dan Rosenthal swatjester@gmail.com wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the WMF has used Oppenheim before for senior level hiring (appointed board members and maybe C-suite level staff? I'm not sure about that last one, but I'm almost certain I recall the WMF has used Oppenheim for executive searches before.) My understanding is that the value in the prospect is simply because Oppenheim simply has a wider reach and base of contacts than the WMF does. If memory serves, they were the ones who found Geoff Brigham, and I believe they also found the replacement for Veronique as CFOO. I'm not really sure why this is suddenly a concern now, and not before, especially given the quality of success they've had in the past.
I'd have to agree with Dan here. This is a very visible and important position, this should require professional consulting and proper vetting before someone is appointed. A recruiting service will have a wider reach and better experience with suggesting suitable candidates. I also don't see how simply appointing a chapter or community person would make this any more balanced, since they both have separate elections every year.
Since both of you are involved with Chapters and the WCA effort, you shouldn't be strangers to outside consultation. I think a few of the larger chapters have approached recruiting agencies for filling vacancies, then there was the "SG" position that was also going to be filled through a recruiting agency. I hope also don't need to point out that you have already consulted outside agencies for an organization that doesn't exist yet.
BTW Itzik, you answer some of your own concerns pretty well here[1].
Regards Theo
[1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Chapters_Association/Resolutio...
On Feb 17, 2013 8:29 PM, "Itzik Edri" itzik@infra.co.il wrote:
I don't understand. The board hired and pays to a company to find a board member? Have we tried before via our networks, chapters, and via our advisory board to find such a person (as been done until now?).
The chapters are used to find new foundation board members. That's what the chapter selected board seats are for. The expert board seats are for providing expertise that we are missing after the community and chapters have selected people.
For context (because I needed to look it up).. I believe this vacancy is to replace the seat held by Matt Halprin, which was not renewed at the end of December 2012.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:CurrentBoardChart
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_of_trustees needs an update too if Matt has left the board.
The WMF board portal and noticeboard havent been updated
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WMF_Board_portal
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 17, 2013 8:29 PM, "Itzik Edri" itzik@infra.co.il wrote:
I don't understand. The board hired and pays to a company to find a board member? Have we tried before via our networks, chapters, and via our advisory board to find such a person (as been done until now?).
The chapters are used to find new foundation board members. That's what the chapter selected board seats are for. The expert board seats are for providing expertise that we are missing after the community and chapters have selected people.
Forgive me if the current board has already communicated their plan, and I have missed it. Please advise me if there is a published strategy/plan for filling this seat. I can only find this note saying Kat is leading this initiative, and they hope to interview candidates in person at the chapters conference in the Milan between 18-21 April:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WMF_Board_Governance_Committee/Agenda_2012-2...
Following on from Thomas Dalton's explanation, which I believe is both accurate and appropriate...
As we are approaching the board election to refill the three community elected seats, I think it may make sense to avoid appointing someone to the vacant expert seat until after the community elected seats are appointed. Shortening the list of candidates is a good idea for 18-21 April, but the expert seat should used to maximise the skills and experiences of the board, filling as many gaps in the board as possible. Those gaps can't be fully identified until the community elected seats are filled.
The community elected seats will provide the board with three people that the community believes are important additions. In some cases these seats may be filled by people whose skillsets and experiences were identified by the community as needed on the board, but the nature of the process is that skillset balance is hard to control via these community seats.
The process ensures that many potential candidates do not even enter the board election, the wiki user interface hamstrings the candidates who are not well versed in wiki editing and the wiki discussion format, so these seats typically go to people who have 10,000+ edits and are well respected in our community, which limits the field quite a bit. The community may also vote for someone who has very similar skills and experience to someone already on the board, and it would be a very bold board that invalidates the election result on that basis.
The expert seat is an opportunity to select a person based on the skillset that is found to be missing on the board, and that should happen _after_ the skills and experience of the three community seats are locked in by their appointment.
-- John Vandenberg
Indeed there's nothing to be surprised of, m/Oppenheim has always been used.
Alice Wiegand, 17/02/2013 00:55:
Interested individuals should contact Lisa Grossman lisag@moppenheim.com
I didn't understand this line: did you mean individuals interested in "applying" for the position or in commenting the process? Using a firm like m/Oppenheim is good, but not particularly useful given that we (as Wikimedia movement) obviously (probably?) have no idea of what we really need from a WMF trustee, which is way harder to define than the desiderata for a manager with rather specific tasks. Alice created this useful page to which more people should add their feedback, IMHO: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WMF_Board_Governance_Committee/Agenda_2012-2013/Appointed_seats/What_makes_a_good_Trustee%3F Is it superseded? I think it shouldn't.
For instance, let me say that I don't like the position description at all. :) It describes the board as a highly defensive body, in need of trench warfare experts: * «has the ability to make unpopular decisions when necessary and explain them transparently in the face of criticism»; * «comfortable *receiving* input and criticism from many sources»; * «ability to tolerate a high degree of ambiguity, and to *negotiate* with people having sharply defined opinions»; * « *Patience* with consensus processes» (emphasis mine). There's only a passage about «willingness to learn from and engage with the community» which despite the word "engage" is made into a passive light by «deeply understand their interests and concerns». This is not what we need from a trustee, in my opinion. What we need is trustees able to: 1) *solicit* an ealthy discussion, 2) *involve* more people in the WMF work and priorities and in the discussions about them, 3) make the board stronger and more credible so that its not just a "vox clamantis in deserto" whose resolutions have no effect on reality (see Openness, probably also BLP... with all due respect and without repeating discussions we've had also in person) or are only monstruous wastes of time/resources for Wikimedia (see image filter [1]); 4) to *revolutionize* (if needed) a body so *sclerotic* that even when we have elections discussions are deadly empty and boring,[2] we have 99.5 % abstention,[3] nobody asks or reads questions.[4]
HTH, Nemo
[1] Referendum also had 96 % abstention, https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image_filter_referendum/Results/en https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image_filter_referendum/Email/False_positives [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Board_elections/2011#Candidates_look_like_Bre.C5.BEnev [3] 80+ % abstention according to some estimates, no data available (also telling about transparency); eligible voters multiplied by 2-3 times, voters stayed the same. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2011/Results/en#footer https://meta.wikimedia.org/?diff=2643859 https://meta.wikimedia.org/?diff=2672174 [4] 55 people involved counting also vandals. http://vs.aka-online.de/cgi-bin/wppagehiststat.pl?lang=meta.wikimedia&page=Board+elections%2F2011%2FCandidates%2FQuestions%2F1 http://vs.aka-online.de/cgi-bin/wppagehiststat.pl?lang=meta.wikimedia&page=Board+elections%2F2011%2FCandidates%2FQuestions%2F2
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
Indeed there's nothing to be surprised of, m/Oppenheim has always been used.
Actually, the last time we were looking for a new appointed Trustee we had a NomCom in place and worked with the recruiter Eunice Azzani - though at the time we were already working with m|Oppenheim for staff searches. [ http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/August_24-25,_2009 ]
The trustee we selected in the end, Bishakha, was found through our (advisory board) network; the recruiters primarily help to handle initial contact, interviews, and scheduling, and narrowing down the field of candidates to those who are likely to be good fits.
The person we find this time will also be through our community and advisor networks. Please spread the word to those you would like to see on the Board.
Sam.
Samuel Klein, 18/02/2013 01:31:
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
Indeed there's nothing to be surprised of, m/Oppenheim has always been used.
Actually, the last time we were looking for a new appointed Trustee we had a NomCom in place and worked with the recruiter Eunice Azzani - though at the time we were already working with m|Oppenheim for staff searches. [ http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/August_24-25,_2009 ]
Yes, sorry, I didn't mean specifically for the board appointment. It's been clear for some time that the board didn't want to rely on a open/committee process like NomCom for the final screening of candidates, so I gave that for granted. http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.org.wikimedia.foundation/53592/ The work Gayle described is huge and very important, so someone must do it; but it is supposed not to influence the decision-makers (i.e. the board directly this time), assuming that criteria for initial screening are clear.
Nemo
The trustee we selected in the end, Bishakha, was found through our (advisory board) network; the recruiters primarily help to handle initial contact, interviews, and scheduling, and narrowing down the field of candidates to those who are likely to be good fits.
The person we find this time will also be through our community and advisor networks. Please spread the word to those you would like to see on the Board.
Le 2013-02-18 00:09, Federico Leva (Nemo) a écrit :
There's only a passage about «willingness to learn from and engage with the community» which despite the word "engage" is made into a passive light by «deeply understand their interests and concerns». This is not what we need from a trustee, in my opinion. What we need is trustees able to:
- *solicit* an ealthy discussion,
- *involve* more people in the WMF work and priorities and in the
discussions about them, 3) make the board stronger and more credible so that its not just a "vox clamantis in deserto" whose resolutions have no effect on reality (see Openness, probably also BLP... with all due respect and without repeating discussions we've had also in person) or are only monstruous wastes of time/resources for Wikimedia (see image filter [1]);
On the one hand, I find this comments relevant, as I have no idea what trustees are doing/supposed to do, not that information is really hidden, but not brang forward. On the other hand, not having bureaucracy clutering the wikimedia projects end user experience seems a good point.
- to *revolutionize* (if needed) a body so *sclerotic* that even
when we have elections discussions are deadly empty and boring,[2] we have 99.5 % abstention,[3] nobody asks or reads questions.[4]
HTH, Nemo
I would like to promote the idea that this person should be a supporter of counties/language that is less fortunate then most of us, ie where free expression of speech is in threat and where we now see an unfortunate trend to limit the free Internet access.
I have spoken with colleagues from Russia and Ukraine and am utterly impressed by their perseverance and idealistic drive in a real tough environment. I also see the success of the Arabic wp as one of the major achievement the last coupe of years. I have no idea what it looks like in Uzbek Wikipedia or Aszerbadjan wikipedia and wonder what is just now happening in the Georgians one who have had success.
With a Board member who knows of these realties from inside (being an experienced wikipedian?) I could hope that we as a Movement could act more provocative to promote Free Knowledge for All even where it now seems there are powers wanting to sabotage this our vision
Anders
Alice Wiegand skrev 2013-02-17 00:55:
Hi everyone,
as you know, we have one vacant appointed seat on the Board of Trustees. We have asked m/Oppenheim Associates to assist us in finding a new board member and and we are reaching out to the community for suggestions and nominations.
The Board functions as a governance body that is ultimately responsible for the Wikimedia Foundation and its activities, supervises the disposition and solicitation of donations, and evaluates the organization’s Executive Director who leads all Foundation staff. As arguably the most influential and respected organization in the free knowledge movement, the Wikimedia Foundation and its Board have a great responsibility for setting policy deliberately and with due consideration for the diverse interests of a truly global community. To find out more about the responsibilities and workings of the board you can have a look at the Board manualhttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_board_manual .
As with any search process we will be communicating with a lot of potential candidates to see if we are a good match. The Board’s objective is to use this search to strengthen its competence with regards to board governance, grantmaking, strategy, and expertise with regions where Wikimedia is trying to make rapid strides in the growth of our projects.
Board terms are for a two year period. Compared to other boards the time commitment is very significant. The Board of Trustees meets four times a year, twice in San Francisco and twice in changing locations around the globe. Meetings take two days and travel can add another two days to each meeting. In addition, the Board communicates frequently by email and Internet Relay Chat (IRC) as it navigates policy issues. This can absorb 4-10 hours weekly. Board members also regularly engage with the Community through wiki pages.
We think that the WMF would benefit from a Board member who has experience with organizations that have grown and evolved rapidly, and who understands how boards can evolve to provide appropriate governance support in these changing circumstances. Experience with international, community-driven, consensus organizations is also important as the Foundation would not exist without the community.
We would like to call upon you to help us out with finding the right individual. A complete position description can be found herehttp://moppenheim.com/searches/links/Wikimedia%20Foundation%20-%20Board%20Member%20position%20description%20-%20final.pdfand additional information can be found at www.moppenheim.com and www.wikimediafoundation.org. Your suggestions and nominations are very welcome. Please feel free to reach out to your networks and distribute this note as you deem appropriate.
Interested individuals should contact Lisa Grossman lisag@moppenheim.com
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org