On 18 June 2012 15:17, HJ Mitchell <hjmitchell@ymail.com> wrote:
> I may be wrong, but I suspect the idea is to aim high, hoping but not
> expecting that somebody will apply who meets all the criteria, and failing
> that, that we'll get somebody who meets most of the criteria and could pick
> up or be trained in the the skills they need.

I don't think you're wrong about that. The "debate so far" has mostly
been in terms of "it would be nice if" or "we are in the business of
getting into that business" or other such aspirational stuff.

I'm actually going on my experience of being recruited to do WMUK's
admin, six months after it should have been clear that WMUK needed at
least a half-time person, at 12 hours a week. Discussions I had after
the interview turned out to be utterly fruitless. There were reasons
for that, but in any case I completely failed to professionalise WMUK
as the first hire, which should have been on the job description.

No amount of corporate jargon and/or penny-pinching can cover up not
getting the right person for the job because the position is a vaguish
proposition. So I think Tom has a point.