On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 4:46 PM Dariusz Jemielniak <dar...@alk.edu.pl> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 5:36 PM, James Salsman <jsals...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Can we at least get confirmation that her performance working at the > > Foundation will be appropriately weighted in her favor if we do have > > another lengthy, expensive, third-party search? > > > > I believe it is always only reasonable to account for someone's intimate > understanding of organizational culture, as well as to recognize one's good > performance hands on. > > However, I think that the process should be wide and open - whoever becomes > the permanent ED, should really be the best choice, not just because of the > incumbent advantage. The solid and rigorous recruitment process will add > credibility and legitimacy to whoever this person eventually is. > I would love to see a solid and rigorous hiring process that lends credibility to the eventual selection. Has the board done an analysis of the previous hiring process to help ensure that the new process will be solid and rigorous? Luis [Disclaimer for those who missed it last time I sent email here: I did not sign a termination or contracting agreement with the organization, so I am not a contractor with the organization. I do still speak to many friends within the org, but have not discussed this email with them.] _______________________________________________ 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-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
