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.
Harry
________________________________
From: Thomas Morton <morton.tho...@googlemail.com>
To: UK Wikimedia mailing list <wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Monday, 18 June 2012, 14:51
Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Recruiting for the Developer
> there are even bigger images
correction: there are even bigger issues
(I said I was in a rush)
Tom
On 18 June 2012 14:49, Thomas Morton <morton.tho...@googlemail.com> wrote:
Looking at the job description I have some concerns that it has been written
without the input of someone experienced in hiring individuals for technical or
pseudo-technical roles - especially in the current economic climate.
>
>
>You seem to be looking for someone extremely versatile, experienced
>and independent... on a very entry level salary packet.
>
>
>I was under the impression, from previous discussions, that the developer
>position was to be contractor-style - or at least remote working in the region
>~10 hours a week.
>
>
>As a developer, from the description page, I see the following roles:
>
>
>* Developer
>* Sysadmin
>* Project manager
>* Advocate
>
>
>Four very distinct roles.
>
>
>To pick on one specific issue; expecting this person to work on Mediwiki core,
>or an extension, is going to be problematic. That's a whole position on its
>own and you are going to find that ongoing "other work" will make project work
>of that sort untenable.
>
>
>(speaking as someone who is in much this position at the moment; my project
>work is on hold pretty much all the time whilst clearing up management issues).
>
>
>I worry that there is not a lot of work described in this job; or at least
>the responsibilities are bitty and ill-defined. You're risking having someone
>who will sit for long portions of the day drumming their fingers on the
>desk. (speaking as someone who was hired to do this once, and quit after 3
>months due to boredom). It would be good to define (internally, on the WMUK
>wiki) the roles this developer will have to fulfill and, from a
>technical perspective, what we'd like to achieve in, say, the next year.
>
>
>The salary is most concerning though; you're looking for experience and
>versatility - two major technical skills (sysadmin and developer) plus
>management experience/skill - at a basic entry level rate. I think you will
>struggle to find competent applicants.
>
>
>I'd fit, fairly well, this job description (and I think am pretty good at it)
>- and any London based job under £35K would struggle to tempt me. Under £30K
>is not even worth considering. (n.b. I'm not saying this because I'd plan to
>apply if you raised the salary :)). You;fe
>
>
>What I recommend is hiring a more general community liaison (we need this
>anyway IMO), with experience in technical projects. They can do most of the PM
>style work. Then contract out specific projects (yes, including MW extension
>writing) as and when needed. Keep a contractor on retainer for sysadmin and
>internal dev work (~10 hours a week etc.).
>
>
>Particularly as you have numerous skilled dev/sysadmin contractors within the
>community who will likely offer discounted rates. Building on the WMF model;
>with a competent project manager most of the dev/sysadmin work could be
>community driven. I've already offered to pitch in, but there is no public
>project to achieve this that I know of.
>
>
>If we have a budget of £30K to go into development this is not enough to hire
>a full time developer/sysadmin/manager. It's enough to contract the work and
>to begin to build a volunteer centric development department.
>
>
>Mike wrote an excellent starter to this
>here: http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/2012_Developer_budget The current job
>description seems to be the opposite of many of those (good) proposals
>(although I know Mike also wrote the job description). If we take the list of
>upcoming requirements from that page there are even bigger images; it talks
>about a robust backup strategy - which is quite a specific set of experience.
>Even worse is the security review stuff - no dev/sysadmin you hire for £25K
>will be capable of a robust security review.
>
>
>As always; just my 2p :)
>
>
>Tom
>
>
>(sorry to be over-critical, but I am in a rush today so this is first draft
>sent :))
>
>
>On 18 June 2012 13:41, Jon Davies <jon.dav...@wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:
>
>We will shortly be advertising for our developer post. We will be spreading
>the word far and wide, especially within the community, but all suggestions
>gratefully received.
>>So far (outside leads:
>>Mozilla
>>Tech hub
>>Civi-CRM
>>Google academy
>>
>>Thanks
>>
>>Jon
>>
>>
>>--
>>Jon Davies - Chief Executive Wikimedia UK. Mobile (0044) 7803 505 169
>>tweet @jonatreesdavies
>>
>>Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and
>>Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513
>>Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London
>>EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom.
>>Telephone (0044) 207 065 0990.
>>Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate
>>Wikipedia, amongst other projects). It is an independent non-profit
>>organization with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its
>>contents.
>>
>>Visit http://www.wikimedia.org.uk/ and @wikimediauk
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Wikimedia UK mailing list
>>wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
>>http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
>>WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
>>
>>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
