[Owasp-board] MOTION: Bring in Scion Executive Search to Handle ED Search Process

Josh Sokol josh.sokol at owasp.org
Wed Jun 28 21:23:14 UTC 2017


Thank you all for your votes.  Tobias, feel free to submit yours for the
record whenever you get around to this thread, but with 4 votes in favor
the motion passes.  Matt Tesauro, can you please make sure that the Board
voting record is updated with this information:

*MOTION: The Board will allocate up to $45k to hire Scion Executive Search
to conduct the search, evaluation, and hiring process for the new OWASP
Executive Director.*

Josh - Yes
Michael - Yes
Tom - Yes
Matt - Yes
Andrew - No
Martin (Shadow Vote?) - No
Tobias -

I will work to get the proper paperwork completed and initial deposit made
to get Scion moving on the search.  Thank you.

~josh

On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 10:00 PM, Matt Konda <matt.konda at owasp.org> wrote:

> I vote yes to using Scion.  I would suggest the higher fee for the longer
> guarantee. (33% for 12 months)  I would also suggest that we see if Scion
> is willing to negotiate on payment timelines.
>
> All that being said, I would further suggest that we write in an exclusion
> and exception for any candidates that are already contacting us or that
> Virtual provides before July 1.  If needed, we should expedite review for
> those candidates to try to clear the air for Scion to move forward in July.
>
> I think we have struggled with this long enough and would best serve the
> community and staff by leveraging 3rd party help to find a strong
> independently verified ED.  I find the proposal and track record compelling.
>
> I also want to go on record in appreciation of the work Virtual is doing
> and will continue doing to support OWASP both from a finance and operations
> perspective.  In considering an alternative it is not a reflection on the
> Virtual team's efforts or commitments but an effort to diversify our
> support network and close a gap that has been present too long.
>
> Thank you, Josh, for your efforts here.
>
> Matt
>
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 5:32 PM, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org> wrote:
>
>> *MOTION: The Board will allocate up to $45k to hire Scion Executive
>> Search to conduct the search, evaluation, and hiring process for the new
>> OWASP Executive Director.*
>>
>> Josh - Yes
>> Michael - Yes
>> Tom - Yes
>> Andrew - No
>> Martin (Shadow Vote?) - No
>> Tobias -
>> Matt -
>>
>> Just to be clear here, I do not have time to "exhaust other options" as
>> Andrew and Martin have alluded to being their preference.  Yes, there are
>> certainly other companies that can conduct the search for us.  Perhaps even
>> some that can do it for cheaper, albeit without the focus and expertise in
>> non-profit executive searches that Scion has.  That said, it is blaringly
>> clear that nobody, including our Board and staff, has the time to invest in
>> vetting out all of our options.  With the departure of Kate and Alison,
>> unfortunately, we are running about as thin as we can possibly afford to be
>> here.  We have two outstanding votes, but I can tell you that if the Board
>> votes no on this, then someone else will need to take point from here as I
>> don't have the time to do as Andrew and Martin have indicated they would
>> like to see.  We need to make traction on this and I don't see it happening
>> to the degree that we need without some form out third-party assistance.
>> It is a lot of money, but this is the single most important hiring decision
>> that the Board has, and with one failed recruitment effort under our belts,
>> it is clear that we need to do something different.
>>
>> ~josh
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 4:16 PM, <martin.knobloch at owasp.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Michael,
>>>
>>> In my understanding,  the vote is about the motion to allocate 45k to
>>> hire Scion Executive.
>>>
>>> On that, my vote is no.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> -martin
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, June 27, 2017, Michael Coates wrote:
>>> > Martin,
>>> >
>>> > From your comments I want to double check there's clarity on this
>>> topic.
>>> > The vote is to have an outsourced firm take us down the process to
>>> > interview and select an ED from a group of qualified applicants (and
>>> anyone
>>> > who submits candidancy)
>>> >
>>> > To your comment:
>>> > "- the position of ED is important for OWASP and better to right
>>> person for
>>> > the job, rather than hurry to get this done quickly "
>>> >
>>> > The "hurry" is only to select our vendor who will be coordinating the
>>> > candidate process and reaching out to potential candidates. Right now
>>> we
>>> > are in a holding pattern and making no progress.
>>> > My question for you is, if this is not the direction you like, what
>>> > approach do you want to take?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Thanks
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Michael Coates | @_mwc <https://twitter.com/intent/us
>>> er?screen_name=_mwc>
>>> > OWASP Global Board
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Martin Knobloch <
>>> martin.knobloch at owasp.org
>>> > > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Hi Josh, et all,
>>> > >
>>> > > I vote no.
>>> > >
>>> > > Before spending 45K, we should have a better look into competitive
>>> > > options.
>>> > > Next, I would like to see to and temporary ED to be hired for the
>>> time
>>> > > being:
>>> > > - we need an ED, but want to have a good process to find the right
>>> > > candidate
>>> > > - the position of ED is important for OWASP and better to right
>>> person for
>>> > > the job, rather than hurry to get this done quickly
>>> > >
>>> > > Regards,
>>> > > -martin
>>> > >
>>> > > P.S.: Required board member documents have been signed and returned,
>>> full
>>> > > vote?!
>>> > >
>>> > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 10:08 PM, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > >> OWASP Board,
>>> > >>
>>> > >> There's been some discussion in the other thread regarding the
>>> proposal
>>> > >> from Scion.  I am including the proposal as it contains answers to
>>> many of
>>> > >> the questions that have been asked.  The only argument that I've
>>> really
>>> > >> heard against this is monetary and I truly feel like we shouldn't
>>> let that
>>> > >> stand in the way of hiring the best ED for the Foundation.  Given no
>>> > >> internal expertise in these matters, it is my recommendation that
>>> the Board
>>> > >> move forward with the proposal from Scion.  To that end, I have a
>>> question
>>> > >> and a formal motion.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Question: Would we like a six-month or twelve-month placement
>>> guarantee
>>> > >> on the hire?  The difference is an additional 3% of the annual
>>> salary.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> *MOTION: The Board will allocate up to $45k to hire Scion Executive
>>> > >> Search to conduct the search, evaluation, and hiring process for
>>> the new
>>> > >> OWASP Executive Director.*
>>> > >>
>>> > >> This is based on the high-range salary estimate of $135k and 33%
>>> number
>>> > >> for the 12-month placement.  This would be billed 1/3rd upon the
>>> signing of
>>> > >> the contract, 1/3rd 60 days later, and 1/3rd on the new ED's start
>>> date.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> For the record, our ED recruitment process is stalled until we
>>> either
>>> > >> approve or reject this motion.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> ~josh
>>> > >>
>>> > >> ​
>>> > >>  Scion Executive Search Proposal - Open Web Appl...
>>> > >> <https://drive.google.com/a/owasp.org/file/d/0Bw1W2qFZ-xDGeW
>>> l6WUNIdlk3b3hSM0lvUmxKZjlBREFTZnlV/view?usp=drive_web>
>>> > >> ​
>>> > >>
>>> > >> _______________________________________________
>>> > >> Owasp-board mailing list
>>> > >> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
>>> > >> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> > >
>>> > > _______________________________________________
>>> > > Owasp-board mailing list
>>> > > Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
>>> > > https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Owasp-board mailing list
>> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-board/attachments/20170628/224f13c6/attachment.html>


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list