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

Josh Sokol josh.sokol at owasp.org
Thu Jun 29 19:26:51 UTC 2017


Matt,

Their proposal says:

Our firm’s fee will be billed in three installments of one-thirds. The
> first (1) will be billed upon successful execution of this agreement, the
> second (2) will be billed 60 days later, and the third (3) will be billed
> on the executive’s start date.


If that is not considered acceptable, can you please be more specific about
the payment schedule that you are looking to accomplish here?  Thanks.

~josh

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Matt Konda <matt.konda at owasp.org> wrote:

> Josh,
>
> Sorry I wasn't clear.
>
> Sometimes recruiters are flexible about payment schedules.  It would just
> mean that we pay them over more months less $ per month.
>
> The benefit is just a flatter cashflow.  Not something I would fight for,
> but no reason not to ask.
>
> Matt
>
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 7:24 AM, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org> wrote:
>
>> I see three suggestions provided by Matt:
>>
>> 1) Go with the higher fee for the longer guarantee. (33% for 12 months)
>> 2) See if Scion is willing to negotiate on payment timelines.
>> 3) We write in an exclusion and exception for any candidates that are
>> already contacting us or that Virtual provides before July 1.
>>
>> 1 and 3 are fairly straightforward and I can ask for them.  2 is vague.
>> Can you please provide more detail on this suggestion so that I can
>> adequately relay it to Scion?  Thank you.
>>
>> ~josh
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 5:55 PM, Tom Brennan <tomb at owasp.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Matts suggested contract exclusions are a good idea.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 5:23 PM Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 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
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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/20170629/1858b5c7/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list