[Owasp-leaders] OWASP's New Executive Director - process?

Tobias tobias.gondrom at owasp.org
Sat Apr 13 22:47:16 UTC 2013


Thank you for the information and clarification. I see.
Best regards, Tobias

Ps.: btw. it seems you might have misread my email: the time from
announcement of the role to filling it was 90 hours, not 90 days. ;-)



On 13/04/13 23:39, Jim Manico wrote:
> There was no selection process. As stated below, the board met in
> private (because this was a staffing matter). After several rounds of
> discussion by the board, and after an official unanimous vote, we
> voted to promote Sarah Baso to Executive Director.
>
> This transpired over several weeks, not 90 days.
> --
> Jim Manico
> @Manicode
> (808) 652-3805
>
> On Apr 13, 2013, at 6:30 PM, Tobias <tobias.gondrom at owasp.org> wrote:
>
>> Jim,
>>
>> hm, thanks for the answer to my question #2.
>> I read your answer as: at the current moment a replacement hire for
>> Sarah's previous role is not planned.
>>
>> And not sure whether your first part of your email is intended to be an
>> answer to my first question of "Would you mind to share some information
>> about the process you used for this?"
>>
>> Actually, although I don't like "private meetings" too much, I am less
>> concerned about them as such, as long as the process itself is clear and
>> is being communicated openly and allows community input (e.g. the JD and
>> required qualifications and responsibilities and on the process, not the
>> individual candidates). In this case I was quite surprised by how fast
>> we moved from creation of the ED role to announcement of filling it. You
>> did this in just 90 hours. Which is probably the fastest I have ever
>> seen and makes me quite curious to find out what process you used. I
>> have hired a number of people in the past and so far this is the fastest
>> process I have ever seen, which raises a few simple questions:
>> - at that speed, was there some kind of selection process already before
>> the announcement of the new role and what was that?
>> - did you have a JD (job description) with the outlined needed
>> qualifications, experience, skills? (I saw the role description with the
>> responsibilities of the role, but that doc didn't have any information
>> on what person you are looking for), did you have a certain salary range
>> in mind? etc.
>> - How many candidates did you consider? (and were there any applications
>> from the community in these 90hours?)
>> - And depending on the number of applications you had, how did you
>> determine the match and for what reason did you choose to not ask for
>> further applications from the community?
>> - How many interviews did you conduct, how many board members were
>> involved in the interview process?
>>
>> I find your last sentence about the distribution of power interesting.
>> And that seizing of new power sounds an alarm for you. Maybe a thought:
>> taking a step back it seems what just happened is that in fact we did
>> concentrate power from a group of elected people (the board) to one
>> individual (the ED), and note: our other staff's power has probably also
>> been reduced in relationship to the ED. I am not debating whether this
>> is right or wrong in this case (as one might argue that the board needs
>> to choose to delegate this power due to time constraints and/or lack of
>> own personal capability). But using your own concept, as we concentrated
>> power in one individual role, we should be very careful and as open as
>> possible (of course within the legal boundaries) with the process of
>> doing so?
>>
>> So I would be really interested to learn a little bit about the process
>> OWASP used in the selection.
>>
>> Best wishes, Tobias
>>
>>
>> Ps.: and again: Let me be clear I am making no statement about the
>> decision itself or Sarah's qualification for this role.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 13/04/13 22:26, Jim Manico wrote:
>>> Tobias,
>>>
>>> We were not seeking candidates for this role. We (unanimously)
>>> promoted Sarah to Executive Director. Because these board conversation
>>> were about employee matters, we had those conversations in private.
>>> It's the •only• private board discussion that I have seen in 2013
>>> during my term. It's the primary role of the board to hire staff
>>>
>>> As Executive Director, it's now Sarahs job to rearrange the staff as
>>> she sees fit or hire someone new (if the budget allows).
>>>
>>> So the answer is, we shall see!
>>>
>>> Last note, I am very wary regarding "private board discussions". If
>>> the board has private discussions that lead to seizing of new power,
>>> that's a huge alarm. But the opposite happened here. We removed
>>> operational leadership from the board and passed it to Sarah and the
>>> staff. It's the boards job to keep watch over this, but I'm personally
>>> really thrilled about this change in OWASP's organizational structure.
>>>
>>> Aloha,
>>> --
>>> Jim Manico
>>> @Manicode
>>> (808) 652-3805
>>>
>>> On Apr 13, 2013, at 5:17 PM, Tobias <tobias.gondrom at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> As OWASP created the new ED position and Sarah got promoted into this. Do we now intend to hire a new person to take over Sarah's previous role?



More information about the OWASP-Leaders mailing list