On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 1:21 AM, Pine W wrote:
> If the research results about qualities of effective managers have been
> generally consistent for 30 years, then I wonder why so many managers in so
> many organizations today have mediocre skills in those areas.
>
I'd hazard a guess that it's be
If the research results about qualities of effective managers have been
generally consistent for 30 years, then I wonder why so many managers in so
many organizations today have mediocre skills in those areas.
I also wonder, in WMF's case, what can be done to ensure that the next ED
is robustly sk
I agree with Craig on the most reasonable interpretation of the limited
commentary from the Board in recent weeks. Indeed, it would be quite
normal, even expected, to include a mutual non-disparagement clause in any
separation agreement, which by its very nature is confidential.
Risker/Anne
On
Well, the traits mentioned in the BI article are so commonplace in
management literature (I can remember studying basically that same list
almost 30 years ago) that they're kind of like mom and apple pie. There's
a bit less emphasis on command and control, and a bit more human interest
emphasis, b
To be honest, I consider it unlikely that Patricio or anyone else is going
to discuss HR matters at length in public, even when they concern Lila, and
especially when they could potentially be interpreted as negative towards a
particular identifiable individual. For legal reasons, it might be the
On the topic of researching what makes someone a successful CEO (as opposed
to a manager who may or may not be a CEO), it's interesting that the
resources that I've found on the Internet tend to describe current trends
in management fads (which aren't particularly helpful in our situation,
IMO) and
+1. I would also very much appreciate Patricio explaining whether the
"full confidence of the board" actually meant the full confidence:
IOW, that a vote was taken and everyone unanimously agreed that Lila's
continuation was the best thing.
I note that Patricio, despite being Chairman of the board
On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 10:11 PM, jytdog wrote:
> How do we work out what actually happened, and how do we resolve the
> contradictions?
>
Several people have asked Jimmy to release his 30 December 2015 email to
James, in which he apparently explains in part why James was removed.
Jimmy said on
Thanks for the kind replies.
The thing I really want to surface here, is the harder thing.
It seems to me that what has gone on around James Heilman's dismissal, has
some things to do with basic board processes being poor, and poorly
executed, for sure, but also.. and this is the hardest part of
> Food for thought:
>
> http://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-best-managers-exhibit-these-7-behaviors-2016-1
I think that is great food for thought for managers of teams,
definitely.
I'm not sure it applies to managers of managers or executives; only
because those positions weren't a part of
Food for thought:
http://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-best-managers-exhibit-these-7-behaviors-2016-1
Looking forward to further discussions in the weeks and months ahead,
Pine
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org
Congrats! Excited to learn more about your activities.
Cheers,
Alex
On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 4:15 PM, Sydney Poore wrote:
> Congratulations!! Look forward to hearing more about your projects.
>
> Warm regards,
> Sydney
> On Mar 6, 2016 4:57 PM, "Carlos M. Colina" wrote:
>
> > Dear all,
> >
> >
Congratulations!! Look forward to hearing more about your projects.
Warm regards,
Sydney
On Mar 6, 2016 4:57 PM, "Carlos M. Colina" wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> On behalf of the Afffiliations Committee, I am glad to announce the
> recognition of a new Wikimedia User Group in the United States: Wikimed
Fantastic! Great to see communities spreading over the mid-US. Can't wait
to see a MO group!
Richard Symonds
Wikimedia UK
0207 065 0992
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and
Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered
Office 4th Floo
Dear all,
On behalf of the Afffiliations Committee, I am glad to announce the
recognition of a new Wikimedia User Group in the United States:
Wikimedians of Colorado User Group [1]
Among their objectives are organizing meetups of wikimedians in
Colorado, plus organizing events to promote our
On 26 February 2016 at 16:54, Maggie Dennis wrote:
> That said, the role Katy had previously filled will be an open new hire,
> with opportunities for all to apply. It'll just take a little bit of time
> to put the hiring packet together.
>
Following up on Maggie's comment, applications for the
Hello!
The pages were marked for translation but no notification was sent out
asking for help with them. A mass message to the translators via Meta and
an email to the translators mailing list might help to get extra help with
the translations.
Regards,
Luis
El 06/03/2016 03:56, "John Mark Vanden
The voters do not have to know English. The board members of a national
organisation do things for which they might or might not need knowledge of
foreign languages. As antanana pointed out, five of seven board members of
Wikimedia Ukraine know English. The situation is similar in other chapters.
O
On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 3:37 PM, Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote:
> On 2016-03-06 09:26, Gnangarra wrote:
>>
>> You would think though that someone who wanted to represent all of the
>> affiliates would endeavor to have their statement translated into as many
>> languages as possible to ensure their mess
Agree with John here
we are talking about two distinct needs one is the candidates being able to
communicate within the boards hence the need for english,
the second which is equally important is the need for Affiliates to be able
to engage their community in the decision process and its here whe
The affiliates should be engaging their members and their broader
ccommunit/stakeholders in this process, and to do that the members should
have translated material to evaluate.
--
John
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia
Is it a written rule that one needs to know English to participate in
Wikimedia's governance?
If it isn't, then the word "need" must not be used about it. If it is, it
must be changed (and that would be a topic for a different thread).
English is an important practicality, but demanding it goes a
On 2016-03-06 09:26, Gnangarra wrote:
You would think though that someone who wanted to represent all of the
affiliates would endeavor to have their statement translated into as
many
languages as possible to ensure their message got heard by the most
amount
of people, even if they did it themse
You would think though that someone who wanted to represent all of the
affiliates would endeavor to have their statement translated into as many
languages as possible to ensure their message got heard by the most amount
of people, even if they did it themselves using one of the many translation
pro
Hoi,
You need at least to be able to understand it in the written format. To be
blunt in the final analysis it is officials who elect these seats.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 6 March 2016 at 09:20, Peter Southwood
wrote:
> Hi Gerard,
> You don’t have to be able to communicate in English to vote for
Hi Gerard,
You don’t have to be able to communicate in English to vote for the
representative who needs to communicate in English
Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Gerard Meijssen
Sent: Sunday, 06 March 2016 9
26 matches
Mail list logo