> > On 3/9/16 2:29 PM, MZMcBride wrote: > > The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees oversees the foundation and > > appoints its Executive Director. It seems very worrying that this body > has > > now admitted that it's so out-of-touch with the workings of the > > organization that it ostensibly manages that it cannot fulfill one of its > > most basic duties: appointing an interim Executive Director.
This seems to be partly a problem of communicating what's happening. The board is accountable for the result, and has final say. Replacing an ED is indeed the most important decision a board makes. Almost always after close consultation with senior staff. In this case, the board and senior team have discussed succession planning since before Sue decided to leave; I'm sure that hasn't changed in the past months during this turmoil. My reading is that the board signalled publicly, to all staff, that in addition to those discussions (and the various plans or options known to already be on the table), it was explicitly going to give priority to the preference of senior staff. There has been a lot of gossip recently about whether or not the board is listening to whom, and how decisions are being made – so while this approach wasn't maximally smooth, it was very clear. And communicating this on wikimedia-l was a transparent update with the community. We should have had a larger set of contingencies lined up, and a more explicit pipeline for new exec talent (either external or internal), while I was on the board. But this particular update seems sane and considerate. I would be happy to discuss past mistakes we can learn from, in a different thread. Sam _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>