>
> I think WMUK's tech needs are substantially more than 0.2 FTE.
>
 I disagree; indeed no one has actually properly enumerated, in one place,
all of the tech needs - so how we can be sure I don't know (hint: this is
what I've been trying to prompt from the get go)

I don't know how much experience in technical management you have; but I
have 4 years working as an independent contractor doing exactly that, and
so far I've not seen anything that dramatically overreaches what it
achievable in one day a week.

And even if it does at least we will have a clearer idea of the new
requirements - and can simply order projects by urgency. Sure, something
might get left undone, but the alternative option at the moment appears to
be leaving everything undone :)

If you only have someone for one day a week, you don't need them to have a
> wide array of skills since they won't have time to do a wide variety of
> things.
>
In practice, and this is from experience, this is not true.

Look the bottom line here is that we've had a big technical budget to hire
a developer - that didn't work out. The new proposal on the 2013 ideas talk
is ambitious and I suspect not going to get approved (and if it does will
be very hard to pull off).

Rather than sit on our hands for another year I am proposing a lightweight
solution to meet some of our short term needs. If it only lasts a year and
we find we need more, then it will be easier to justify in the budget...

I am essentially offering free consultancy here; these are the sorts of
questions I ask my clients - to enumerate their tech needs and develop work
schedules and hiring strategies. If that doesn't appeal to you, or the
ideas seem incompatible, then that's fine :) I feel obliged to do this
because I moaned about the last attempt. But at least lend arguments to
your assertions (even if it's simply "I've been a tech manager for 20
years" or something).

Tom

On 22 August 2012 19:04, Thomas Dalton <[email protected]> wrote:

> I think WMUK's tech needs are substantially more than 0.2 FTE. If you only
> have someone for one day a week, you don't need them to have a wide array
> of skills since they won't have time to do a wide variety of things.
> On Aug 22, 2012 3:40 PM, "Thomas Morton" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Afternoon all,
>>
>> I've had some free time today so looked into the technical gap Wikimedia
>> UK is facing (this is somewhat tied into the 2013 activity plan/budget). My
>> understanding is that the developer job failed to recruit a suitable
>> candidate<http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/2013_Activity_Plan/Ideas#Build_a_tech_team>.
>> I've not seen any feedback on that, but at the time I did criticise the
>> process and suggested this might happen (not intending to gloat, just
>> pointing this out).
>>
>> One of the major problems, I think, was we wanted a multi-skilled
>> individual with management experience... at a rate around £10,000 less than
>> the average for London (and that is conservative).
>>
>> As I was such a staunch critic :) it seems only fair that I make the
>> effort to submit a proposal I think would work out for us next year. To
>> wit; I am proposing we fill the technology gap short term by contracting an
>> individual one day per week. This will be a little more expensive than
>> one-fifth of the full-time rate proposed before - but because it is
>> contracted we are more likely to find someone able to address the varied
>> requirements.
>>
>> My estimate for contractor cost + a technical budget (for servers,
>> travel, etc.) is about £17,000 - just over half of this years budget. This
>> based on my experience of doing similar work.
>>
>> The proposal is drafted here:
>> http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:ErrantX/2013_Developer_role
>>
>> If you have a moment to comment on it that would be great! Ideally the
>> community needs to identify *exactly* what development needs it has -
>> and establish some fixed goals for hiring. If we can do this I am confident
>> we could fill this gap.
>>
>> And if it seems ridiculous say so :) I am simply trying to present a
>> possible option.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Tom
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia UK mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
>> WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
>>
>>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

Reply via email to