Subject: [Diversity] Selecting a person from a pool of candidates that are above the bar (was: Defining the Diversity problems)

From: SM <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 19:15:49 -0700

At 13:45 17-04-2013, Thomas Narten wrote:
>One concrete change we could make that might make a difference is to
>change the mantra of "selecting the best person for the job" to
>"selecting a person from a pool of candidates that are above the bar".
>
>This is an important distinction. If we always select the "best"
>person, that favors those that have been in the community for a long
>time. Experience begets more experience. That is the essence of the
>good ol' boys network.
>
>What we really want, is to select people that will do an adequate
>job. To me, that doesn't always mean "best". What it really means is
>that they don't have any glaring disqualifications.
>
>I.e., you can't expect folk to be "ideal" in all categories. But they
>MUST not be below a threshold in key categories. Like judgement, BS
>detection, ability to work with people, etc.

First of all, thanks for suggesting a concrete change.

Recently someone congratulated a person on his appointment for a 
position.  It wasn't a surprise for a lot of people.  The essence 
(see above) has been mentioned previously in 
draft-klensin-nomcom-incumbents-first.

The above might even be the essence of the problem.  I would describe 
the problem as not being about diversity; it is more about having the 
expertise and experience that the IETF requires to be functional.  I 
was thinking about how much time it takes to build someone for a 
position; I am not thinking about mentoring here.  My guess is that 
it would take years.

Information about the key categories mentioned above could be gleaned 
through publicly accessible material.  Currently, such information is 
not always available.

At 13:55 17-04-2013, Carsten Bormann wrote:
>*) We just had this fierce debate about introducing a quota system 
>for supervisory boards in Germany.  I just don't want to go there.

I don't think that was what Thomas Narten was suggesting.

At 14:07 17-04-2013, Jari Arkko wrote:
>of the criteria that often got emphasised was "training new 
>leadership". You do not always pick the person with most experience. 
>You try to optimise the availability of talent on longer term. An 
>(experienced person, new person with potential) pair was often

Yes.

In my opinion the above and what Thomas Narten was suggesting can be 
viewed as two different things or it can be another of the key categories.

Regards,
-sm

---

From: Abdussalam Baryun <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2013 07:34:46 +0200

>>"selecting a person from a pool of candidates that are above the bar".
It depends on how we define the *best*. Also depends if we are the
best in selecting.
Does IETF select the best person for its jobs (not sure which job ment
above!)? Does IETF monitor/report performance of jobs or it leaves it
to the best-community to do the hard job? Is diversity in the equation
of selecting persons into jobs?

>>time. Experience begets more experience. That is the essence of the

I will say IETF selects the best known to be best person from a pool
of candidates, ignoring diversity. Is diversity in the equation?

>>that they don't have any glaring disqualifications.

I agree, but I will add that we need to change people in jobs, or to
make selected person not fixed to one job.

> expertise and experience that the IETF requires to be functional.

All are important selecting; experties, skills, diversity, and
networking. Are these key factors the only we should consider?

>  I

The time depends on the person first, and then on the organisation. Do
we have the best system for that building/processing?

> through publicly accessible material.  Currently, such information is

I agree, if the community has no information then how can it select a
person, or even select a job for it? In IETF we need more diversity in
*jobs* then in *persons* doing thoes diverse jobs.
>>(experienced person, new person with potential) pair was often

training leadership is important, but the best way is doing that while
they are in the leader job, and that that leader-person is able to
self-build new skills from the best-community.

> viewed as two different things or it can be another of the key categories.

Not understood, could you put the difference/keys in points. I don't
see the suggestions clear to be categories. Each job has its special
selecting categories, I don't beleive the jobs in IETF are all the
same, and the diversity key is not necessary in all jobs, I think only
few. I hope we get to know together which jobs need diversity and
which don't. Thanks SM your discussion make me think and try to find
best suggestion, but I may not be the best just trying to be :-)

AB