[maemo-community] Evaluating paid contributors (was Re: Sprint meeting & process)

[From: Tero Kojo]

On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 09:25 +0200, Gil Quim (Nokia-D/Helsinki) wrote:
> 
> This is something we need to solve in the second half. By default any
> paid maemo.org team member is there to stay, but an evaluation is needed
> within two margins:
> 
> - You are actually doing the right work the community asks you and you
> commit to do.
> 
> - You are fulfilling your minimum responsibilities and competences.
> Below that we're sorry but we need to talk, and if the situation doesn't
> improve we need to find someone else.

And as with any job, the tasks do change as time goes by. The community
isn't static, so occasionally there will be a public discussion on what
the roles should be and how to fulfil them. Just like the ones that took
place a while back.

> Regular reporting and the sprint process should be enough to handle the
> first point. Just a note: these people paid need to send their (hour?)
> report to Tero once a month to justify the money they are being paid.
> Why not merge the reporting to Tero and to the community to simplify
> their work?

In some sense that is what the sprint system is about. However I need an
hour report due to Nokia processes. I don't know whether the community
would benefit on knowing where the paid people spend every hour, my
guess is that a short overview is more effective.

> For the second point, it's a tricky one because it poses a lot of
> stress, not only to the evaluated workers thatn might or might not get
> renewed but also to the ones supposed to evaluate that work (having
> potentially a chance to decide that someone looses a job, the kind of
> decision that is really not nice in life, leave alone in a community of
> volunteers).
> 
> Some ideas that come to mind (Tero might correct me since he knows the
> Nokia/lehal processes).
> 
> - One year contracts instead of 6 months.

I would love that, but but but... life isn't so simple when a large
publicly listed company talks about money. I haven't figured out a way
to do one year contracts.

> - Evaluations and renewals done at the same time for all paid
> contributors. For instance, evaluation starting in October and renewals
> done in January - this way there is time to find a substitute if needed
> and make a reasonable transition for the both persons involved in the role.

I am working on this one now. June and December are my candidate months.
The bad part is that some people will get a short contract in the
Autumn, but then everyone should be in the same cycle.

> - Evaluation done by Nokia - Council - maemo.org team peers, defaulting
> to renewal unless something big happens (poor performance, conflicts,
> budget cut...) Executed by Nokia, since it's Nokia who pays and signs
> the contract. Tero and myself being 'the bad cops', so no community
> volunteer needs to to this nasty job.

I agree here. It would be unfair to place the community or the council
in a position where they would have to make those kind of decisions.

Tero