[Lnc-business] Executive Director Search

[Joe Bishop-Henchman]

What I would ask is communicating off-list with me or any other member 
on EPCC now (or in the next few days) on what you consider important for 
our next Executive Director. I'm happy to make the time for a phone 
conversation with any LNC member as well. It doesn't do anyone any good 
if you have an essential prerequisite of some kind and I don't know 
about it until it's too late.

Speaking just for myself, my ideal choice is one that fulfills every 
aspect of the job description, but real-world hiring means balancing 
different candidates' strengths and weaknesses. (I'm evaluating 
candidates on an 18-point scale based on the job description; the others 
have similar but not identical evaluation techniques.) The 35 candidates 
get narrowed down to some smaller number for interviews, and what 
happens after that is up to Nick.

And as I said, if there are questions you'd like asked of all the 
interviewees, I welcome that.

JBH

------------
Joe Bishop-Henchman
LNC Member (At-Large)
joe.bishop-henchman at lp.org
www.facebook.com/groups/189510455174837

On 2019-02-24 17:19, Jeff Lyons via Lnc-business wrote:
> Mr. Bishop-Henchman,
> 
> 
> 
> 
>      Thanks for the update and all the hard work that the team has put
> into this.  I want to elaborate that I have total confidence in those
> we appointed to conduct the search and respect for the process they
> adopted.  I don't think it is necessary to publicly or privately
> reveal the names of all the candidates, and there is definitely
> significant danger of leaks if it is revealed to the entire LNC.  I
> heard outside talk of our Executive Session discussion from December
> within minutes of leaving the room, to the tune of "Everybody already
> knows".  However, I don't see any special privileges for the
> Secretary, officers or any other individual to know these names other
> than the Chairman and EPCC any earlier than anybody else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My concerns start and end with the premise that our whole LNC should
> be *prepared* to make preliminary decisions at our next meeting and to
> hire on schedule, and how that question will be presented.  Based on
> how important this decision is and the long-term impact this hiring
> will have on the LP, I believe members of the LNC should be provided
> enough time to review the recommendations of the search committee and
> the runner-ups before calling a vote.  When the proper time comes,
> revealing or considering any number of candidates less than all 35
> would be arbitrary, considering only one would be completely
> unacceptable, in my view. Mr. O'Donnell and I have discussed that if
> we do not have full confidence in the choice presented, Region 8 will
> err on the side of abundant caution and urges others to do the same.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This will be a contentious and impassioned topic of debate, and I hope
> that the plan and process will attempt to alleviate and facilitate the
> transparent selection of the best possible candidate to be our new
> Executive Director.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for all you do for the Liberty of Others.
> 
> 
> -Jeff Lyons
> 
> 
> Region 8Alt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Get Outlook for Android
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 12:56 PM -0500, "Caryn Ann Harlos via
> Lnc-business" <lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a bit petty to latch on to Richard’s very obvious approximation 
> of
> time.
> 
> To say that no one thought anyone was interested is at odds with the
> timeline showing the delays because others were very much interested 
> and
> the regular emails to this list expressing interest as well.
> 
> As well as the very few LNC members, there are more than have 
> commented,
> but I don’t care if it’s one- this was handled poorly.
> 
> All most people wanted was regular updates such as what Joe has 
> provided
> and could have been done extemporaneously and avoided much of this.
> 
> I’m appreciative of the timeline but not at all of the dismissive and
> demeaning way inquiring LNC members have been treated.
> 
> I will send a separate request to the EPCC and Nick for the names.  
> That is
> my right as an officer and I share the same sentiments as Rhett did to
> Scarlett about how anyone “feels” about that.
> 
> -Caryn Ann
> 
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 9:32 AM Richard Longstreth via Lnc-business <
> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
> 
>> Sam and Joe,
>> 
>> Thank you for the updates. The six month comment came from our 
>> September
>> meeting when it was announced that Wes was stepping down. 
>> Additionally, as
>> Joe pointed out, that was five months ago. In reality it was about 5 
>> months
>> and I was rounding, not meaning to exaggerate. For the sake of 
>> argument, I
>> adjust my language to say 5 months. Some people have been paying 
>> attention
>> since that time, waiting for updates. I understand we waited until 
>> after
>> the electronic meeting to even solicit applications, but technically, 
>> by
>> announcing publicly about the opening, this process has been going on 
>> since
>> September to some degree. I understand if anyone else line didn't 
>> start
>> until we actually began encouraging people to apply.
>> 
>> Richard Longstreth
>> Region 1 Representative (AK, AZ, CO, KS, MT, NM, OR, HI, UT, WA, WY)
>> Libertarian National Committee
>> richard.longstreth at lp.org
>> 931.538.9300
>> 
>> Sent from my Mobile Device
>> 
>> 
>> On Sun, Feb 24, 2019, 08:41 Joe Bishop-Henchman <
>> joe.bishop-henchman at lp.org>
>> wrote:
>> 
>> > I'm happy to provide additional information on the timeline to this
>> > point, as I don't think there's any harm in sharing the
>> > minute-by-minute. I honestly didn't think there was interest in the
>> > details of when we did what, but there obviously is so here you go! It
>> > doesn't share any information about specific applicants, but I will say
>> > the vast majority of them are in current jobs and it would be harmful to
>> > our hiring efforts if that information became public at this time. But
>> > if an applicant has asked for more information or a status report,
>> > please let one of us know and we can send out a message to everyone (as
>> > Ms. Van Horn has asked).
>> >
>> > The TL;DR version is that the vacancy was announced September 30 (five,
>> > not six months ago), the O'Donnell proposal to change who would do the
>> > search was introduced October 14 but not resolved until January 6, once
>> > it was resolved on January 6 we had a job description finalized January
>> > 16, announced January 22 with a deadline of February 14 (ten days ago).
>> > Since then we have reviewed 35 applications totaling hundreds of pages
>> > and are proceeding with interviews this upcoming week. (Please send me
>> > or any of the EPCC members any questions you may want asked - I have my
>> > list of Qs but am not sending it out on the public list for obvious
>> > reasons.)
>> >
>> > The hardest part, in my opinion, has been coordinating communications
>> > between the three EPCC members and Nick, but Dr. Lark is a benevolent
>> > but firm taskmaster and has kept us hopping since the February 14
>> > application close date. As I observed in the Phoenix meeting, hiring for
>> > this kind of job is usually a three month deal, and it's been a month
>> > and a half since the LNC green-lit us on January 6 - most of that being
>> > the application period giving enough time to make people aware of the
>> > position and for people to apply. (The application required more than
>> > just cover letter and resume, but also an action plan.)
>> >
>> >
>> > September 30: Vacancy announced at the Phoenix meeting.
>> >
>> > October 14: O’Donnell introduced his proposal to revise the hiring
>> > process. It’s placed on the calendar for the December meeting.
>> >
>> > November 26: EPCC conference call to discuss process, if we continue to
>> > lead the search.
>> >
>> > December 1-2: LNC meeting where we do not get to the O’Donnell proposal,
>> > so an electronic meeting is set up to consider it.
>> >
>> > December 7: First draft of job description. We begin revising it, hoping
>> > that it can be used by whoever replaces us if the O’Donnell proposal is
>> > adopted.
>> >
>> > December 19: Second draft of job description. Electronic meeting set for
>> > January 6.
>> >
>> > January 5: Third draft of job description.
>> >
>> > January 6: Electronic meeting to consider the O’Donnell proposal.
>> > Resolving that outstanding matter allows the EPCC to move forward with
>> > the search.
>> >
>> > January 16: Job description finalized.
>> >
>> > January 21: Job description submitted to APRC for mailing, and approved.
>> >
>> > January 22: Job description announcement, with deadline of February 14.
>> > First application received.
>> >
>> > January 24: EPCC begins e-mailing acknowledgments to applicants with
>> > completed files, and e-mailing requests for more information from those
>> > who submit partial applications. This continues until the close of the
>> > application period.
>> >
>> > February 10: Joe e-mails candidates who had expressed interest but not
>> > yet applied that the application deadline is soon.
>> >
>> > February 14: Application period closes. Flurry of applications on the
>> > last day. Dr. Lark directs us to be ready to review all the applications
>> > on February 17.
>> >
>> > February 17: EPCC call reviewing all applicants based on the written
>> > submissions. We ask Nick whether that’s all he needs from us, or if he
>> > wants us to interview.
>> >
>> > February 19: After Nick says he wants us to interview, we determine the
>> > earliest date that works for all three of us is the following week.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > JBH
>> >
>> > ------------
>> > Joe Bishop-Henchman
>> > LNC Member (At-Large)
>> > joe.bishop-henchman at lp.org
>> > www.facebook.com/groups/189510455174837
>> >
>> > On 2019-02-24 09:15, Richard Longstreth via Lnc-business wrote:
>> > > Bottom line for me. I'm not an officer, but this process is ongoing for
>> > > what appears to be six months with interested parties not receiving
>> > > communication and no one receiving a timeline. I had trust initially,
>> > > but
>> > > this is dragging on and eroding basic trust in the process simply
>> > > because
>> > > the process is unknown. I understand keeping applicants name private. I
>> > > don't understand waiting until infinity to find out when the LNC will
>> > > approve the person. I don't have any reassurance that the LNC will be
>> > > given
>> > > any more than a name to vote on. I don't have reassurances that all
>> > > applicants are being equally solicited for follow-up. I don't even have
>> > > assurances that our offices, the people who, if something happens to
>> > > Nick,
>> > > are charged with figuring out the next steps.
>> > >
>> > > This is simply not how a professional organization operates and, the
>> > > LNC
>> > > and membership, are entitled to certain assurances, at least in the
>> > > form of
>> > > a timeline of no other transparency occurs.
>> > >
>> > > Richard Longstreth
>> > > Region 1 Representative (AK, AZ, CO, KS, MT, NM, OR, HI, UT, WA, WY)
>> > > Libertarian National Committee
>> > > richard.longstreth at lp.org
>> > > 931.538.9300
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> 
> --
> 
> *  In Liberty,*
> 
> *Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary *- 
> Caryn.Ann.
> Harlos at LP.org  or Secretary at LP.org.
> *Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee* - LPedia at LP.org
> Call me at 561.523.2250 and follow my public figure page at
> facebook.com/pinkflameofliberty/
> 
> =========================================================================
> Peaceful Commerce With All Nations * Non-interventionism * Re-Legalize 
> All
> Drugs * End Government Intrusion In The Bedroom * Repeal All Gun Laws *
> Abolish All Taxation * Sound, Free-market Money * Abolish The Fed * End
> Corporate & Individual Welfare * Abolish The IRS and Repeal the Income 
> Tax
> * Privatize Transportation Infrastructure * Free-market Emergency 
> Services
> * Open Migration * Transfer Government Schools To The Private Sector *
> Eliminate Regulation *
> 
> *VOTE LIBERTARIAN * 800-ELECT-US or http://www.LP.org *
> =========================================================================