It seems important to begin communicating about how we will fill assignments on new teams, even though the plans are not totally clear. If you have comments or suggestions on staffing teams, please send them as soon as possible to itlt-feedback@mit.edu
We have begun to talk about a project team or a standing team having at any point in time a designated number of "seats" for people to occupy (may be fulltime or parttime) and "hats" for people to wear or "assignments" for people to do. For the most part, you can think of seats, hats, and assignments as timebound, defining the roles, levels of effort, and/or results for the team. Among the "hats" on any team might be several leadership opportunities, singly or in combination, such as the point of contact beyond the team, convener, technical expert, facilitator, point of fiscal accountability, project manager, and so forth.
Separately, we've begun to use the word "position" to refer to a "collection of rank, responsibilities, and qualifications" usually with greater longevity than a seat or a hat or an assignment on a team. Positions might be counted in competency groups, not on teams.
In these terms, a person gets appointed to a position in IS, for example, as a computer operator, through hiring or promotion. During the person's time in that position, the individual may have seats and hats on several teams -at the same time or one after the other - with various assignments of differing durations and levels of effort. This means that an individual doesn't necessarily have to leave an assignment on one team or a position in IS, for that matter, to take an assignment on another team.
The standing teams and project teams that we will charter in Phase 2 will have numerous seats and hats that can be filled by individuals who hold existing positions in IS. In addition, some seats and hats on some teams will probably represent "new" positions, that is, particular roles and responsibilities that have not existed before in IS. When we implement the new help desk process, for instance, there may be new position descriptions associated with the new seats and hats on the team. In other situations, teams will form spontaneously among individuals who are self-motivated to tackle an issue.
In discussing how to match individuals to seats and hats on teams, the I/T Leadership Team has briefly explored a range of options, from posting open assignments and letting people express interest to drafting individuals and sending "greetings" messages without consultation. We haven't yet settled on an approach. "One size" may, in fact, not fit all.
In exploring options, I/TLT understands that staff want
-the ability to be involved and considered in the team assignment process.
-assurances that they have options for moving around over time.
-opportunities to learn the new skills necessary for some assignments.
-NOT to go through a full search process for all team assignments.
We also recognize the need to maintain continuity of many current staff assignments in upcoming months, so that our service, support, and project commitments are not unduly disrupted. We want to settle initial assignments as soon as possible, moreover, so that teams can get to work.
We can't begin to match people and assignments until we know for sure what the seats are on teams and what the description are of any new positions that may be required. This will not be final until after the planning teams and the Help-it pilot are further along and after review by the ITLT and, where new position descriptions are involved, by the MIT Personnel Office. However, we do have some preliminary thoughts about how to structure a fair and efficient process for staffing these roles.
First, we would like to consider staff for assignments similar to those they now have, while not ruling out the possibility of a current staff member having an assignment(s) different than one they have today. At the same time from a customer service standpoint we probably cannot afford to have too many people in totally new positions.
Second, we would like to provide staff with the opportunity to say what they're interested in doing and to the greatest extent possible we would like to match people with assignments in which they are most interested. At the same time, we will need to move quickly and we must insure that the right skills are available to get the job done. And, it may be critical to have certain individuals in specific assignments, at least initially.
Third, we are especially interested in providing staff with an opportunity to express their interest in new leadership positions. One strategy for filling positions in the new process is to ask individuals to indicate their first and second choices for seats and hats on teams and for new positions. Optimally, individuals could meet with process leaders, competency group leaders, and/or team leaders to discuss their interests and fit for the assignments.
What do you think?