EDIT: All staff are invited to respond here, JS included.
Greetings all
Having taken over the tech team some time ago, I've noticed that there's a few gaps in the "traditional" staff structure, especially as larger projects loom on the horizon.
Thus, I feel there is a logical split that needs to take place within the ranks of my team: Staff and Members. There are people who would do very well, working as programmers, taggers, what have you for the team, and are not necessarily cut out to be staff members either due to temperament, maturity, availability, phase of the moon, what have you.
The "official" structure would be thus:
Major differences:
Staff have a much higher expectation. For one, you'll definitely at some point be handling "grunt" work, as you're obligated to participate. Members can also do this work if they feel compelled to do so.
There are a significant number of people who are willing to contribute to the upcoming Project Foundation work and technical work in general, who do not wish for the time commitment or responsibilities of being staff. There are also people who I wish to rope in for PF, who I am not comfortable offering the rank and privilege of staff to.
So, Magnus, why are you asking us, instead of just doing this?
Well, for one, I'd like to know if this is a good idea. Secondly, I don't like making unilateral changes without people generally getting feedback. Thirdly, I'd like everyone from the tech team to see what I have planned, and understand what I intend to do, and be able to comment on this. Lastly, maybe other teams want to implement something similar? I dunno.
I'd like to get feedback on this for a week, and, presuming there's no major divergence, admin approval to make this change.
In my head, the 'staff' members of the tech team are the management, especially as we move forward towards Project Foundation, and more…codified work. We're growing in to something that requires more structure, and I'm trying to get it in place.