Some work flows will require approval of a person's manager (if they are WMF staff). We don't have a clear source of truth we can query, so I think it makes sense to instead have any one who's use an account with WMF staff affiliation to instead configure it in Bitu for themselves.
Description
Description
Related Objects
Related Objects
Event Timeline
Comment Actions
Linking Developer accounts to WMF org charts seems like a precarious situation given that the Wikimedia Foundation does not maintain any public organization chart that can be queried for reconciliation.
Comment Actions
I think Betterworks is pretty close to being the official source of truth now, isn't it?
https://app.betterworks.com/app/#/charts/org?id=499884 is auto-generated.
Just depends on HR/ITS/hiring manager/someone keeping it updated.
Betterworks also has an API (https://support.betterworks.com/hc/en-us/articles/208943166-Platform-Configuration-API) so I assume we could get access to that, pull the info and then:
- generate wiki text that a bot could auto-paste on a wiki
- generate something machine-readable for use in shell scripts (like to check if a user is actually staff, who the manager is)
Since we have that I have been checking Betterworks to see if someone is actually staff and who they report to.
Letting users update themselves in BITU who they get approved by seems counter-intuitive to me. Would there still be a point in getting approvals as a sanity check if users can just decide themselves who approves them? And wouldn't it likely be outdated all the time since it's still an all manual process?
Comment Actions
I would assume Dayforce is the closest thing to truth visible to me as that is actually the system of record for HR actions such as scheduling PTO and receiving US tax information. Betterworks at this point seems to only be used for Individual Tuning Conversations. I honestly doubt either system consistently tracks all employee/contractor/vendor/short-term contractor status with consistently updated worker/manager relationships. In any case such relationships are not publicly documented and readily auditable by the community.
Adding org chart hierarchy information to the LDAP directory that backs our Developer account system would make it the only public record of such relationships now that https://wikimediafoundation.org/role/staff-contractors/ is a partial and out of date record of management and arbitrarily selected staff.
Comment Actions
You are right, Dayforce is closer than Betterworks. There is also an orgchart-like thing in there and if you click on a random user and then on "show manager" enough times you eventually get to CEO level.
And it has an export button! Which let's you save.. SVG, heh! I mean, could be worse, SVG is scalable and upload-able to MediaWiki. But HTML could be converted to wiki text and a bot could automatically update a page.
Afair we once had a manager field in LDAP and it was set by ITS during onboarding. But it was set only once on the first day at work and not updated later when changes happened.
Comment Actions
From the outside but having talked with a few folks about this problem, that is my understanding. It's the closest thing to accurate available, and it contains errors.
Adding org chart hierarchy information to the LDAP directory that backs our Developer account system would make it the only public record of such relationships now that https://wikimediafoundation.org/role/staff-contractors/ is a partial and out of date record of management and arbitrarily selected staff.
Correct. And WMF HR Talent & Culture People considers the full org chart to be non-public information, not to be released to anyone, especially not the public or, $deity forbid, volunteers. A subset *might* be releasable, but "all staff with an LDAP account" wouldn't be because it contains some T&S staff, as an example.