Subject: RE: assessing campaign staff
From: "Chris Lu" <[email-masked]>
To: "Pete Rouse" <[email-masked]>, "Jim Messina" <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], [email-masked]
Cc: "Jennifer Clark" <[email-masked]>, "Adam Hitchcock" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 14:44:28 -0500

Sure thing.  I’ll make sure that everyone gets a copy of what Kerry used – as far as I know we’re not doing anything on our end on this issue.  Just wanted you to see  how the Kerry folks did their analysis in case it’s helpful

-----------------------------------------------------------

Chris Lu

[email-masked]

(312) 505-4864 (cell)

 

From: Pete Rouse 
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2008 3:39 PM
To: Chris Lu; Jim Messina; [email-masked]'; [email-masked]'
Cc: Jennifer Clark; Adam Hitchcock
Subject: Re: assessing campaign staff

I've initiated discussion of the organization platform for this exercise with Jenn Clark and Adam. We are meeting on the project again next week. Chris you may want to coordinate through Adam to make sure we're not working at cross purposes. 

________________________________

From: Chris Lu 
To: Jim Messina; Pete Rouse; Michael Froman ; John Podesta 
Sent: Fri Sep 12 14:26:20 2008
Subject: assessing campaign staff 

I wanted to start an email chain about assessing campaign staff for placement either in the transition or the administration.  In going through the Kerry transition documents, I found an interesting memo and accompanying spreadsheet that analyzed the entire Kerry campaign staff.  I’ll scan the cover memo and a sample page, but the criteria that the Kerry folks used might be a helpful template for us.  For each campaign staffer, there was the following analysis:

·         Overall assessment as a staffer (ranked 1-5, with 1 being the best)

·         Priority placement in the administration (ranked 1-5, with 1 being must place, 5 being don’t place)

                                They deliberately made sure than not more than 20% of a department’s total staff could be ranked as 1, 20% as a 2, etc.

·         Professional experience (ranked 1-5, with 1 being 15+ years of professional experience)

·         Kerry service (ranked 1-5, based on the beginning of their service date with Kerry)

·         Prior administration experience (yes or no)

·         Transition/inaugural (yes or no, based on people who they wanted to tap immediately for participation in either activity)

And then they totaled it up:

Overall assessments

                1’s – 162

                2’s – 155

                3’s – 123

                4’s – 27 

                5’s – 7

Priority placements

                1’s – 125

                2’s – 125

                3’s – 96

                4’s – 122

                5’s  - 6

This will all be a little more clear when I redact a sample page and scan it for your review.  But just wanted to get people thinking about this.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Chris Lu

[email-masked]

(312) 505-4864 (cell)