This email has also been verified by Google DKIM 2048-bit RSA key

Re: Fw: Uncensored view on hiring technology/digital/analytics people

From:robbymook@gmail.com To: hdr29@hrcoffice.com CC: huma@hrcoffice.com, cmills.hillary@gmail.com, john.podesta@gmail.com Date: 2015-01-09 21:10 Subject: Re: Fw: Uncensored view on hiring technology/digital/analytics people

I agree with him on both points. On staffing, we have the same roles, just different titles: He has a "Chief Digital Officer" and we have a "Digital Director", he has a "Head of Analytics", we have an Analytics Director. Because I want to keep the number of people reporting directly to the Manager at a minimum, we are going to wrap the Digital Director and CTO under the Digital and Technology Director (this is what we're considering Teddy for) and we're wrapping the Data Director and Analytics Director under a Data and Analytics Director. But I agree with him completely on roles. His point about recruitment is very important. He's absolutely right that you can have too many CAMPAIGN analytics, digital, or tech people. Similarly, you can build a team exclusively from Silicon Valley that doesn't integrate well into the campaign--this was an issue in 12. Our theory of the case is that you want to have the leadership--your Digital/Technology Director and Analytics/Data Director--understand campaigns, but make sure they build teams with specialists recruited directly from the highest performing areas of industry. For example, if Teddy were the Digital/Tech Director, we'd want to make sure the CTO has strong experience and relationships in silicon valley. Teddy can provide the strategic vision specific to a campaign--the CTO should be someone who is really good at building and managing a terrific team that can ship quality code on time. Likewise, we want a Digital Director who understands the role digital plays on a campaign, which is totally unique from the corporate world (press influence, persuasion, motivation, MONEY), but your web designers or video producers should absolutely be lifted directly out of top design firms. The other point I would add is diversity. The Obama team was almost all male and very white. We've had long discussions with his tech leadership on how we build a process that generates a different team for you. That's what Todd Park is helping us with--and it will look a lot like a corporate recruitment process (campus recruitment events, events at corporate sites). We've even discussed having you do a targeted recruitment video. I agree with him that managing this process is a full time job, not just because there needs to be a lot of prospecting, but also because there needs to be an intensive vetting and testing component. I think OFA 12 generally did a good job on this front, so we have a good template to work with. On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 4:41 PM, H <hdr29@hrcoffice.com> wrote: > Please read this email and give me your reactions. Alec worked for me > and I highly value his opinions about technology. > ------------------------------ > *From:* Alec Ross <alec.ross@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Friday, January 09, 2015 4:23:07 PM > *To:* Hillary Clinton > *Subject:* Uncensored view on hiring technology/digital/analytics people > > > Madam Secretary, > > I hope those memos I sent you following our last phone conversation were > useful. During that discussion, you encouraged me to pass along names of > people who might be good additions to a technology operation. > > > > There are 3 main jobs that I think you should personally concern yourself > with: > > Chief Digital Officer > > Chief Technology Officer > > Head of Analytics > > > > I could put together a list of candidates for you for each of these three > jobs but here’s the thing --- I think your campaign’s approach to building > a digital/tech & analytics operations should break with how it is normally > done. > > > > Normally in campaigns, a small number of candidates with close ties to > people in leadership (candidate, campaign manager, chairman, pollster) are > vetted and a tech team is quickly built. There is some judgment brought to > the evaluation, but the hires are normally rooted in relationships and > recent performance. > > > > I think that process would not serve you well. I think that you need to > cast a wider net and I think that you need something that is very unusual > in political campaigns for top hires: a formal HR process. > > > > There are a lot of kick-ass tech/digital/analytics operatives out there, > but most of them have become part of a new consultant class that has > emerged since the 2008 campaign made millionaires out of lots of guys in > their 20s. > > > > Don’t get me wrong, these are good people; and many of them should be > hired and/or get contracts for the technology they have spent years > building and applying in actual campaigns. Many of these are also my > friends --- I have lots of beer drinking buddies among them. > > > > My worry is that the real A listers from this community will want to stay > at their firms and make a lot of money off of a campaign that is going to > spend north of a billion dollars when what you really need are people who > are going to work 15 hours a day, 7 days a week sitting inside the campaign > HQ who have all the technology skills but are primarily motivated to work > in a Hillary Clinton for President campaign out of a sense of mission. > These may be highly skilled people from Silicon Valley who would love to be > a part your campaign but who lack the relationships to find their place > inside a campaign without a more formal hiring process. These folks, in > turn, should manage the consultants/vendors rather than the > consultants/vendors managing the people inside the campaign. > > > > In order to get people who combine both the great technology skills and > the sense of mission, I’d suggest you put the kind of HR process in place > that looks much more like what you’d find at McKinsey than at a campaign. > The campaign manager, chairman and pollster should all be involved, but I > would also bring in an HR professional to manage the process and then > leverage the ties you have to people in the technology world (beyond me > this includes people like Eric Schmidt, Sheryl Sandberg, Katie Stanton and > Katie Dowd) who both know you and your needs but who also know how to vet > technology and have relationships that go far beyond what are now the > normal suspects from the “tech in campaigns world”. Again, lots of those > are great people, but in addition to the important roles they will play we > need to find HILLARY PEOPLE. > > > > I am also always happy to put together small meetings for you with people > who are a mixture of Silicon Valley and the previous Obama campaigns (from > digital/tech/analytics) if you want to benefit from other perspectives. > They are all eager to meet you. > > > > Apologies for the long email, but I wanted to give you my uncensored > perspective. If what I propose does not work given choices you have already > made, no worries, I will send in suggestions of potential hires. You will > end up with great people either way. > > > > My best, > > Alec >