Thanks for sharing Emily. I think it’s totally doable and each potential problem is solvable: boundaries, payment terms, scope and quality etc. Upwork has solved these already–of course it’s never perfect, but neither is having a talent shortage. 

I wonder how much the orgs factor in the opportunity cost of each path. Surely hiring a freelancer with good reviews, a solid portfolio, a clear scope, and strong motivation is preferable to having critical work left undone. 

My concern is that even if you create the freelancer directory, the orgs who are hesitant still won’t participate if there’s a feeling it’s risky (even if it isn’t). Getting to the bottom of their concerns will be key. I’d ask “what would make you change your mind?”

 

Nice post and I agree with you — "starting to work in this field requires an excessive amount of effort" — my concern is how off-putting that will be to high-performers, especially if getting a job in corporate will pay better and be easier to get into.

I wonder if it would be an option to have the initial engagement with a "generalist" in the Upwork style — a bounded paid engagement where they actually operate, deliver value and then get reviewed.

The benefit is that they get paid and valued for their work, while getting experience in the ecosystem. The organisation gets a low risk feel for the person's performance and experiences their value first hand. And the ecosystem gets someone with more experience than before and a published a verified review, showing their skills and commitment to the mission.

Then, every time a person applies for a role, do a trial assessment, they get both paid and reviewed, which will hopefully increase their hope in securing a long-term position. Their previous reviews will also be useful to the next organisation they're hiring for also.