Our project team is divided into sections: core team, fundraising, representatives, media, etc. We want to show the member list each year so that visitors can see who is behind the project, and to serve as a reference for later.
Currently, to see the names of members, visitors need to click on the section in which they are interested and then choose the year. Only the members in the core team have photos and additional information.
When I read the question How could I better layout a list of 200+ members?, the accepted answer reminds me of the member list of the Stack Exchange company. The layout of this list doesn't divide into sections or years; they are just listed in order of importance. I wonder if this layout is best for listing members? I think dividing the list into sections (and years) is not bad though.
Some notes on JohnGB's answer:
- Length of the list: about 20 - 30
- Useful significant to users: the year they work and the job they take part
- I would say our team is more like a company rather than a highshool, but it's not like a typical company. It only produces one product per year. People can join in the middle of the work year, but hardly quit until that year ends since we have commitments to prevent that.
And it's hard to build a org chart like that, for example I am a leader of the web team, but I don't belong to the core team, since I don't commit to work here after the work year. From the perspective of function, I'm commensurate to the members of the core team since I do contribute to many aspect of the work beside the web (below the leader of course), but from the perspective of working year, I'm afraid that I don't belong to the core team.