[atrt2] Prioritization Doodle Poll

[Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond]

Dear Larisa,

I am sorry but I will not prioritise any of these recommendations. This
is purely an ICANN thing to prioritise things which are all important,
for the sole purpose of demoting the importance of some of the
recommendations because let's face it, that's exactly what we are doing.
There are 12 recommendations; ICANN is purporting to be a world class
organisation... and it needs to have a committee help it throttle the
rate at which these recommendations are implemented?
For this reason, and I apologise for this, I shall not fill the doodle
poll.
Kind regards,

Olivier


On 18/12/2013 05:48, Larisa B. Gurnick wrote:
>
> Dear ATRT2 Members,
>
>  
>
> As discussed on the ATRT2 call on 17 December, please indicate which
> recommendations you would consider to be "priority" recommendations by
> voting in the Doodle Poll _http://doodle.com/yxidhmrupcbfmb4u.  *This
> Doodle Poll will close by 23:59 UTC on 18 December.*_  Depending on
> the results of this Poll, further discussion and consideration will be
> given, via email, to the possibility of including prioritization
> guidance in the Final Report.
>
>  
>
>  
>
> Here is a recap of the recommendations for ease of reference:
>
>  
>
> #1        The Board should develop objective measures for determining
> the quality of ICANN Board members and the success of Board
> improvement efforts, and analyze those findings over time.
>
>  
>
> #2        The Board should develop metrics to measure the
> effectiveness of the Board's functioning and improvement efforts, and
> publish the materials used for training to gauge levels of improvement.
>
>  
>
> #3        The Board should conduct qualitative/quantitative studies to
> determine how the qualifications of Board candidate pools change over
> time , and regularly assess Director's compensation levels against
> prevailing standards.
>
>  
>
> #4        The Board should continue supporting cross-community
> engagement aimed at developing an understanding of the distinction
> between policy development and policy implementation.  Develop
> complementary mechanisms whereby the Supporting Organizations and
> Advisory Committees (SO/AC) can consult with the Board on matters,
> including, but not limited to policy, implementation and
> administrative matters, on which the Board makes decisions.
>
>  
>
> #5        The Board should review redaction standards for Board
> documents, Document Information Disclosure Policy (DIDP) and any other
> ICANN documents to create a single published redaction policy.
> Institute a process to regularly evaluate redacted material to
> determine if redactions are still required and if not, ensure that
> redactions are removed.
>
>  
>
> #6        GAC-related recommendation
>
>  
>
> #7        The Board should explore mechanisms to improve public
> comment through adjusted time allotments, forward planning regarding
> the number of consultations given anticipated growth in participation,
> and new tools that facilitate participation.  The Board also should
> establish a process under the Public Comment Process where those who
> commented or replied during the Public Comment and/or Reply Comment
> period(s) can request changes to the synthesis reports in cases where
> they believe the Staff incorrectly summarized their comment(s).
>
>  
>
> #8        To support public participation, the Board should review
> capacity of the language services department versus the Community need
> for the service using Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and make
> relevant adjustments such as improving translation quality and
> timeliness and interpretation quality. ICANN should implement
> continuous improvement of translation and interpretation services
> including benchmarking of procedures used by international
> organizations such as the United Nations.
>
>  
>
> #9        Consideration of decision-making inputs and appeals processes
>
>  
>
> #10      The Board should improve the effectiveness of cross-community
> deliberations
>
>  
>
> #11      Effectiveness of the Review Process
>
>  
>
> #12      Financial Accountability and Transparency
>
>  
>
>  
>
> */Larisa B. Gurnick/*
>
> Consultant/Senior Director, Organizational Reviews
>
> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
>
> larisa.gurnick at icann.org <mailto:larisa.gurnick at icann.org>
>
> 310 383-8995
>
>  
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> atrt2 mailing list
> atrt2 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2

-- 
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/atrt2/attachments/20131219/b2cd12c2/attachment.html>