[atrt2] Prioritization Doodle Poll

Alan Greenberg alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Thu Dec 19 01:34:49 UTC 2013

Olivier, if I understand your message correctly, 
you are saying that you do not support the 
concept of us prioritizing the recommendations (a 
position that I am considering taking myself). In 
such a case, shouldn't you submit answers, specifically saying NO to each?


At 18/12/2013 07:02 PM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond wrote:
>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,
>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 
>>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)
>><mailto:larisa.gurnick at icann.org>larisa.gurnick at icann.org
>>310 383-8995
>>atrt2 mailing list
>><mailto:atrt2 at icann.org>atrt2 at icann.org
>Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
>atrt2 mailing list
>atrt2 at icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/atrt2/attachments/20131218/3111d2c6/attachment.html>

More information about the atrt2 mailing list