[atrt2] Prioritization Doodle Poll
Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
ocl at gih.com
Thu Dec 19 01:47:03 UTC 2013
Thank you for your explanation, Denise. Yes, I had dropped from the last
call when this was discussed (darn) - apologies for the misunderstanding.
Kind regards,
Olivier
On 19/12/2013 02:26, Denise Michel wrote:
> Dear Olivier,
>
> For the sake of clarity (and you may have gotten dropped from the last
> call when this was discussed?) -- the Team decided to consider
> prioritizing and asked staff to send this poll. This came out of a
> request from Zhang Xinsheng to prioritize the recommendations.
>
> Regards,
> Denise
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 4:02 PM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
> <ocl at gih.com <mailto:ocl at gih.com>> 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,
>
> 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 <tel:310%20383-8995>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> atrt2 mailing list
>> atrt2 at icann.org <mailto:atrt2 at icann.org>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2
>
> --
> Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
> http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> atrt2 mailing list
> atrt2 at icann.org <mailto:atrt2 at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/b37fb2c7/attachment.html>
More information about the atrt2
mailing list