[atrt2] Prioritization Doodle Poll

Lise Fuhr lise.fuhr at difo.dk
Thu Dec 19 10:16:34 UTC 2013

Hi Olivier,


Yes we discussed it but I am still against prioritization – so I filled the
Doodle with a plus to every subject since I think all our recommendations
should be equally important. I think saying no to all recommendations in the
Doodle would be to say none is important, so





Fra: atrt2-bounces at icann.org [mailto:atrt2-bounces at icann.org] På vegne af
Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
Sendt: 19. december 2013 02:47
Til: atrt2 at icann.org
Emne: Re: [atrt2] Prioritization Doodle Poll


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,


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. 





On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 4:02 PM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com>

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 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


#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


#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


#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

310 383-8995 <tel:310%20383-8995> 


atrt2 mailing list
atrt2 at icann.org

Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD

atrt2 mailing list
atrt2 at icann.org


atrt2 mailing list
atrt2 at icann.org

Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/atrt2/attachments/20131219/0f747af2/attachment.html>

More information about the atrt2 mailing list