[atrt2] Prioritization Doodle Poll

Thu Dec 19 16:17:43 UTC 2013

Since in many cases, the implementation will be 
done by different parts of ICANN, there will 
surely be a lot of parallelism, and not 
particularly visible to us at this time.

Alan

At 19/12/2013 10:50 AM, David Conrad wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I agree with Xinsheng: the issue isn't really 
>whether or not we believe some items are more 
>important than others (or whether some 
>recommendations are being demoted), it's whether 
>or not ATRT2 has input to provide to ICANN staff 
>on the order of implementation. Pragmatically 
>speaking, it is unlikely that ICANN staff will 
>be able to implement all recommendations in 
>parallel, so there will be some ordering of 
>implementation regardless of whether we choose to provide input or not.
>
>If we do not provide input, then ICANN staff 
>will make the decisions on the order of 
>implementation based on their view of 
>criticality and resource availability.  This is, 
>of course, perfectly reasonable.
>
>Regards,
>-drc
>
>On Dec 19, 2013, at 6:40 AM, zhang xinsheng 
><<mailto:zhangxinsheng at miit.gov.cn>zhangxinsheng at miit.gov.cn> wrote:
>
>>Hi Olivier,
>>
>>I am kind of confused about the point. For all 
>>of these recommendations, I think that the 
>>importance of them and the effort to prioritize 
>>them are two things. Even if the team thinks 
>>the 12 recommendations are all important, in 
>>terms of operation, should we tell ICANN to 
>>implement all 12 recommendations at the same 
>>time? I do not know whether my knowledge 
>>regarding prioritization methodology is wrong.
>>
>>The team can decide not to do this. But ICANN 
>>has to face it in the process of 
>>implementation. Should the team make some suggestions to ICANN in this aspect?
>>
>>Best regards,
>>
>>Xinsheng
>>
>>·¢¼þÈË: 
>><mailto:atrt2-bounces at icann.org>atrt2-bounces at icann.org 
>>[mailto:atrt2-bounces at icann.org] ´ú±í Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
>>·¢ËÍÊ±¼ä: 2013Äê12ÔÂ19ÈÕ 9:47
>>ÊÕ¼þÈË: <mailto:atrt2 at icann.org>atrt2 at icann.org
>>Ö÷Ìâ: 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,
>>
>>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 <<mailto:ocl at gih.com>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>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)
>><mailto:larisa.gurnick at icann.org>larisa.gurnick at icann.org
>><tel:310%20383-8995>310 383-8995
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>
>>atrt2 mailing list
>>
>><mailto:atrt2 at icann.org>atrt2 at icann.org
>>
>>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>
>>Olivier MJ Cr¨¦pin-Leblond, PhD
>>
>><http://www.gih.com/ocl.html>http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>atrt2 mailing list
>><mailto:atrt2 at icann.org>atrt2 at icann.org
>>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>
>>atrt2 mailing list
>>
>><mailto:atrt2 at icann.org>atrt2 at icann.org
>>
>>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>
>>Olivier MJ Cr¨¦pin-Leblond, PhD
>>
>><http://www.gih.com/ocl.html>http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
>>_______________________________________________
>>atrt2 mailing list<mailto:atrt2 at icann.org>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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/atrt2/attachments/20131219/46f67c68/attachment-0001.html>