[registration-issues-wg] [CPWG] Fwd: NomCom Review: Feedback on planned implementation steps

Maureen Hilyard maureen.hilyard at gmail.com
Tue May 14 18:59:54 UTC 2019


Hi everyone

Something else for us to work on before 10 June. Perhaps we could get a
small subgroup to work on the 7 questions the Review Team recommends we
concentrate on and bring their report back to the CPWG for discussion. Any
volunteers?

M


---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Jean-Baptiste Deroulez <jean-baptiste.deroulez at icann.org>
Date: Tue, 14 May 2019, 4:39 AM
Subject: NomCom Review: Feedback on planned implementation steps
To: Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard at gmail.com>
Cc: Tom Barrett <tbarrett at encirca.com>, Cheryl Langdon-Orr <
langdonorr at gmail.com>, Zahid Jamil-IG (internet at jamilandjamil.com) <
internet at jamilandjamil.com>, Lars Hoffmann <lars.hoffmann at icann.org>, ICANN
At-Large Staff <staff at atlarge.icann.org>


Dear Maureen,



We are contacting you in the capacity of Chair and Vice-Chairs of the
NomCom Review Implementation Working Group (NomComRIWG). Following the
ICANN Board’s acceptance
<https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2019-03-14-en#2.f>
of the Final Report
<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/nomcom-review-final-05jun18-en.pdf>
and the Feasibility Assessment and Initial Implementation Plan
<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/nomcom2-ipt-review-faiip-14dec18-en.pdf>,
we have been tasked to oversee the implementation of the twenty-seven (27)
recommendations issued by the independent examiner.



Before implementation can begin, the Board has asked us to draft a Detailed
Implementation Plan, due to be submitted to the Board’s Organizational
Effectiveness Committee no later than 14 September 2019.



While the NomComRIWG has the Board-mandated responsibility to plan the
implementation of the twenty-seven recommendations, we would welcome any
and all feedback either as a single document from the ALAC or from
individual members of the ALAC. All feedback will inform our drafting of
the Detailed Implementation Plan.  We understand that you or the ALAC may
not have the time to respond to all 27 recommendations, so we have
identified seven where your input would be most helpful.



Please, limit your response to the process you suggest we follow for each
implementation rather than advocating for any specific outcome of the
recommendation.



*We kindly ask you to provide us with your feedback no later than 10 June
2019*. If you cannot respond by that time, but would like to provide input,
please, let us know at your earliest convenience by when we can expect your
feedback.



If you have any questions or concerns, either about the list of questions,
or about any other aspect of the NomCom Review implementation, please, do
not hesitate to reach out to us or any of ICANN’s support staff at any
time.



Many thanks and best wishes,



Tom Barrett, Chair NomComRIWG

Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Vice-Chair NomComRIWG

Zahid Jamal, Vice-Chair NomComRIWG





Cc: ALAC, ASO AC, ccNSO Council, GAC, GNSO Council, RSSAC, SSAC, NCSG,
RrSG, RySG, BC, IPC, ISPCP, NCUC, NPOC, AFRALO, APRALO, EURALO, LACRALO,
NARALO.



   1. *Recommendation 10*: Representation on the NomCom should be
   re-balanced immediately and then be reviewed every five years.



   - What process, based on which principles, would you suggest for  the
   implementation of this recommendation to rebalance the NomCom? And, what
   criteria  should the overall allocation of all NomCom seats among the
   SO/ACs be based on?



   1. *Recommendation 14*: Formalize communication between the NomCom and
   the Board, SOs/ACs, and the PTI Board in order to understand needed
   competencies and experience.



   - What process would you suggest to formalize the communication of the
   needed competencies and experiences of NomCom appointees to your SO/AC?



   1. *Recommendation 16*: Implement and codify a system for providing
   feedback to the NomCom regarding the contributions and participation of
   members up for re-appointment by the NomCom (i.e. for the Board, PTI, GNSO,
   ALAC and ccNSO)



   - What process would you suggest to improve feedback to the NomCom
   regarding the contribution and participation of NomCom-appointees
members that
   wish to apply for re-appointment by the NomCom?



   1. *Recommendation 24*: An empowered body of current and former NomCom
   members should be formed to ensure greater continuity across NomComs, and
   in particular, to recommend and assist in implementing improvements to
   NomCom operations.



   - What process do you suggest should be put in place to help ensure
   cross-community consensus on developing the Charter and formation of this
   body? The Charter would address issues such as membership, term-limits,
   number and allocation of seats.



   1. *Recommendation 25*: Improve NomCom selection decisions by assessing
   the performance and needs of all bodies receiving NomCom appointees.



   - What process would you suggest for your organization to inform and
   improve future NomCom appointments?



   1. *Recommendation 27*: Provide clarity on desire for and definition of
   “independent directors”. Upon clarification of desire and definition,
   determine the number of specific seats for “independent directors”.



·         What are your suggestions regarding the process of implementing
of this recommendation?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/registration-issues-wg/attachments/20190514/95f261be/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list
CPWG at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg


More information about the registration-issues-wg mailing list