[Ws2-diversity] FEEDBACK on DIVERSITY FROM CCWG-A WS2 F2F MEETING AT ICANN58

[Fiona Asonga]

Dear All

Thanks Julie for the summary

The adjusted questions as per the discussion at the plenary summarised by Julie in earlier email is as follows:

*************************
The  CCWG Work Stream 2 Diversity Sub-Group has identified the following elements of diversity as potentially relevant to ICANN SO/AC/groups:

A.	Geographic/regional representation
B.	Language
C.	Gender
D.	Age
E.	Physical dis-ability
F.	Diverse Skills
G.	Stakeholder group or constituency 

1. What relative importance does your SO/AC/group give to these six dimensions of diversity?

2. What, if any, additional dimensions of diversity are important to your SO/AC/group?

3. How, if at all, does your SO/AC/group measure and track diversity issues related to its work?

4. How, if at all, does your SO/AC/group seek to promote diversity in its membership, its active participation, and its leadership?

5. What, if any, educational and informational initiatives does your SO/AC/group pursue to promote diversity awareness?

6. What, if any, formal or informal practices or written or unwritten policies are pursued in your SO/AC/group to promote diversity?

*****************************

We would appreciate if the WS2 Diversity group members can provide their feedback on the questions.

Kind regards

Fiona Asonga

----- Original Message -----
From: "Julie Hammer" <julie.hammer at bigpond.com>
To: ws2-diversity at icann.org
Cc: "ACCT-Staff" <acct-staff at icann.org>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2017 6:12:16 AM
Subject: [Ws2-diversity] FEEDBACK on DIVERSITY FROM CCWG-A WS2 F2F MEETING	AT ICANN58

Hi Everyone,

In the interests of updating our Diversity Questionnaire as soon as possible, I have been through the recording of the session on Friday 10th March and made the following notes.  Please let me know if you do not think I have accurately captured the feedback provided during the Plenary.

1. The introduction to the Questionnaire should make it more explicit that the list of Diversity elements stated is not exhaustive.

2. The term “SO/AC/group” should be clarified and it should be stated more specifically who are the target groups for this Questionnaire.

3.  In the list of diversity elements, “Skills” should remain but should be listed as “Diversity of Skills” to avoid confusion.

4. In the list of diversity elements, “Physical Ability” is ambiguous and should be listed as “Disability”.

5. In Q4, the concept of being "proportionally represented within your SO/AC/group and its leadership” is neither clear nor necessarily useful. “Members" of a group/constituency may or may not participate, and of those who do participate, it is the ones who are actively engaged that are most likely to be those who are appointed to leadership positions. This question could create a great deal of confusion.

6. Q1-3 are asking for current information about diversity; Q4-6 are more aspirational.  They are asking about ways to promote diversity.  The questions should be amended as follows:

-  Q4 should focus on asking about ways to promote diversity in membership and leadership
-  Q5 should ask about educational or informational initiative to promote diversity awareness
-  Q6 should focus on asking about policies/practices which promote diversity

I would also like to add one further suggestion of my own.  In our original list of questions, we had one which asked "Does your SO/AC/group have any formal policies and procedures relating to diversity?  If so, please provide details of these.” as well as "Does your SO/AC/group have any informal practices relating to diversity?  If so, please provide details of these.”  We seem to have retained the latter question but not the former.  I do think it would be useful to ask about both formal and informal, but I am conscious that we don’t want to increase the number of questions so I have merged both of these aspects in the new Q6.

Taking the above feedback into account, I have attempted to incorporate all these points into an updated Questionnaire which is attached for your review.  I realise that the Diversity Sub-Group has not necessarily collectively agreed with all these recommendations, but if any of the suggestions we received are not agreed, then we can change the Questionnaire accordingly.   I have not used “track changes” as I felt the list above adequately details the changes that have been made.

Cheers,  Julie




_______________________________________________
Ws2-diversity mailing list
Ws2-diversity at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity

--