[council] [Ext] Options to adjust timeline for specific and organisational reviews

Sun Jul 29 16:07:41 UTC 2018

Dear Rafik,

Thanks for your quedtions/comments.

ll organizational reviews start with the procurement by ICANN org of an "Independence" expert, which normally starts with a questionnaire to all parties, based in which the recommendations are developed. 

Then a very long discussion/implementation cycle starts. In the case of the GNSO 4 years. In the case of ALAC a protracted fight to disqualify all or most recommendations.

The idea is to turn around the tortilla. Let the So/ACs leaderships think first about there bottlenecks and limitations. Let them choose the type of independent advice they need and write the specs. Then make better use of this external expertise, and instead of a protracted reoltuon of old conflicts, use them for a forward looking startegy.

Just like the Council leadership has been doing in our case since the LA meeting.

We have done in a few months much more progress that the GNSO Review  in 4 years!!!! It would be great if the resources of the organizational reviews could be used in this very efficient manner present  GNSO council leadership has managed us through an invite project list and new arising issues.

If the recommendation could be focused in that direction please feel free to edit as you wish. It should be a common effort.

Have a nice Sunday or beginning of your week.

Carlos

On July 27, 2018 6:44:44 PM CST, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
>Hi Donna,
>
>thanks for the draft. I have some comments asking for clarifications:
>- "in terms of letting the independent expert (or  ̈coach ̈) to work in
>parallel with Working Party Team (or even the respective SO/AC
>Leadership)
>and collaborate towards a forward looking work strategy, instead of
>looking
>for and fixing past mistakes". I am not sure how this can work in
>practice
>or what can achieve. it is unclear to me what is the role of the
>independent expert in such context. can you please elaborate more?
>the deliverable of independent examiner of latest organizational
>reviews
>for the different SO/AC were of variable quality and scope.
>- I see that SO/AC leadership will be responsible for the organization
>review. but is it possible to know more what is the role description
>other
>than initiating and/or managing the budget? is the leadership will be
>tasked to set the terms for the reviews (as it was mentioned we don't
>have
>yet the operating standards yet). what is the relation vis-a-vis the
>working party?
>- for benchmarking, it is a good idea but I guess it will be only
>effective
>if all organizational reviews are done in a similar way which I don't
>think
>it is the case now. it will also need more work on metrics or criteria
>to
>be agreed on for testing against and benchmark.
>
>Best,
>
>Rafik
>
>Le sam. 28 juil. 2018 à 01:18, Austin, Donna via council <
>council at gnso.icann.org> a écrit :
>
>> Thanks Julie, and thanks to the GNSO Review Working Group for their
>input.
>>
>>
>>
>> All the comment period closes on 31 July, so comments or concerns
>should
>> be raised today if at all possible.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund at icann.org]
>> *Sent:* Friday, July 27, 2018 6:39 AM
>> *To:* council at gnso.icann.org
>> *Cc:* Carlos Raul <carlosraulg at gmail.com>; Austin, Donna
>> <Donna.Austin at team.neustar>
>> *Subject:* Re: [Ext] Options to adjust timeline for specific and
>> organisational reviews
>>
>>
>>
>> Dear GNSO Council members,
>>
>>
>>
>> Further to Donna’s message below, on behalf of the GNSO Review
>Working
>> Group (WG) please see the attached revised version of the draft
>response.
>> The comments from the WG appear at the bottom of page 3 and continue
>on the
>> top of page 4.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Julie
>>
>> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *"Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin at team.neustar>
>> *Date: *Wednesday, July 25, 2018 at 3:45 PM
>> *To: *"council at gnso.icann.org" <council at gnso.icann.org>
>> *Cc: *Carlos Raul <carlosraulg at gmail.com>, Julie Hedlund <
>> julie.hedlund at icann.org>
>> *Subject: *[Ext] Options to adjust timeline for specific and
>> organisational reviews
>>
>>
>>
>> Dear Colleagues
>>
>>
>>
>> On behalf of Carlos and I, please find attached for your
>consideration,
>> our proposed draft response to ICANN’s Long-Term Options to Adjust
>the
>> Timeline of Reviews that was posted for public comment until 31 July
>2018.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>https://www.icann.org/public-comments/reviews-long-term-timeline-2018-05-14-en
>> [icann.org]
>>
><https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_public-2Dcomments_reviews-2Dlong-2Dterm-2Dtimeline-2D2018-2D05-2D14-2Den&d=DwMFAg&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=WndtysIyhi_Eh-WkTzHsgfrB91JSBAg8XGbNppJSweo&s=haxmeO9jH5FoHzoCGn-1JdODnVmwt8yWxzPDnVuZv2Q&e=>
>>
>>
>>
>> Please note that I have also asked Julie Hedlund to share the
>proposed
>> comments with the GNSO Review Team for consideration. As most of you
>know,
>> the Review Team is finalizing what has been a 4+ years effort, and I
>> believe it would be timely to be able to capture any comments they
>may wish
>> to make regarding Organisational Reviews. The Review Team is meeting
>> tomorrow and we hope to have comments back from them by Friday.
>>
>>
>>
>> With regard to the Short Term Options to Adjust the Timeline for
>Specific
>> Reviews, please consider the options available at the following link
>and
>> respond to the list regarding preferences.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/specific-reviews-short-term-timeline-fillable-form-06jun18-en.pdf
>> [icann.org]
>>
><https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_en_system_files_files_specific-2Dreviews-2Dshort-2Dterm-2Dtimeline-2Dfillable-2Dform-2D06jun18-2Den.pdf&d=DwMFAg&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=WndtysIyhi_Eh-WkTzHsgfrB91JSBAg8XGbNppJSweo&s=Yuk3c1yp-cMms72QgTigHTIWVSHueUU4gd0q3eKiHgc&e=>
>>
>>
>>
>> I suspect that it may not be possible for the Council to submit a
>comment
>> on the Short-Term Options as I am already aware that the RySG will be
>> supporting Option B, which is at odds with the views expressed by
>Ayden
>> during out last Council call.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>>
>> Donna
>>
>> *Donna Austin*
>> *Neustar, Inc.* / Senior Policy Manager, Registry Solutions
>> *Mobile:* +1 310 890 9655
>> *donna.austin at team.neustar <donna.austin at team.neustar>* / *Website:*
>> home.neustar [home.neustar]
>>
><https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.home.neustar_&d=DwMFAg&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=WndtysIyhi_Eh-WkTzHsgfrB91JSBAg8XGbNppJSweo&s=poL08Sf6pF5_f54ctWgSyPD9OXw7jy0cZrn0M8wSJJI&e=>
>>
>>
>>
>> *Follow Neustar:* LinkedIn [linkedin.com]
>>
><https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.linkedin.com_company_5349&d=DwMFAg&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=WndtysIyhi_Eh-WkTzHsgfrB91JSBAg8XGbNppJSweo&s=Gds0ikOCHzXuB2JRYBCUEDtcotLrwKPGE8DYhUDQG_s&e=>
>> */* Twitter [twitter.com]
>>
><https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.twitter.com_neustar&d=DwMFAg&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=adDIs0WEx_lLwFfrsdovxTYY8GkRHo5ibc8SR3Npdh8&m=WndtysIyhi_Eh-WkTzHsgfrB91JSBAg8XGbNppJSweo&s=nPpIX33kiVoKLXP-rhqOgfsbXLSdwGfPoKxn9Pc5hoc&e=>
>> Reduce your environmental footprint. Print only if necessary.
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> The information contained in this email message is intended only for
>the
>> use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential
>and/or
>> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you
>have
>> received this email message in error and any review, dissemination,
>> distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If
>you
>> have received this communication in error, please notify us
>immediately and
>> delete the original message.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> council mailing list
>> council at gnso.icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
>>

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20180729/072fa07d/attachment.html>