[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] RDS PDP WG Leadership

Tue Jan 26 06:17:23 UTC 2016

Hi All,
Unfortunately I have a conflict for todays meeting, disappointed but please record my apologies.

I wanted to make sure that I was on the record strongly supporting Chucks suggestion, this will be a long complex and multifaceted PDP and we need to have an excellent leadership team. The workload for the chairs will undoubtedly need as Chuck says a team rather than a Chair or Chair and a single Vice-Chair. We have now developed a body of knowledge on this form of leadership within the community and within staff and it has proven to be a successful approach in CWG and CCWG.

I look forward to joining you all on the next call,

James Gannon

From: <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of "Austin, Donna" <Donna.Austin at neustar.biz<mailto:Donna.Austin at neustar.biz>>
Date: Tuesday 26 January 2016 at 1:10 a.m.
To: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes at verisign.com<mailto:cgomes at verisign.com>>, "gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>" <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] RDS PDP WG Leadership

Hi Chuck

Your suggestion seems sensible and I support the approach.

Donna

Donna Austin:Neustar, Inc.
Policy and Industry Affairs Manager
Cell:+1.310.890.9655 Email: donna.austin at neustar.biz<mailto:donna.austin at neustar.biz>

________________________________
The information contained in this e-mail 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 e-mail 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 me immediately and delete the original message.
Follow Neustar:   [cid:image001.png at 01CC3CD3.5F595DC0]  Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/neustarinc>   [cid:image002.png at 01CC3CD3.5F595DC0]  LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/company/5349>   [cid:image003.png at 01CC3CD3.5F595DC0]  Twitter<http://www.twitter.com/neustar>
P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
Sent: Monday, 25 January 2016 12:56 PM
To: gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org<mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
Subject: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] RDS PDP WG Leadership

In my personal capacity as a volunteer for the RDS PDP WG I would like to propose the following approach to the WG leadership that I think would be very helpful in facilitating our productivity:

·         Have a leadership team consisting of 4 WG members plus the ICANN staff support personnel.

·         Have one leader from each of the four GNSO Stakeholder Groups (SGs):

1.       Non-Commercial SG (NCSG)

2.       Commercial SG (CSG)

3.       Registrars SG (RrSG)

4.       Registries SG (RySG).

·         The four leaders could serve in one of two ways:

o   2 co-chairs & 2 co-vice-chairs

o   1 chair & 3 co-vice chairs.

In recent years in the GNSO, a team leadership approach for WGs and even for the GNSO Council itself has proved to be quite effective.  It not only spreads the workload around but more importantly it allows for a small team of experienced people to collaborate together in leading the group’s efforts. Here are a few examples where a collaborative leadership team have been used:

·         The GNSO Council has a chair plus two vice chairs.

·         The Policy & Implementation WG had two co-chairs and two vice-chairs.

·         The CWG Stewardship has two co-chairs.

·         The CCWG Accountability has three co-chairs.

By adding a condition that each of the leadership team members come from different SGs, it ensures that the chairs and vice chairs collectively have expertise about all four of the GNSO stakeholder groups and creates a situation where the leaders are well versed in the varying viewpoints that exist across all four groups as well as differences within their respective groups.  I believe that this is especially important for an area such as Registration Data Services (Whois) that has been very controversial over the entirety of ICANN’s history.

For those that are new to GNSO policy development processes, any recommendations made by a WG have to eventually be approved by the GNSO Council, which primarily consists of the four SGs.  So Having all SGs involved in the leadership of the WG from the beginning should facilitate approval in the end.

It is important to remember that the role of the leadership team is to facilitate bottom-up multi-stakeholder policy development in a neutral and effective manner using a consensus based approach.  This of course means managing meetings and online work to ensure that the WG charter requirements are satisfied.  Hopefully, in most cases this will mean guiding the full group in developing recommendations that most if not all of the WG members can support.  But, after diligent efforts to reach consensus, there is still significant divergence about certain proposed recommendations, it will be the leaders responsibility to decide whether there is sufficient support in the WG to submit such recommendations to the GNSO Council.  Understanding this, it is important that each SG endorse the person on the leadership team from its group.

I hope that we can confirm whether or not there is support for this approach in our WG call tomorrow.  If there is, then it will guide our efforts in finding qualified members to serve on the leadership team as well as how to structure the team (2 co-chairs + 2 co-vice-chairs or 1 chair + 3 co-vice-chairs).

I would be happy to respond to any questions anyone has.

Chuck Gomes

P.S. – For those that do not know me, my Statement of Interest (SOI) can be found here: https://community.icann.org/display/gnsosoi/Chuck+Gomes+SOI<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_display_gnsosoi_Chuck-26-2343-3BGomes-26-2343-3BSOI&d=CwMFAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=4A3LwUUER9_CePZ11QJsr56eryGQiPHEqv4TL7JH87w&m=JabH3jmVRlppLGAqKPje2B1WU1nPoNJ_yCUrEEj4sjE&s=bJv_VBQ6NUk2pDkLu-smOe5gzB4v3yDbiGUyjBy6zaM&e=>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20160126/47e15d48/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 792 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20160126/47e15d48/image001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 767 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20160126/47e15d48/image002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 586 bytes
Desc: image003.png
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rds-pdp-wg/attachments/20160126/47e15d48/image003.png>