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

Susan Kawaguchi susank at fb.com
Tue Jan 26 15:23:56 UTC 2016 

I agree with Chuck that we need a diverse leadership but a larger team may
pose other difficulties.

This is a great discussion and I am encouraged that we have so much
interest.  
Susan Kawaguchi
Domain Name Manager
Facebook Legal Dept.






On 1/26/16, 5:40 AM, "gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org on behalf of
Gomes, Chuck" <gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org on behalf of
cgomes at verisign.com> wrote:

>When I was thinking this through, I considered a larger leadership team
>but I think we need to be cautious about having a leadership team that is
>too large.  I have been thinking about another way we could increase
>diversity and representation of Constituencies, Advisory Groups and even
>those who are independent, but I think it is best to hold off on that
>until we get the leadership team in place and the WG kicked off.  A
>leadership team of four maps very well to the GNSO Council structure and
>I think that has important value, but that does not have to limit the WG
>in any way in terms of influence by those who are independent or who are
>not associated with a SG.
>
>
>
>Chuck
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>
>From: James Galvin [mailto:jgalvin at afilias.info]
>
>Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 8:23 AM
>
>To: Gomes, Chuck
>
>Cc: gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
>
>Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] RDS PDP WG Leadership
>
>
>
>I support this approach in principle.
>
>
>
>I don¹t feel strongly about the list of stakeholders but I am sensitive
>to Don¹s comment about restricting the leadership to those who represent
>an actual stakeholder.
>
>
>
>How do folks feel about adding a 5th leader who is an ³independent²?
>
>
>
>
>
>Unfortunately, I have a conflict for the meeting today and will not be
>able to attend.  It¹s a one time conflict and I will otherwise be
>available.
>
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>
>
>Jim
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>On 25 Jan 2016, at 15:56, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
>
>
>
>> 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://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_
>>display_gnsosoi_Chuck-2BGomes-2BSOI&d=CwIGaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=g
>>vEx8xF7ynrYQ7wShqEr-w&m=btok6CidsBB2RHMhBLM5ndveAQWEGTwEG8ahuX5ajjM&s=PnG
>>Q_xQkr4kj_S4aOgzXpRr4N9MIKmdj5iisaOtHEV4&e=
>
>>
>
>>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>
>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
>
>> gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
>
>> 
>>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman
>>_listinfo_gnso-2Drds-2Dpdp-2Dwg&d=CwIGaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=gvEx8
>>xF7ynrYQ7wShqEr-w&m=btok6CidsBB2RHMhBLM5ndveAQWEGTwEG8ahuX5ajjM&s=qht7x1J
>>_g91Ch8BaVwk0lTgeF_X9NevjOKqQbiL0nkE&e=
>
>_______________________________________________
>gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
>gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_
>listinfo_gnso-2Drds-2Dpdp-2Dwg&d=CwIGaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=gvEx8xF
>7ynrYQ7wShqEr-w&m=btok6CidsBB2RHMhBLM5ndveAQWEGTwEG8ahuX5ajjM&s=qht7x1J_g9
>1Ch8BaVwk0lTgeF_X9NevjOKqQbiL0nkE&e=

More information about the gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list