[Gnso-ssc] For your review - RDS RT evaluation survey options

[Marika Konings]

All, so far the feedback is as follows:

Preference for option 1: Julf, Frederick, Renata
Preference for option 2: Poncelet

Can you please weigh in as soon as possible so we are able to launch the survey with sufficient time before the next meeting? We will also need your feedback concerning how the results are shared. Renate has already indicated that she prefers the survey results, including individual responses to be shared publicly.

Best regards,

Marika

From: <gnso-ssc-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>
Date: Thursday, March 30, 2017 at 20:20
To: "gnso-ssc at icann.org" <gnso-ssc at icann.org>
Subject: [Gnso-ssc] For your review - RDS RT evaluation survey options

Dear All,

Following on from the call today, staff has gone ahead and created two (for now) possible approaches for a survey to review the candidates for the RDS Review Team:


·         Option 1 – See https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Preview/?sm=0hjSAi4ZCoUvdD2Kv0gANdf5YVqJkYkY72BakcBodNIid_2FUGWhFFHZYmxyB7zn0K[surveymonkey.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.surveymonkey.com_r_Preview_-3Fsm-3D0hjSAi4ZCoUvdD2Kv0gANdf5YVqJkYkY72BakcBodNIid-5F2FUGWhFFHZYmxyB7zn0K&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=2zNUmJODrxcFaE9ZlN-Gx2Ku8s1bE0nCPqcUT4GYQ74&s=Q8Nn4WU6CuYLmVysl8yVLg-C6A5t4pLc9_hCNvZvwAc&e=> for a preview. This is a very straightforward approach which first asks two questions in relation to whether the candidate qualifies as a GNSO candidate (yes/no-don’t know) and whether the candidate has the necessary expertise and competence (yes/no-don’t know), followed by a ranking of the candidates. This approach is similar to the one used by the volunteers that reviewed the SSR2-RT candidates.

·         Option 2 – See https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Preview/?sm=3yLMDGyDuJTXv7WxGEXYmZTUiaAeDz3ZMxJ6g2UuNK6V0_2FXUhfilY6EjEGBvPgJQ[surveymonkey.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.surveymonkey.com_r_Preview_-3Fsm-3D3yLMDGyDuJTXv7WxGEXYmZTUiaAeDz3ZMxJ6g2UuNK6V0-5F2FXUhfilY6EjEGBvPgJQ&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=2zNUmJODrxcFaE9ZlN-Gx2Ku8s1bE0nCPqcUT4GYQ74&s=wPB5kUKuUiCZj5IX0W24JOGRccTZsjw8FU76kLhm6TQ&e=> for a preview. This survey goes into a bit more detail as it asks to rank the candidates based on how the meet 1) the skills and expertise as outlined in the call for volunteers, and 2) the desired attributes as outlined in the call for volunteers. This option could be further refined by asking a ranking for each individual skill / expertise and/or desired attribute, but that would make the survey significantly longer and would also take you more time to complete. The aggregated score could be used to obtain an overall ranking based on the responses from all.

Note that these two options are in preview mode – any responses will not be recorded.

Please share with the list which approach has your preference and/or which modifications or alternative approaches should be added to this list of options.

Once the SSC has agreed on an approach, you will also need to decide whether you intend to share the individual survey responses with the SSC or only the aggregated results as well as whether you intend to share these publicly. As noted on the call today, the charter foresees that “To facilitate its deliberations, the SSC may decide to conduct some or all of its deliberations in private, but if so, it is expected to provide a rationale with its recommendations”.

We would like to ask you to share your feedback as soon as possible so that ideally the survey will be launched early next week to allow for review and discussion of the results during next week’s meeting (please remember to fill out the doodle poll that has been circulated by Nathalie).

Best regards,

Marika

P.S. You will also find attached the updated summary document which now includes a column for gender.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ssc/attachments/20170403/fd424c08/attachment.html>