[ICANN Academy WG] Reality, Realism, and Responsiveness -- a few of the three Rs that we must consider + Accountability

Tue Aug 28 15:24:48 UTC 2012

I am struggling with what I will say in this email. 
first, I want all of us to stop, and think, and then try to agree. What is the purpose of an ICANN sponsored/funded/supported 'academy'? Is an 'academy' from ICANN our best strategy? What are the topics? Who is the audience?What is the credibility of an ICANN academy?Is this introduction, intro-doctrination, or something else?Given the harsh demands of work on the Constituencies/SGs/ALAC, and probably others, is this 'overview' or a more formalized training approach that is 'verified' with the entities?

I understand that some are citing examples  of sessions held in Europe or Latin America with guest speakers, none of whom are certified, or accountable to any entity, nor do they represent any official view.  that has great value.  
Let's introduce a different model:  ONLINE training.  
For instance, the DIPLO training is in fact highly successful in reaching large numbers of interested parties. Some become participants. Many just are better informed and more aware of ICANN, or IG, or the topic that is presented. 
I have no relationship to DIPLO,but I do have a concern. The Academy as proposed by whomever designed it is based on a model that makes assumptions that to me are elitist, and require face to face for a few.  The BC strongly wants to support training for the many -- including information that can be widely distributed by entities like the BC, etc. 
Some seem, again, to want to provide indoctrination/orientation to NC appointees. It is of concern to the BC that people who know nothing about ICANN are being appointed to leadership positions. BUT, any information/briefings/orientation must be neutral.  Orientation of newly appointed reps, whether Board or other, could be a one half day orientation session with the chairs of the various SOs/AC/Constituencies/SGs on Friday. That is a simple matter; less 'stressful' and is more an orientation session than an indoctrination opportunity. It also can be accomplished in a 1/2 day to 2/3 day segment. 
Decisions are needed on who can participate: all appointees? Chairs and designees? staff -- whom? BUT, it simplifies one of the objectives of the Academy and allows us to move the Academy concept into a more realistic and responsible discussion, which is not trying to solve too many problems at once. 
summary: We are struggling with implementing a process that simply lacks full support.  I have to focus on my responsibilities as BC Chair. I can come in a day early, but only if we decide now. I cannot stay after the ICANN meeting -- I have to travel to Montreal to a global event on ICTs. I'll travel Friday/late afternoon/early evening, so have some time during day Friday/post ICANN for a short discussion/debrief. 
However, the ICANN Board MUST meet in Toronto, or run the risk of conveying to the community that they simply don't care about accountability and transparency.  So, we should assume an ICANN Board meeting on Friday. That still leaves a two hour segment Friday afternoon. However, I have work to do with my Constituency/SG, and I need to plan accordingly. 
Can we not use part of Friday - pre ICANN - and discuss key questions:
Why:Who:What:When:AND WHAT NOT to do: what to co exist with, etc. 
Question to ICANN staff: Can you accept that an academy may not be a physical event, but could best be an online and widely available service that is online? That doesn't preclude an ocassional face to face, but online training is a different matter in terms of development, skills, and capability.  And reach. 
Is someone on staff or Board somehow so focused on having a physical 'academy' that using online training mechanisms are  not an option? We should determine now how flexible staff/board are willing to be on this.  
And, I need to assess how much resource, commitment and time that the BC can devote to the needs we see for enhancing support for participation from business and others. 
Marilyn Cade, BC Chair

Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 10:03:14 -0400
From: alain.berranger at gmail.com
To: tyokunbo at yahoo.co.uk
CC: at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [ICANN Academy WG] Pilot leadership training in Toronto - decision on the dates

Three quick points:1) the majority of those expressing a preference for postponing are all experienced and well trained in ICANN matters;2) would it make sense to poll the prospective trainees? They have the most at stake in learning.
3) an important benefit of training is the networking between trainees; given that this training involves a good chunk of ICANN stakeholders' leadership, this networking would produce substantial value.

Alain

On Tuesday, August 28, 2012, TYokunbo Abiola  wrote:

Having read about the Toronto training program for some time, I strongly agree with Bill's ideas.

Regards,
Adetokunbo Abiola

--- On Tue, 28/8/12, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:

From: William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch>

Subject: Re: [ICANN Academy WG] Pilot leadership training in Toronto - decision on the dates
To: "sandra hoferichter" <info at hoferichter.eu>

Cc: "at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg at icann.org" <at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg at icann.org>

Date: Tuesday, 28 August, 2012, 3:18

Hi

While I strongly support capacity building and outreach/inreach and would not want to cause frustration among those who've worked hard on this, I think I
 agree with Avri and Chuck that postponement merits serious consideration.  There still seems to be different baseline visions in play with regard to goals, substance, mechanics and governance, and it's not obvious that these can all be effectively resolved quickly enough to ensure a good outcome in Toronto.  And if a "not ready for prime time" version is rushed out and doesn't go splendidly, this could have a negative impact on community perceptions of the utility of such efforts going forward.  I'd rather see it unambiguously done right and build the support needed for a regular activity than have it be the object of gossip and dissensus (not that that could happen in ICANN, but…).

A little more percolation and community direction seems advisable to me.

Best,

Bill 

On Aug 28, 2012, at 7:53 AM, sandra hoferichter wrote:

> Hi Avri, postpone the programme would be that last option only, which I
 put not as an option yet. Taking into consideration the NomCom selections and the new CEO participation, I still see some very good reasons to go for Toronto. The Autumn meeting was not proposed just by chance. Furthermore I believe we can get things done, now that we are in the dialogue. 

> 
> Best Sandra
> 
> (Note: This message was send from my iPhone - I do apologise for any misspelling.)
> 
> Am 28.08.2012 um 01:01 schrieb "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes at verisign.com>:

> 
>> Considering how late it is before the Toronto meetings, this is worth considering.  At the same time, I personally will contribute however possible to do what needs to be done if we keep the Toronto target.

>> 
>> Chuck
>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org

>>> [mailto:at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg-bounces at atlarge-
>>> lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
>>> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2012 6:20 PM

>>> To: at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg at icann.org
>>> Subject: Re: [ICANN Academy WG] Pilot leadership training in Toronto -

>>> decision on the dates
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>>> other ideas.
>>> 
>>> Would it be possible/reasonable to add the option of postponing the

>>> leadership training
 from Toronto to a later time when a properly
>>> constituted plan can be considered?
>>> 
>>> Thanks
>>> 
>>> avri
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 27 Aug 2012, at 17:00, sandra hoferichter wrote:

>>> 
>>>> Dear all,
>>>> 
>>>> thank you again for the valuable comments which has been posted on
>>> this list. I did not respond to everyone, but they should all feed into

>>> the further discussion and the final curriculum.
>>>> 
>>>> Coming back to one of Filiz' earlier email I like to draw your
>>> attention to the following question and ask you kindly to express your

>>> opinion in a doodle.
>>>> 
>>>> Due to the time conflicts for some assigned participants, we like to
>>> get a clearer picture about
 the duration of the leadership training in
>>> Toronto.
>>>> 
>>>> I propose 3 options and ask all WG members*** to choose, what do you
>>>> think is the most appropriate solution. Feel free to consider also

>>> the
>>>> feedback of your SO / AC / SG chair whilst making the choice
>>>> here:http://www.doodle.com/4c4fa7dehuaksckx

>>>> 
>>>> *** For group balancing reasons I ask the recent ALAC programme
>>> committee members (Avri, Tijani, Sala, Carlos) only to reply on the
>>> doodle.
>>>> 

>>>> The options are:
>>>> 
>>>> 1.       A one day orientation programme on Fri, 12th October à this
>>> will avoid time conflicts, especially for the
 GNSO, board and current
>>> 

-- 
Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBAMember, Board of Directors, CECI, http://www.ceci.ca

Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business, www.schulich.yorku.caTreasurer, Global Knowledge Partnership Foundation, www.gkpfoundation.org
NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, www.chasquinet.org
Chair, NPOC, NCSG, ICANN, http://npoc.org/

O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
Skype: alain.berranger

_______________________________________________
at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg mailing list
at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg at atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/private/icann-academy-wg/attachments/20120828/ccc7a737/attachment.html>