[ICANN Academy WG] Reality, Realism, and Responsiveness -- a few of the three Rs that we must consider + Accountability
Nigel Roberts
nigel at channelisles.net
Tue Aug 28 15:31:29 UTC 2012
>
> Can we not use part of Friday - *pre ICANN *- and discuss key questions:
>
For some of us, for whom travel expense economy is a key indicator, this
is NOT possible simply because of the fact that discount coach-class
tickets have already been booked before this was mentioned.
On 08/28/2012 04:24 PM, Marilyn Cade wrote:
> 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 <http://mc/compose?to=cgomes%40verisign.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
> <http://mc/compose?to=at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg-bounces%40atlarge-lists.icann.org>
> >>> [mailto:at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg-bounces at atlarge-
> >>> lists.icann.org <http://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
> <http://mc/compose?to=at-large-icann-academy-ad-hoc-wg%40icann.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, MBA
> Member, Board of Directors, CECI, http://www.ceci.ca
> <http://www.ceci.ca/en/about-ceci/team/board-of-directors/>
> Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business,
> www.schulich.yorku.ca <http://www.schulich.yorku.ca>
> Treasurer, Global Knowledge Partnership Foundation,
> www.gkpfoundation.org <http://www.gkpfoundation.org>
> NA representative, Chasquinet Foundation, www.chasquinet.org
> <http://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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
More information about the icann-academy-wg
mailing list