[ICANN Academy WG] Outcome of the survey

Tue Feb 12 01:48:03 UTC 2013

Thanks, Sandra, I agree with Tijani on the suggestions for the next step.
We may also take a note of the composition of the Respondents to the
survey. Although it is diversified, Responses from at-large community are
almost a half and some stakeholder groups are still missing. It could be
mentioned in the survey analysis.

Hong

On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:51 PM, Tijani BEN JEMAA <
tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn> wrote:

>  Dear Sandra,****
>
> ** **
>
> Great work, thank you.****
>
> I didn’t find the result for question 12. Can u please tell me how many
> want it prior to the ICANN meeting and how many want it afterward?****
>
> ** **
>
> I think that the next steps could be:****
>
> **·       **Survey analysis****
>
> **·       **Analysis result distributed on the list****
>
> **·       **At least one call prior to Beijing to discuss the priority
> actions according to the survey result****
>
> **·       **Interaction with Sally and staff in general****
>
> **·       **Face to face meeting in Beijing****
>
> ** **
>
> I hope that in Beijing, we decide concrete actions and that in the near
> future, we will be able to have the ICANN Academy starting its work.****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *My address **tijani.benjemaa at fmai.org** **is not working properly any
> more. Please use one of the 2 following addresses: **
> tijani.benjemaa at topnet.tn** **or** tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn***
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ****
>
> *Tijani BEN JEMAA*
>
> Executive Director****
>
> Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (*FMAI*)****
>
> Phone:  + 216 41 649 605****
>
> Mobile: + 216 98 330 114****
>
> Fax:       + 216 70 853 376****
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ****
>
>  ****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *De :* 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] *De la
> part de* sandra hoferichter
> *Envoyé :* samedi 9 février 2013 18:56
> *À :* 'ICANN Academy WG'
> *Objet :* [ICANN Academy WG] Outcome of the survey****
>
> ** **
>
> Welcome back to the ICANN Academy working group!****
>
> ** **
>
> First of all I think it is never too late to send you my best wishes for
> the new year, for some parts of the world, like China, I am even right in
> time.****
>
> ** **
>
> With some delay from my side I send you enclosed the survey report. The
> aim of this survey was to get more detailed information about the different
> needs of the various stakeholder groups within ICANN, in order to
> development of a moulded framework structure for all capacity building
> provisions in ICANN. This framework shall then:****
>
> ** **
>
> 1.       mirror all current Capacity Building provisions (modules) within
> ICANN****
>
> 2.       help to identify possible missing modules within ICANN****
>
> 3.       help to harmonise and synchronise all current and future modules*
> ***
>
> ** **
>
> The report enclosed provides no information about the stakeholder groups
> which participated in this exercise. Nevertheless this information is
> existing - an overview is provided below. Over all 22. surveys were
> submitted. I must admit I was hoping to receive some more surveys, on the
> other hand we can expect that some results were jointly submitted by a
> group of people. The following Organizations & Committees did not
> participate in the survey: ASO, RSSAC, SSAC. ****
>
> ** **
>
> The following groups participated:****
>
> ** **
>
> 1.****
>
> ccNSO****
>
> 2.****
>
> GNSO / RySG****
>
> 3.****
>
> At-Large / NARALO****
>
> 4.****
>
> At-Large/ EURALO****
>
> 5.****
>
> At-Large/ APRALO****
>
> 6.****
>
> At-Large / AFRALO****
>
> 7.****
>
> At-Large / EURALO****
>
> 8.****
>
> At-Large / LACRALO****
>
> 9.****
>
> At-Large / LACRALO****
>
> 10.****
>
> At-Large / LACRALO****
>
> 11.****
>
> NomCom****
>
> 12.****
>
> GAC****
>
> 13.****
>
> At-Large / EURALO****
>
> 14.****
>
> At-Large / APRALO****
>
> 15.****
>
> GNSO / NPOC****
>
> 16.****
>
> GNSO /NPOC****
>
> 17.****
>
> GAC****
>
> 18.****
>
> GNSO / NPOC****
>
> 19.****
>
> GNSO / NPOC****
>
> 20.****
>
> GNSO / NPOC****
>
> 21.****
>
> GNSO / BC****
>
> 22.****
>
> GNSO / NPOC****
>
> ** **
>
> I will not start to analyse this survey at this point, because I want to
> find out first what you are reading from the results. The only thing which
> is pretty clear for me, and I would like to share with you here is, that
> various needs were identified and I see the WG is on the right track
> working on a modular system which provides different types of programmes
> for different groups respectively level of engagement. One size will not
> fit all.****
>
> ** **
>
> As for the future course of action I think we can organise a conference
> call prior to Beijing and meet there personally. Your suggestions in this
> regard are welcome. ****
>
> ** **
>
> I am looking forward to your comments****
>
> ** **
>
> Best Sandra ****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>

-- 
Professor Dr. Hong Xue
Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL)
Beijing Normal University
http://www.iipl.org.cn/
19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street
Beijing 100875 China
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/private/icann-academy-wg/attachments/20130212/6560a9d2/attachment.html>