AT-LARGE GATEWAY

At-Large Website

ALAC

RALOs

At-Large Regional Policy Engagement Program (ARPEP)

At-Large Governance

At-Large Reports

Policy Comments & Advice

Working Groups

ICANN Meetings

At-Large Summit (ATLAS III)

At-Large Review Implementation Plan Development

ALAC and RALO Elections, Selections, and Appointments

At-Large Priority Activities - 2021

 

 

Independent Examiner’s Final Recommendation

ALAC should adopt a set of metrics that are consistent for the entire At-Large Community to measure the implementation and impact of the EMM and track the continuous improvement in the performance of the At-Large Community.

Issue Identified

Absence of consistent performance metrics.

Does ALAC Support Recommendation?

Support with qualification

As the ALAC is explicitly rejecting the EMM model, there is no plan to monitor its performance. However, the ALAC does support the establishment of metrics to track performance and improvement of the At-Large Community.

If Not, Please Provide Reasoning.

Not Applicable

If ALAC Does Not Support Recommendation, Does It Suggest an Alternative Recommendation?

If so, please provide a suggested alternative Recommendation.

Not Applicable

Prioritization

Low Priority

At-Large Comments

The ALAC already define a set of metrics for performance for ALAC Members. The ALAC also has an activity to develop metrics for other volunteers and community members. This activity was largely put on hold during the IANA Stewardship and CCWG-Accountability efforts. There is also an ongoing activity to establish criteria for ALS performance. Establishing metrics for RALO leadership is potentially more problematic as it is not clear that the ALAC has the authority to act in this area.

At-Large has a Metrics WG (one of the groups recommended to be abolished) that has been tasked precisely with that responsibility.

Although consistency is important, there are also significant differences between the regions and any discussion of metrics needs to factor that in. 

Possible Dependencies

The Metrics WG is currently on hold pending the completion of the ALS and RALO Criteria and Expectations Task Force.

Who Will Implement?

ALAC SubCommittee on Metrics, RALOs

Resource Requirements


Budget Effects impact?


Implementation Timeline


Proposed Implementation Steps




  • No labels

6 Comments

  1. Alan Greenberg

    My thoughts

    Status: Accept with qualification

    Comment: The ALAC already define a set of metrics for performance for ALAC Members. The ALAC also has an activity to develop metrics for other volunteers and community members. This activity was largely put on hold during the IANA Stewardship and CCWG-Accountability efforts. There is also an ongoing activity to establish criteria for ALS performance. As the ALAC is explicitly rejecting the EMM model, there is no plan to monitor its performance.


  2. Glenn McKnight

    Status  Accept

    Comments

    The devil is in the details on the  tracking mechanism and what is being measured. We lack clear reporting on improvements and organizational efficiency. Clear and consistent deliverables and benchmarks are needed. 

  3. Ariel Liang

    ALAC comment in the ALAC Statement on the At-Large Review Draft Report

    ==

    As noted elsewhere, the ALAC does not support implementation of the EMM. However, the ALAC does support the establishment of metrics to track performance and improvement of the At-Large Community. In fact, we have a Metrics WG (one of the groups recommended to be abolished) that has been tasked precisely with that responsibility. It is currently on hold pending the completion of the ALS and RALO Criteria and Expectations Task Force. Although consistency is important, there are also significant differences between the regions and any discussion of metrics needs to factor that in. 

  4. Holly Raiche

    Yes, we had a metrics program - which we need to both update and then report against.  Quoting Glenn, clear and consistent deliverables are what is needed.  some metrics are easy - participating in call, voting, holding thee pen.  And - agea ago - we all submitted reports on the meetings we attended at ICANN meetings.  Time to revisit the metrics, revise them, and then report on them

  5. Aida Noblia

    In order to establish the implementation timeline, it is necessary to know how long the ALS and RALO criteria and expectations working group will finish its work and how long the metric group will finish its in each RALO.
    This must be determined before 6 August ! We need to ask this question to each RALO  already . Timeline  for response is before August 6

  6. Vanda Scartezini

    accept the need for metrics and it is high priority in my view.

    in many other points in this review I, personally,  and many other colleagues have state such need and made suggestions on how to proceed to define adequate metrics for At LArge. 

    this, in my view shall be priority 1