00:22:43 Xavier Calvez - ICANN Org: Fully agree Cheryl. will also be helpful to the primary member to be able to debate ideas in-between meetings. 00:26:48 Becky Nash - ICANN Org: Here is a link to the Wiki space: https://community.icann.org/display/projfinadhocws/Planning+Prioritization+Framework 00:27:12 Chris Disspain: the status chart seems to imply that apart from the pilot, the priority framework won’t be used until financial year 24. So what happens to work and how is it prioritised before the start of 24? 00:28:21 Becky Nash - ICANN Org: Chris the outcome of the Pilot on the specific scope is for board approved specific recommendations to be evaluated for detailed plans for implementation in FY23. 00:29:36 Xavier Calvez - ICANN Org: @Chris: we have included in the FY23 plan a placeholder of resources to work on implementation of recommendations, but did not specify any, intending to use the outcome of the pilot to inform what implementation work is taken on for FY23. 00:29:57 Chris Disspain: ah…that makes sense - thanks 00:30:22 Xavier Calvez - ICANN Org: So, while this is a pilot, it still will be input that org will take into account for FY23 (starting in 1 July). 00:31:36 Chris Disspain: So the work that will be prioritised in FY23 will be as a result of the pilot and then for FY24 the re-drafted framework will be used… Got it 00:32:45 Xavier Calvez - ICANN Org: Exactly. 00:34:54 Xavier Calvez - ICANN Org: The first step on the left of the diagram has not existed up to now. The rest of the steps have existed since 2016 00:42:01 Xavier Calvez - ICANN Org: Acknowledging the presence in this meeting of the ICANN Board members Avri, Becky Burr, Danko and Matthew. Matthew will be the Board observer to this pilot meetings and is the chair of the BPCR Board caucus (Budgeting and Prioritization of Community Recommendations) which provides oversight to org on this prioritization framework process. Avri will be his alternate. Becky Burr and Danko are the 2 remaining members of this board caucus. 00:44:11 Matthew Shears: Thanks Xavier 00:45:17 Xavier Calvez - ICANN Org: And thank you to Manal, also Board member, who is also the alternate pilot participant for the GAC 00:45:34 Victoria Yang - ICANN Org: Meeting Materials are available on the wiki page here: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=192220713 00:52:51 Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC/At-Large: this sort of matrix usually requires a resourcing overlay as well before Implementation action starts however 00:52:59 Donna Austin, CPH: Got it, thanks Becky. 00:53:40 Becky Nash - ICANN Org: Thank you Donna for a very good question for the group. 00:54:14 Donna Austin, CPH: So worrying about resourcing is not within the scope of our job here. 00:54:28 Victoria Yang - ICANN Org: The output of the prioritization step is a list of activities that ICANN org will evaluate and work on planning for it during the draft plans development, which including budgeting. 00:54:54 Becky Nash - ICANN Org: Yes Donna. And Cheryl does this address your comment as well? 00:55:13 Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC/At-Large: indeed @Becky 00:55:24 Susan Payne: But then what happens if at planning step something is determined to be unfeasible due to resourcing/funding etc? Will you move on to the next priority on the list? 00:55:39 Victoria Yang - ICANN Org: Community can address resources related to the activity during the PC proceeding 00:56:36 Rafik Dammak: PC? 00:56:46 Victoria Yang - ICANN Org: sorry, Public Comment 00:57:00 Rafik Dammak: +1 01:01:13 Victoria Yang - ICANN Org: good question Susan, so for the pilot, we have 54 = (17+12+14+11) Items to discuss and prioritize, how many of the 54 will end up at P1 and P2? and how many of those can org work on is a question mark still. Thus, we need the time to evaluate, which in a regular planning process, that will be during the draft plan development phase. 01:01:17 Victoria Yang - ICANN Org: I hope that make sense. 01:01:18 Xavier Calvez - ICANN Org: @Susan: as an example, if org determines it has capacity to work on priority #1 to #4, but priority #3 can not be worked immediately because specific skills need to be acquired to work on it, org will then look at priority #5 to see it can then be incorporated into the workplan insteead. 01:02:03 Rafik Dammak: the matrix looks similar to Eisenhower Matrix , and usually according to it P4 is something to delegate or not do. I assume that doesn't what we mean here? 01:02:10 Susan Payne: ok, thanks Victoria, Xavier 01:03:03 Victoria Yang - ICANN Org: Yes, in our context, P4 doesn't mean something that we don't do, as those are Board approved recommendations. 01:03:33 Xavier Calvez - ICANN Org: #Rafik: you are correct, P$ does not mean “to delegate”. It also does not mean “don't do" though I could imagine that you all may think that some recommendations are obsolete or not worth implementing anymore, but that would likely be exceptional. 01:03:36 Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC/At-Large: But it may mean not do now/first/ urgently 01:03:44 Xavier Calvez - ICANN Org: sorry P4, not P$. 01:04:20 Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC/At-Large: A still "To Do' quadrant 01:04:36 Xavier Calvez - ICANN Org: yes Cheryl. 01:09:40 Xavier Calvez - ICANN Org: There is also a pragmatic efficiency advantage to start from an existing position rather than start from a blank sheet… 01:09:57 Chris Disspain: Xavier + 1 01:10:26 Xavier Calvez - ICANN Org: We do expect however that you will be able to react to the starting point and depart from it as you see fit. 01:11:17 Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC/At-Large: So to be clear I see the RT's priority as a data point not necessarily an influence 01:11:34 Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC/At-Large: Exactly a common matter 01:12:11 Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC/At-Large: and also only from ATRT3 has any form of criteria for what makes Recommendations come into play 01:12:17 Xavier Calvez - ICANN Org: @Susan: we agree. This is just an input for you to consider. 01:13:03 Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC/At-Large: indeed @Susan there is often a shift in Importance due to 'other factors- external and otherwise' 01:13:42 Xavier Calvez - ICANN Org: It is useful for you to know that the RT has suggested a rec was more important than another. But this is just input for you. We are not suggesting that this a final position. 01:15:31 Victoria Yang - ICANN Org: all comments and questions are welcome please. this is something new developed, and we want to hear feedback and improve and make this an useful process. 🙂 01:16:52 Rafik Dammak: it also still to early here :) 01:17:01 Jothan Frakes - CPH Alternate: good point @Susan about Gov or other mitigating factors that might pop up and bump Pri - these will likely reveal themselves and be presented to us (or org) 01:17:01 Xavier Calvez - ICANN Org: We will make a note of the potential issue of “a bias" introduced by the starting point as a potential lesson learned after the pilot. 01:17:02 Donna Austin, CPH: Sorry I need to step away for a minute or two 01:17:31 Jothan Frakes - CPH Alternate: Pilot makes sense 01:17:51 Xavier Calvez - ICANN Org: Thank you Jothan. 01:20:59 Donna Austin, CPH: I'm back 01:21:43 Rafik Dammak: it is 6:00am call for me 01:21:48 Chris Disspain: this is a short sharp exercise and consistency of time would be helpful IMO 01:22:44 Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC/At-Large: getting the diary entry is also essential 01:23:33 Jothan Frakes - CPH Alternate: rotation of meeting times is sub-utopian vs middle of night 01:24:11 Jothan Frakes - CPH Alternate: constant time = p1 time of day = p4 See, I get the pilot 01:24:24 Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC/At-Large: it is only 5 meetings of course 01:24:40 Xavier Calvez - ICANN Org: Nice Jothan… 01:24:43 Becky Nash - ICANN Org: Yes Cheryl it is only 5 meetings or less 01:25:40 Victoria Yang - ICANN Org: if we can get through the 54 rows within 2 meetings, then yes, less than 5 meetings in total 😄 01:28:00 Jothan Frakes - CPH Alternate: I think this call is about HOW and I agree that when we get to WHAT the advance notice is helpful 01:28:01 Susan Payne - CSG: perfect 01:28:41 Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC/At-Large: working meetings might need to be a little longer if needs be 01:29:07 Jothan Frakes - CPH Alternate: I notice we have some of the best from org staff here, so this will go very smoothly 01:29:28 Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC/At-Large: All good 01:29:34 Susan Payne - CSG: yes thanks it has 01:29:40 Rafik Dammak: thanks all 01:29:51 Matthew Shears: good introductory session - thanks 01:29:56 Xavier Calvez - ICANN Org: for each of you to form your input thanks to your colleagues input is all good, though we would not want to extend the duration of the pilot to enable inter-meeting offline communication. 01:29:57 Cheryl Langdon-Orr - ALAC/At-Large: Bye for now then 01:30:08 Jothan Frakes - CPH Alternate: great intro, thank you for the hard work... look forward to diving into the WHAT 01:30:09 Xavier Calvez - ICANN Org: Thank you all for your time. 01:30:15 Victoria Yang - ICANN Org: Thank you all. This is great. We look forward to working with you all on the pilot. 01:30:19 Jonathan Zuck: Thanks! 01:30:19 Chris Disspain: thanks team… Great work 01:30:20 Ken Renard: see you next time! 01:30:25 Susan Chalmers: Bye, thanks!