Page History

A.S - STRENGTHS                                                                              

A.S.1 - Membership diversity brings talent
A.S.2 - Regional involvement and balance:
    1.  At-Large outreach is pillar of ICANN's strategic influence in Internet governance
    2.  Involvement of all five RALOs is an asset
    3.  Knowledge of local communities benefits outreach planning
    4.  Knowledge of local actors (e.g., stakeholders, government leaders,
policy makers, regulators) related to ICANN and Internet ecosystem
    5.  Knowledge of possible outreach efforts
    6.  First-hand involvement in Internet governance unrelated to ICANN and domain names
A.S.3 - At-Large strategy is bottom-up and reflects the consensus of many stakeholders
A.S.4 - Current structure and existing processes are in place to avoid capture and allow scalability 
A.S.5 - At-Large, as home of individual Internet users, does not take into account purely commercial or vested individual interests
A.S.6 - Number and diversity of stakeholders are growing
A.S.7 - Level of participation by stakeholders is increasing
A.S.8 - At-Large is core part of the original ICANN vision
A.S.9 - At-Large's multi-stakeholder, bottom-up governance transcends operational domain name issues
A.S.10 - At Large, as ICANN's conscience, brings unique considerations to strategic planning


NARALO & LACRALO (combined)

NARALO:
Benefit   Volunteer involvement is highly professional and experienced, providing a wealth of knowledge and expertise.
      -  LACRALO:  Benefits of having a voter voting Board Director from Director At-Large community
      -  LACRALO:  We are a community.
      -  LACRALO:  We have processes to encourage maximum participation in contests or mechanisms for appointment.
NARALO: Volunteer involvement is highly professional and experienced providing a wealth of knowledge and expertise

A.W - WEAKNESSES                                                               

A.W.1 - Specific details of At-Large strategy are not well defined or easily understood
A.W.2 - Translations: 
    1.  Number is limited
    2.  Delays exist
A.W.3 - Lack of clear strategic targets for the whole At-Large community (ALSes, RALOs, and ALAC)

LACRALO:

Lack of empowerment to the RALOS "officers" in events related to ICANN
Lack of sufficient and updated skills (technical knowledge, socil and political agenda of ICANN)
Increased risk of applying the capabilities of an ALS or an entire RALO in support of a pattern or policy favoring a single provider or provider

There is, in theory, the possibly that a RALO can be "captured" by a single provider or provider group -- consistently supporting policies favoring a that provider or group. (For example with new gTLDsExample issues on which a RALO might suffer capture:  New gTLDs, ccTLDs used like generics, and other changes in the domain names).changes in the DNS.)

Lack of mechanisms for transparency and accountability within and between ALSes.

Lack of minimum requirements for the incorporation of the At-Large ALSes (Annual Reportperhaps should require annual report, statutes approved by competent authorities, recent activities).:
      -  Lack of policies of Out-Rich.
regarding outreach;
      -  Lack of policies of In-Rich.
Must be substantially improved procedures to include profilesregarding "inreach"; and
      -  Must substantially improve procedures to include profiles, orientation, presence and participation, representation, better options for new leaders, less or no re-election, less or no multiple representation in the same or different agencies, etc.

NARALO:

- Lack of presence of  fair representation from  low income  memberships  from the " digital divide"

- Unclear of the integration of the disabled communities, WCAG 2.0 compliance

- No separate committee on mobile internet issues ie. internet on smart phones, Ipads, Motorola Xoom etc

A.O - OPPORTUNITIES                                                                      

A.O.1 - Ability to feed local and global issues into ICANN strategy
A.O.2 - Very powerful communication channel
A.O.3 - Useful tool for ICANN outreach
A.O.4 - Local ALSes can help with local events (i.e., act as liaisons to local stakeholders)
A.O.5 - Developing countries and emerging economies provide many prospects 
A.O.6 - Opportunity exists to create a road-map, based on various scenarios, for At-Large's future
A.O.7 - A better understanding between At-Large and ICANN Strategy team could lead to increased use of At-Large as a strategic resource for ICANN
A.O.8 - Public participation could be strengthened by integrating the Public Participation Committee's strategy with At-Large 's processes, facilitated by Staff
A.O.9 - Consultation and coordination between RALOs should be strengthened

LACRALO:

The participation of the ALSes  in Out-Rich events  in outreach events can be strengthened by the sponsor and sponsorship and the funding of ICANN. 

The increase in the remote participation of the At-Large meetings can increase the contribution and participation of the global communities.

NARALO:

Leadership Could take a leadership role in providing foundation grants (ICANN Is a 501C) to less fortunate groups,  Note .  Note the World Wide Web Foundation's efforts to promote entreprenuership in the third worldthe Third World.  (This could be a way of encouraging the growth of a number of ALSes.)

A.T - THREATS                                                                            

A.T.1 - Lack of funding limits outreach
A.T.2 - Lack of volunteers reduces time spent on strategic issues
A.T.3 - Lack of established feedback loop from ICANN
A.T.4 - Loss of ICANN credibility if At-Large does not grow
A.T.5 - If bottom-up process is broken or At-Large strategy is not considered:
         1. Loss of local support
         2. Loss of stakeholder input
A.T.6 - ICANN's control by government-led agencies
A.T.7 - Competition from another agency similar to ICANN
A.T.8 - International pressure limits ICANN's revenue

LACRALO:

ICANN control by IT companies. OCL: yes 

Loss of efforts and resources of At-Large in the training of volunteers to be removed (no longer participate) in the community without the benefit of it.  OCL: yes, but I would see this more a weakness than a threat