Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

Cloak

NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only for demonstration purposes and discussion within the ARIWG

Issue #1

Lead: Jonathan Zuck


Quality vs Quantity of ALAC Advice
Final Proposal as approved by the Board

Staff, under the direction of At-Large leadership, has already begun to rework the website and Wiki to ensure that our “Policy Advice” pages are accurate and understandable. This will continue as volunteer and staff resources allow. We will also ensure that as documents are published, the classification of the document is clear.

Prioritization1:1:1 (Low resource needs : Low risk ; 1st priority)
ARIWG comments


Status of improvement effort / staff leadAlready underway, continuous improvement to continue / HU; EE
Activities, if any, on which implementation is dependent, or that are dependent on implementation of this recommendationNone noted as at end Sept 2018
Who will implement the recommendation: ICANN community, ICANN Board, ICANN Organization, other?ICANN Staff in conjunction with ALAC/At-Large Leadership
Anticipated resource requirements (FTEs, tools)Staff up to 0.2 FTEs in Dec 2018 through to Dec 2019
Expected budget implicationsNothing additional beyond already allocated resources to At-Large.

Proposed implementation steps:

  1. Nov 2018 convene analysis and review of issue and status of improvements to date micro-team with staff allocated, penholders for this issue <insert link to wiki page> and ARIWG member volunteers as desired.
  2. Identify the specifics of processes and practices used to date.
  3. Identification of opportunities for process improvement or modification
  4. Development of proposal for reenvisioning any processes and practices to be discussed by ALAC / At-Large and those utilising ALAC advice.
  5. Documentation process renewal proposal as agreed and prioritised developed into a project plan. Noting which milestones are intended to be reached by Dec 2019, and what is to be undertaken under review and continuous improvement planning.
Continuous Improvement(s)
Metrics
How long will it take to implement this plan?

...

Cloak

NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG

Issue #2Uneven contribution of At-Large to a coordinated ICANN strategy for ‘Outreach and Engagement’. Missed opportunities for coordination with other constituencies and ICANN staff.

Final Proposal as approved by the Board

Lead: Bastiaan Goslings

At-Large is increasingly focusing on individuals (both unaffiliated At-Large Members as well as members within
each ALS) instead of just ALS voting representatives. Four of the five (RALOs) allow individual members and the fifth, LACRALO, has already approved the concept and is developing the detailed rules. We will also use the ALSes to communicate with those within an ALS who may have an interest in ICANN.

RALOs have also started to identify experts on ICANN topics within their ALSes and among individual members and to increasingly engage them in ALAC’s policy work. Thus, a bi-directional flow of ICANN information continues to be strengthened.

These activities will require the production of information that is truly understandable (as identified in a recent ALAC-GAC Joint Statement) and available in multiple languages. As some of this will need to be created by At-Large staff, additional resources may be needed. We would suggest that At-Large Staff continue to work together with At-Large Leadership in looking for effective methodologies to coach and onboard new policy volunteers and leaders to facilitate the development of their skills and encourage them to stay and deepen their knowledge and expertise. Regarding the perception of unchanging leadership, statistics reporting involvement will be published

Prioritization3.3.1. (High resource needs; High risk; #1 priority)
ARIWG comments


Status of improvement effort / staff lead
Activities, if any, on which implementation is dependent, or that are dependent on implementation of this recommendation
Who will implement the recommendation: ICANN community, ICANN Board, ICANN Organization, other?
Anticipated resource requirements (FTEs, tools)
Expected budget implications

Proposed implementation steps:


Continuous Improvement(s)
Metrics
How long will it take to implement this plan?

...

Cloak

NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the AIRWG

Issue #3

Lead: Holly Raiche


Staff resources are disproportionately concentrated on administrative support. Staff should have greater capacity to support preparation of policy advice.
Final Proposal as approved by the Board
Continue to look for opportunities to utilize and develop the skills of At-Large support staff while ensuring that the positions taken by At-Large represent solely those of users. Ensure that the volunteer community has sufficient support services so as to best utilize their volunteer time. This may require a shift or development of skills among At-Large Staff as well as additional staff.
Final Proposal as approved by the Board
Continue to look for opportunities to utilize and develop the skills of At-Large support staff while ensuring that the positions taken by At-Large represent solely those of users. Ensure that the volunteer community has sufficient support services so as to best utilize their volunteer time. This may require a shift or development of skills among At-Large Staff as well as additional staff.
Prioritization3.3.1. (High resource needs; High risk; #1 priority)
Prioritization3.3.1. (High resource needs; High risk; #1 priority)
ARIWG comments


Status of improvement effort / staff lead
Activities, if any, on which implementation is dependent, or that are dependent on implementation of this recommendation
Who will implement the recommendation: ICANN community, ICANN Board, ICANN Organization, other?
Anticipated resource requirements (FTEs, tools)
Expected budget implications

Proposed implementation steps:


Continuous Improvement(s)
Metrics
ARIWG commentsStatus of improvement effort / staff leadActivities, if any, on which implementation is dependent, or that are dependent on implementation of this recommendationWho will implement the recommendation: ICANN community, ICANN Board, ICANN Organization, other?Anticipated resource requirements (FTEs, tools)Expected budget implications

Proposed implementation steps:

Continuous Improvement(s)MetricsHow long will it take to implement this plan?

...

Cloak

NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG

Issue #4

Lead: Maureen Hilyard


Leadership Team (ALT), which is not mandated by ICANN Bylaws, concentrates in the established leadership too many decision-making and other administrative powers which should be spread among the members of the ALAC.

Final Proposal as approved by the Board

- Issue #4


The ALAC Chair will work with members of the ALAC and staff to better communicate the role and activities of the ALT ensuring that it is clear what the ALT does and does not do.
Prioritization1:1:1 (Low resource needs : Low risk ; 1st priority group)
of the ALAC and staff to better communicate the role and activities of the ALT ensuring that it is clear what the ALT does and does not do.
Prioritization1:1:1 (Low resource needs : Low risk ; 1st priority group)
ARIWG comments

This leadership model has been developed by the incoming Chair to offer a visual representation of the new At-Large Leadership Team (ALT), as part of her preparation for future Leadership of At-Large. The ALT now includes Regional Leaders, to encourage more interaction between the ALAC and the leaders of our regional member organisations. The objective is also to ensure that decisions and other important messages from the ICANN Board (through our At-Large Board representative) and from other constituencies of ICANN (through the ALAC Liaisons) are relayed more directly to Regional Leaders and will more easily filter to the At-Large Community through RALO meetings and outreach and engagement opportunities.

ARIWG commentsStatus of improvement effort / staff lead
Activities, if any, on which implementation is dependent, or that are dependent on implementation of this recommendation

Introduction of the organigram to all the members to get buy in to the organisational model and the purposes behind making the information more transparent. This is proposed to take place during the Development Session of the ALAC , Regional Leaders and Liaisons which will be held at the conclusion of ICANN63 in Barcelona. This session will also give implementation issue teams a chance to discuss their plans for the items they have been assigned, with each other and to get feedback Other organisational teams (CPWG and O&E leads will be able to share some goals and objectives for their working teams during 2019, especially as we lead up to ATLASIII.


Who will implement the recommendation: ICANN community, ICANN Board, ICANN Organization, other?ICANN Staff in conjunction with the ALAC/At-Large Leadership
Anticipated resource requirements (FTEs, tools)
Expected budget implications

Proposed implementation steps:

Many of the issues raised have already been addressed in some way by the Incoming Chair as part of her preparation for future Leadership of At-Large. The following steps have been covered:

1. An Organigram has been developed to show a new At-Large Leadership model that is more inclusive and collaborative, as well as being more transparent and accountable. 

2. The Organigram demonstrates how leadership roles are dispersed among ALAC and Regional Leaders, as well as to key leads who take responsibility for the core tasks of At-Large - namely, Development of Policy Advice, ; Outreach and Engagement; and Organisational Matters 

3. Regional Leaders  have been incorporated into what is now the At-Large Leadership Team to enable them to share in ALAC discussions about key issues, and then to share any key messages with their regional members.

4. At-Large Leadership team meetings will be open to the ALAC and the public unless there are specific, usually personnel, issues to be discussed (as per any ALAC meeting). These matters will be discussed in camera.

5. A specific page on the At-Large Wiki and Website will display the organigram which will be regularly updated with regards to current Working Groups and appointees to various roles that are allocated by the vote of the ALAC.

6. Roles and responsibilities of the different levels of leadership within At-Large will be more clearly defined on a page set aside for this purpose on the website, and available to all.

7. Staff will be assigned to the steps #5 and #6 as per Implementation Task #1 which is related to At-Large Wikis and the Website, and the work of At-Large.. 

Continuous Improvement(s)Staff will update the wiki spaces related to this task regularly as any changes are made ti to the ALAC and to other personnel and working groups or other activities related to the charts and other information
Metrics

Any changes to personnel involvem are involvement will be recorded on the wiki spaces within one month of the change taking place

How long will it take to implement this plan?Implementation will take place immediately after the Barcelona meeting. Once loaded onto the website, it will be updated as required.



ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#5

Toggle Cloak

...

Cloak

NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG

Issue #5

Lead: Tijani Ben Jemaa


Uneven contribution of At-Large to a coordinated ICANN strategy for ‘Outreach and Engagement’. Missed opportunities for coordination with other constituencies and ICANN staff.
Final Proposal as approved by the Board

To the extent allowed by ICANN’s mission and available funding, members of At-Large and the At-Large organizations will continue to, and potentially increase, our involvement
with other I* organizations as a method for increasing the visibility of At-Large, exploring areas for mutual collaboration and for attracting additional At-Large volunteers.

At-Large will continue to work closely with GSE Staff to contribute to regional outreach plans and to encourage participation in a cross-community, cross-organizational fashion.

Prioritization2.2.1 (Medium needs; medium risk; #1 priority group)
ARIWG comments


Status of improvement effort / staff lead
Activities, if any, on which implementation is dependent, or that are dependent on implementation of this recommendation
Who will implement the recommendation: ICANN community, ICANN Board, ICANN Organization, other?
Anticipated resource requirements (FTEs, tools)
Expected budget implications

Proposed implementation steps:


Continuous Improvement(s)
Metrics
How long will it take to implement this plan?

...

Cloak

NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG

Issue #6

Lead: Sebastian Bachollet


Election processes are excessively complex and have been open to allegations of unfairness.
Final Proposal as approved by the Board
At-Large will continue to evolve its processes through its bottom-up, consensus based, community deliberations and update as and when needed.
Prioritization3.3.2. (High resource needs; High risk; #2 priority)
ARIWG comments


Status of improvement effort / staff lead
Activities, if any, on which implementation is dependent, or that are dependent on implementation of this recommendation
Who will implement the recommendation: ICANN community, ICANN Board, ICANN Organization, other?
Anticipated resource requirements (FTEs, tools)
Expected budget implications

Proposed implementation steps:


Continuous Improvement(s)
Metrics
How long will it take to implement this plan?

...

Cloak

NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG

Issue #7

Lead: Javier Rua-Jovet


Excessive amounts of At-Large Community time spent on process and procedure at expense of ALAC’s mandated responsibilities to produce policy advice and coordinate outreach and engagement activities. Too many internal working groups are a distraction.
Final Proposal as approved by the Board
The ALAC has begun to review our WGs, ensuring that the ones we have are active and relevant. We have also started the process to revamp our WG web and Wiki presence to ensure that all WGs are properly represented and documented. Groups no longer active will be segregated, but still documented for historical purposes
Prioritization1:1:1 (Low resource needs : Low risk ; 1st priority group)
ARIWG comments


Status of improvement effort / staff lead
Activities, if any, on which implementation is dependent, or that are dependent on implementation of this recommendationPartially related to Item activity #1 0 Quality vs quantity of policy advice. May need to collaborate.
Who will implement the recommendation: ICANN community, ICANN Board, ICANN Organization, other?
Anticipated resource requirements (FTEs, tools)
Expected budget implications

Proposed implementation steps:


Continuous Improvement(s)
Metrics
How long will it take to implement this plan?

...