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 discussion by the ARIWG

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.
Prioritization3.3.1. (High resource needs; High risk; #1 priority)
ARIWG comments
  1. Consider further use of staff as proofreaders for non-native English speakers
  2. Consider use of staff as translators for non-english participants in advice development
  3. Consider further use of staff to present issues on webinars
  4. (JC) Consider capacity of staff in being the librarian for At-Large's policy repository
  5. (JC) Consider knowledge of staff in actual issues of policy considered by At-Large to enable them to be effective points of reference for queries, past positions, webinars etc
  6. (JC) Consider capacity of staff in monitoring, distilling and applying commentary contributions by At-Large community members collected through various tools / channels, as well as usage of tools for facilitating such contributions
  7. (JC) Performance review

8. (NA) A targeted policy development training program to at-large staff goes hand-in hand with at-large community development or capacity building program. Reasoning the peer learning and discussions enhances the learning.  

9. (NA) Review the job description of at-large staff to develop separate positions /roles with clear organizational structure.

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?

(JC) ICANN Org for HR aspects, ALAC for actual implementation, with supervision also provided under CPWG leadership (or any other WG dealing with ALAC policy)

(HM) with supervision under the implementation working group of the ALAC

Anticipated resource requirements (FTEs, tools)
Expected budget implications

Proposed implementation steps:

  1. (JC) Identify what policy support activities ALAC / At-Large needs first
  2. (JC) Consider capacity of staff in being the librarian for At-Large's policy repository
  3. (JC) Consider knowledge of staff in actual issues of policy considered by At-Large to enable them to be effective points of reference for queries, past positions, webinars etc
  4. (JC) Consider capacity of staff in monitoring, distilling and applying commentary contributions by At-Large community members collected through various tools / channels, as well as usage of tools for facilitating such contributions
  5. (JC) Performance review
  6. Consider further use of staff as proofreaders for non-native English speakers
  7. Consider use of staff as translators for non-english participants in advice development
  8. Consider further use of staff to present issues on webinars
Continuous Improvement(s)


Metrics
  1. (JC) Performance review
How long will it take to implement this plan?

...