Page History

RECORDINGS

Audio Recording

Zoom Recording

Zoom chat

GNSO transcripts are located on the GNSO Calendar

PARTICIPATION

Attendance-Zoom

Attendance-CRM

Apology: Osvaldo Novoa

Notes/ Action Items

Action Items:

1. Discussion of poll results and candidate EOI – Community Representatives Group (CRG) to select Independent Review Process (IRP) Standing Panel

ACTION ITEM: Staff to put to the list the proposal for Heather as the candidate to put forward to the GNSO Council with a request for SSC members to respond by 23:59 UTC on Monday, 18 January.

1. Content of Report to S/Cs on the CRG Rep selection process 

ACTION ITEM: Staff to collate the suggestions from this meeting and send them to Leadership, who will review and then send to the SSC members.

1. Discussion – Should the SSC comment on whether to open a new EOI process for CRG candidates?  

ACTION ITEM: Sophie Hey to draft a letter and send it to the SSC list for review and SSC members can decide to sign on in their individual capacities.

Notes: 

1. SOI Updates: None provided.

2. Discussion of poll results and candidate EOI – Community Representatives Group (CRG) to select Independent Review Process (IRP) Standing Panel (additional information hereand here, poll results will be sent once the poll is closed)

Summary of Poll Results:

-- 7 responses to the poll.

-- Overwhelming support for Heather as a qualified candidate.

-- Additional response from Peter outside the poll supported Heather.

-- Scores on the questions were high all around (8s, 9s, and 10s).

-- Addition comments were all very positive.

Discussion:

-- In future evaluations the EOI needs to be much more specific so that respondents can speak specifically to those items.

-- Question: Is it necessary to ask Heather for more information? Answer: This is focused on going forward.  Heather is well known.

-- Heather was the only candidate, but based on the poll we are supporting putting Heather forward as the candidate.

ACTION ITEM: Staff to put to the list the proposal for Heather as the candidate to put forward to the GNSO Council with a request for SSC members to respond by 23:59 UTC on Monday, 18 January.

3. Content of Report to S/Cs on the CRG Rep selection process (see attached slide and below):

Questions for the SSC to discuss:

• Should additional materials be requested from candidates as part of future EOI processes (for example, an EOI form with specific questions about candidate qualifications)?
• Are the SSC’s standard process and practice (e.g. reliance on written materials only) scalable and sufficient for this type of appointment? Should additional mechanisms be considered in the future

(interviews, reference, etc.)? If additional mechanisms are recommended, is the SSC in a position to conduct such activities?

• Is any additional guidance needed from SG/Cs to support future selection processes?

Discussion/Content:

-- If bullet number 1 is done more thoroughly then an additional mechanism may not be necessary.

-- Need a thorough EOI.  If the EOI mirrors the areas of expertise in the Terms of Reference then we probably don’t need additional questions.

-- There is the case where a call goes out and there is only one or no candidates – can we make suggestions to improve the process to encourage volunteers?  That could be helpful include.

-- High perks or benefits and also make qualification criteria clearer.

-- Suggest that EOI reflects something around case scenarios as regards role for consideration, likely standard / general questions, and then specifically curated questions that are for purpose on specific roles.

-- Pandemic has really eliminated one of the elements of attraction for volunteer positions, which is where there would have been travel support.

-- Keep the issue of incentivizing volunteers separate from this particular task (report on this selection process). Might be a separate communication to the Council.  Travel support is just one incentive.

-- Summary of suggestions: 1) have a more detailed EOI form with a breakdown of questions related to the Terms of Reference as well as some standard/general questions; 2) more detailed called for volunteers – expectations (such as travel support), expected time commitment, qualification criteria; 3) what to do if there aren’t sufficient candidates.

-- On bullet number 2: Is the SSC’s process sufficient?  What kind of scenarios would help inform the SSC’s decision?  Ask for examples to demonstrate qualifications for selection criteria.  Like a case study assignment.

-- On bullet number 3: Need for additional guidance?  With respect to these roles it may not be needed, but with others more role-directed questions would be helpful.

-- Could be helpful to include information on the timing of the SSC’s work – something that says that it is necessary for the SSC to have sufficient time to review the candidates and complete its process; more time would be required if interviews are included, for example.

ACTION ITEM: Staff to collate the suggestions from this meeting and send them to Leadership, who will review and then send to the SSC members.

4. Discussion – Should the SSC comment on whether to open a new EOI process for CRG candidates? 

-- Should the content of the SSC’s report apply to reopening the EOI process?

-- How many applications were received across the SO/ACs – good to know where we are.  Staff answer: 2 for ALAC, 2 GAC and 1 each ccNSO and GNSO meaning 2 nominations; in prior discussions the community leaders agreed that number and representativeness is less important than actually getting qualified reps in the group; timeline is unclear as to whether there could be an impact on the work of the CRG.

-- Seems that there is support for the SSC to provide comments on whether to open a new EOI process.  Seems to be support for a second EOI among some, but not all, SSC members.  At least one member does not think a second EOI is needed.

-- There were a lot of questions about this in the Registrar SG – questions about what the CRG is; confused about what the CRG will do; think that there should be better representation from the GNSO.

-- GNSO has the option of selecting another member of the CRG but not sure that this additional process would impact any of the GNSO’s other work.  If there is no impact then that argues for going with a second call.

-- SG/C leadership is the group to decide on whether to initiate another EOI.

ACTION ITEM: Sophie Hey to draft a letter and send it to the SSC list for review and SSC members can decide whether to sign on in their individual capacities.