Page History

...

9.3  Not Active        0-40%

Hi everyone.. I am having problems getting into the comments boxes below.  Many thanks to you all for your valuable contributions. 

Rinalia Abdul Rahim (27/11/13)

Hello everyone.

I like Ali's input on metrics about leadership of Working Groups for ALAC members. I would also suggest co-chairing of WG between an ALAC Member and an At-Large community member. This will help build collaborative skills and capacity along the way.

Best regards, Rinalia

Ali Al Meshal (27/11/13)

Good day Maureen,

   First of all we have always to but in mind as your correctly stated that this is a volunteer work from the members, but on the other hand I do agree that up to certain extent there should be a fair KPI’s in place to evaluate the performance of ALAC members.

Also I am quite sure that selected or nominated ALAC members for these leadership positions were based on their knowledge , commitment and experience as well as high performance otherwise they will not be part of the team.

   Hence measuring criteria would always be much clearer and effective if it is set for Quantitative factors rather than Qualitative once.

So having said that then I would like to address the following:

 o   Attending meetings by it self is not a goal or objective therefore it can not be part of the measuring criteria independently.

o   Also participation and contribution to the meeting discussion can not be evaluated as a performance measure

 Thereafter to have a process in place that gives an indication of the member performance I would suggest the following

o   ALAC members should be assigned to Chair a WG’s

§  With this type of assignment the member will logically be accountable and responsible of a set deliverables  that he/she have to achieve, and this can be measured and evaluated for the following set of KPI’s

• Time to deliver
• Commitment
• Team working
• Developing others (member of the group)
• Others

o    ALAC members and chair of RALO’s jointly should be responsible for engaging the ALS’s in work and activities related to the rejoin at least and should provide a monthly call report on this.

§  This is different activity from the RALO monthly call; this should be done separately to reach out the ALS’s through a pre-plan agenda and time frame.

§   The objective is to get in touch with ALS’s members outside the official call and tries to understand their needs and requirements and also will be a good tool maybe to get them engage in if they are not active. So this is more of OUTREACH on a small scale and more of direct communication.                     

….Should you need any clarification then please let me know by email or a call, I will be more than happy to discuss.

From Karaitiana Taiuru (25/11/13)

These are my thoughts based on not been an ALAC member (nor do I have time to).

I would support a more closer monitoring approach to the ALAC performance review and would like to see the evaluations distributed to the relevant RALO's as we are the ones who nominate and put our trust in our representatives to provide our views and then to report back to us.

I would expect that participation in all meetings, emails and Work Groups would be at the very minimum 90%. There are so many issues at present it would be hard not to have a voice at a meeting.

Saying this, I would also expect that any new ALAC appointments are mentored and giving an appropriate transition period and were made to feel comfortable to ask for help.  Some cultural and language barriers may also exist and should be considered.

If people are under-performing, then perhaps a mechanism of someone talking to them in a non threating manner to see if there is any assistance required etc.

Perhaps too, some way of recognition for the long hours and dedication may also be a motivation. This is likely to be more of a RALO initiative though.

From Winthrop Yu (24/11/13)

   I'd tried to find people here (even outside ISOC-PH) who could actively and constructively participate in the various WGs.  Unfortunately, no takers so far, and i really don't like the idea of simply "tapping" someone who may not be as committed to the work or drop the ball.  For myself, i'm already committed to policy issues on the local front and cannot honestly make any further commitments until ... oh, after December 2014? :)

Comments are on the workspace at