You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 31 Next »

Introduction

This is the LACRALO SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) table prepared by the LACRALO Strategic Planning WG - draft by Dev Anand Teelucksingh and Alejandro Pisanty

 

Strengths

  • ALS in 15 countries in LAC region
  • Level of expertise; middle
  • Parliamentary experience of approximately 20% of the members

 

 

 

 

 

 

Weaknesses

  • Language barrier to particapte in ALAC / At-Large WGs which work in English
  • Language barrier makes it difficult for ALSes in LA (predominately Spanish) and Caribbean (predominately English) to understand each other and thus colloborate together
  • Politics - groups in LACRALO compete for LACRALO Representatives. Groups can mobilise ALSes to vote in elections but not in ICANN policy development
  • Different perspectives in how LACRALO should be administered ("sovereign")
  • Individuals can only participate as observers (AP: I don't see this as a weakness)
  • Lack of expertise above the middle level, in substantive matters
  • Lack of parliamentary experience of approximately 80% of the members
  • A history of unresolved internal conflict, embodied particularly in the still unresolved General Assembly
  • Complexity of rules
  • Lack of deep knowledge of the applicable rulesets (Bylaws and others)
  • Limited linkage of members to substantive ICANN issues
  • Leadership failures

 

 

Opportunities

  • have At-Large representation in all 33 Countries in LAC region
  • End users from a diverse range of countries with respect to history, language, culture, population size could bring unique perspectives into ICANN activities
  • Fadi Chehade's discourse towards geographical diversification
  • Fadi Chehade's discourse towards more, and more effective, participation
  • ALAC's increased standing under Olivier Crepin-Leblond's leadership

 

 

 

 

Threats

  • Dissolution of LACRALO
  • ALSes/individuals frustrated by the politics become disenfranchised with LACRALO and stop participating in LACRALO
  • Perception by third parties of LACRALO as an improductive, problematic, and/or benefit-seeking organizations
  • Need of ICANN to make budgets lean and require justification for spending which LACRALO may not be able to provide sufficiently
  • Growth of visibility, influence and impact of NCSG and other groupings which compete for representation attention space, participation in decision-making, budget, and seats in the governing bodies
  • Questioning of the legitimacy and effectiveness of LACRALO and its members

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • No labels