PROPOSED METRIC SECTION ***STAFF USE ONLY: PLEASE DO NOT EDIT*** | ||||||||||||||||||||||
1 | Metric Description: | Survey of perceived consumer trust in DNS, relative to experiences before the gTLD expansion. Survey could at least measure experiences with:
| ||||||||||||||||||||
2 | Notes/Comments: | |||||||||||||||||||||
3 | AoC Category: | Consumer Trust (CT) | ||||||||||||||||||||
4 | SO/AC Originator: | GNSO | ||||||||||||||||||||
STAFF INFORMATION/ANALYSIS SECTION | ||||||||||||||||||||||
5 | Staff Team: | Online Comm Svcs | ||||||||||||||||||||
6 | Metric Currently Measured? | No | ||||||||||||||||||||
7
| Computation: (e.g., data elements, formula, numerator, denominator, ratio/percent, periodicity/frequency) | See Q11... | ||||||||||||||||||||
8 | Data Owner: (i.e., party responsible for collecting and publishing metric) | Indeterminate | ||||||||||||||||||||
9 | Data Reference Source: (i.e., how/where is the data collected, tracked, managed, and published/produced?) | Indeterminate | ||||||||||||||||||||
10 | Targets: |
| ||||||||||||||||||||
11 | Implementation Considerations: (e.g., what new or additional resources, tasks, activities, systems, et al., whether internal or external, would be needed to develop, capture, and report this metric?) | A team of SMEs would need to be assembled to:
A make vs. buy decision would be needed to determine whether ICANN should develop the survey in house or hire an external firm. If the latter choice is made, an RFP would need to be written, published, and responses analyzed to select a winner. A development period would ensue followed by instrument/process testing and analysis of the test. Once a final design is approved for use, the survey would be conducted and monitored by either ICANN or the external firm. A final report, utilizing accepted statistical methods, would then be produced and, after approval by ICANN, published. | ||||||||||||||||||||
12 | Degree of Difficulty/Impact: (i.e., net impact on existing ICANN resources, systems, and capabilities) | Significant | ||||||||||||||||||||
13 | Estimated Development Cost ($M): |
| ||||||||||||||||||||
14 | Estimated Ongoing Production Costs: (i.e., incremental to existing funded/budgeted expenditures) |
| ||||||||||||||||||||
15 | Estimated Net Incremental Staff (FTE): (Express as a fraction and/or range, e.g., .25 - .50) | .25 - .50 FTE | ||||||||||||||||||||
16 | Itemization of Staff Work Effort: | On the basis that this project is externally developed and administered, Staff tasks/activities include:
| ||||||||||||||||||||
17 | Rough Implementation Timeframe: (e.g., indicate major steps and months/years to complete each one) |
| ||||||||||||||||||||
18 | Critical Dependencies: | Dependencies:
| ||||||||||||||||||||
19 | Anticipated Challenges/Risks: | There are many challenges to be addressed including, but not limited to:
| ||||||||||||||||||||
METRIC EFFECTIVENESS AND UTILITY SECTION | ||||||||||||||||||||||
20 | Explanation of Metric Effectiveness: (i.e., how will success/failure enable conclusions to be drawn concerning the relevant AoC definition?) | Measures related to confidence in registrations and resolutions. | ||||||||||||||||||||
21 | Metric Effectiveness Assessment: (i.e., vis a vis AoC definition) | Moderately Effective | ||||||||||||||||||||
22 | Overall Feasibility Assessment: LEGEND Poor: Low Effectiveness - High Cost | Potential | ||||||||||||||||||||
======================================= |
DETAILED ITEMIZATION & TRACKING OF ISSUES
Category A: | Metric Questions & Issues |
---|
No. | Issue Description | Originator | Status | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | It is not clear, from the metric's description, exactly what measurements would derive from performing a survey, e.g., "Percentage of respondents expressing satisfaction with X?" To answer Q3 properly will require considerable development and analysis. | KB | Pending |
|
2 | Based upon the phrasing in Q1 and considering that survey lengths should be short in duration (15-30 mins), this metric may ultimately sub-divide into several different measurements. | KB | Needs Clarification |
|
Category B: | Metric Effectiveness & Utility |
---|
No. | Issue Description | Originator | Status | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Suggest a more thorough answer to Q20 which describes how such a metric would impact interpretations of CT. | KB | Needs Clarification |
|
Category C: | Technical/Implementation |
---|
No. | Issue Description | Originator | Status | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | If ICANN expects to utilize survey methods for important questions now and into the future, should it consider developing the capability in house? | KB | Deferred |
|
Category D: | Financial/Cost/Budgetary |
---|
No. | Issue Description | Originator | Status | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Due to budgeting constraints, work on this metric cannot begin until FY 2015. | KB | Under Review |
|
Category E: | Other |
---|
No. | Issue Description | Originator | Status | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|