Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 Staff Accountability Subgroup Meeting #11 – 2 March 2017 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/OZ-RAw A copy of the notes may be found below. Thank you. With kind regards, Brenda Brewer, Projects & Operations Assistant Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives (MSSI) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers [cid:image001.png@01D29410.DAEC9110] Notes including relevant portions of the chat): 10 Participants at start of call Avri Doria – Only item on the agenda is the review of the note from JC. Jordan Carter – (presentation of document) Avri Doria – do we have the issues right? Any comments? Cheryl Landon-Orr – articulation of the two primary issues is fine but doubt the plenary will have any wisdom for us. George Sadowsky – Issue 1 – you have a short term problem in establishing effective communication with staff – there may be a longer term problem. The short term problem can be solved but if there is a longer term one you are correct to raise it. Alan Greenberg – Agree with GS – Said differently this group having great difficulty in working with staff is indicative of the great difficulties we as volunteers in the community very often have in working with staff is VERY indicative. Jordan Carter – Do not see this as a lack of support – but this is different than the usual working method of volunteers developing a paper and then working with staff – here we have to work with staff during the development. This is an unusual way of working and calling it out may help get what we need. Avri Doria – Does not really capture the issues some groups are having with staff – and because people fear retaliation so do not want to formally provide input on this. Alan Greenberg – JC description how it should work is overly simplistic – a lot of the other things we do in working with staff trying to make things work overall requires a more interactive and collegial process which does not always happen. Greg Shatan: Alan's discussion highlights the kind of "deeper dive" we need to do as we narrow our focus from the meta-analysis of the first iteration. Jordan Carter: yup Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): indeed Jeff Neuman – Finally I can say we will publicly release a letter we have sent to the ICANN Board as a follow up to an original letter in December – we will not release the original given there are name cited in it – however the second letter contains principles and recommendations. Avri Doria – Maybe we need a 1A and 1B on how to work effectively. Jordan Carter – do not think so. Avri Doria – Any comments on the second point? George Sadowsky – Pleased to see how this is phrased and reflects the conversation of the last meeting. Suggest we use the issues that have come in the course of this work and what can be used to solve these things as they come up – this is pretty close to that. Jordan Carter: "Proposes solutions to resolve those problems or mechanisms that could resolve them as they arise from time to time". This should probably capture this. George Sadowsky – I like it. Specific complaints that have been made could be used in stress tests to see if the solutions work. Jordan Carter: the effect of the change would be, overall, to get us focused on the issues raised or identified, and solutions, or ways to prevent recurrence Jordan Carter: (the change of scope, that is) Avri Doria – Any other comments? (none) Jordan Carter: thanks all Jordan Carter: great feedback Jordan Carter: it feels like a more solid direction to be going Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): all good Avri Doria – any other points or comments (none). JC and I will finalize this document to send in to the plenary.
