ALAC in an evolving ICANN.
*Dear Olivier & Colleagues,* * * *at the end of today's ExeCom meeting, under AOB, Olivier kindly gave me the opportunity to present some views on ALAC in an evolving ICANN. * * * *Background & rationale * * * *At the age of 10, ALAC naturally shares many characteristics with its parent, ICANN. One striking characteristic is the pioneer spirit in approaching major challenges and more routine work alike.* * * *Times are changing. Youth want to be included. Though faulty, the new gTLD programme is about to provide a sizeable increase in ICANN revenue, the allocation of which has not yet been prioritized according to clear principles. In some areas, project overlay and the constraints of PDP are making us susceptible to burnout. And the concerns of the wider community are still not in focus in our house, in which terms like globalization and the public interest ring empty in the large corridors.* * * *Change in ICANN is coming. The international dimension of ICANN will impose its logic, even without the full consent of this corporation. Echelons of decision will be simplified, because failing to accomplish this would push our structures into irrelevance. The new CEO seems committed to accomplishing tasks begun, before being drawn into new areas.* * * *The ALAC should seize this moment to examine its efficiency, and therefore its structures. My proposal is based on a few simple ideas whose implementation has proven efficient elsewhere.* * * *Clear, committed lines of responsibility. * * * *ALAC's tasks can be handled under three main lines. Each line would be led by a Vice Chair, and each member would be required to join at least one of the three lines:* *1) Community, Outreach, Communication* *2) Policy, Process, Legal* *3) Finance, administration* * * *Naturally, this would remain under the overall guidance of the Chair, whose responsibilities would not change, but he/she would no longer be expected to accept being constantly submerged. Support Staff, a crucial element for ALAC, would not require more people, at least in the first stage.* * * *Why 3 Vice Chairs? Why not 5, which would make regional representation comfortable? I believe that the challenges facing ALAC are well beyond the pale of regions, and require both a holistic approach and equal engagement from all. My proposal is to concentrate on the efficiency of our structures, rather than on representation, as the latter is ensured at other levels.* * * *This is, in a few lines, what motivated my brief presentation this morning at the end of the ExeCom meeting. I'm looking forward to your comments.* * * *Best regards,* *Jean-Jacques.* * * * * * * * *
Dear Jean-Jacques: Thanks for this note. I believe there is much wisdom here and a lot of grist for the mill. The rationale you provide is incontestable. So I'm inclined to support both the principles as well as the solution framework. I suggest that this proposal be discussed at the next ALAC meeting with a view that some of the thoughts here be adopted in the ALAC Rop WG channel for further discussion. Best, - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 9:05 AM, JJS <jjs.global@gmail.com> wrote:
*Dear Olivier & Colleagues,* * * *at the end of today's ExeCom meeting, under AOB, Olivier kindly gave me the opportunity to present some views on ALAC in an evolving ICANN. * * * *Background & rationale * * * *At the age of 10, ALAC naturally shares many characteristics with its parent, ICANN. One striking characteristic is the pioneer spirit in approaching major challenges and more routine work alike.* * * *Times are changing. Youth want to be included. Though faulty, the new gTLD programme is about to provide a sizeable increase in ICANN revenue, the allocation of which has not yet been prioritized according to clear principles. In some areas, project overlay and the constraints of PDP are making us susceptible to burnout. And the concerns of the wider community are still not in focus in our house, in which terms like globalization and the public interest ring empty in the large corridors.* * * *Change in ICANN is coming. The international dimension of ICANN will impose its logic, even without the full consent of this corporation. Echelons of decision will be simplified, because failing to accomplish this would push our structures into irrelevance. The new CEO seems committed to accomplishing tasks begun, before being drawn into new areas.* * * *The ALAC should seize this moment to examine its efficiency, and therefore its structures. My proposal is based on a few simple ideas whose implementation has proven efficient elsewhere.* * * *Clear, committed lines of responsibility. * * * *ALAC's tasks can be handled under three main lines. Each line would be led by a Vice Chair, and each member would be required to join at least one of the three lines:* *1) Community, Outreach, Communication* *2) Policy, Process, Legal* *3) Finance, administration* * * *Naturally, this would remain under the overall guidance of the Chair, whose responsibilities would not change, but he/she would no longer be expected to accept being constantly submerged. Support Staff, a crucial element for ALAC, would not require more people, at least in the first stage.* * * *Why 3 Vice Chairs? Why not 5, which would make regional representation comfortable? I believe that the challenges facing ALAC are well beyond the pale of regions, and require both a holistic approach and equal engagement from all. My proposal is to concentrate on the efficiency of our structures, rather than on representation, as the latter is ensured at other levels.* * * *This is, in a few lines, what motivated my brief presentation this morning at the end of the ExeCom meeting. I'm looking forward to your comments.* * * *Best regards,* *Jean-Jacques.* * * * * * * * * _______________________________________________ ALAC-Internal mailing list ALAC-Internal@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal
ALAC Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
At-Large Website: http://atlarge.icann.org
As an observer with no say in this, though I support many of the suggestions, I do not support 5 Vice Chairs for ALAC. There should be just one vice chair to help the chair or two to sit in on his behalf if anything arises. Why have so many vice chairs when there are reps to the alac from the ralos. They are already helping the chair. You can have more reps on the alac if the work increases. Creating more positions in alac should reflect ralo needs and not a new organizational structure on the top to honour people. Strengthen ralo participation and alac would appear evolving if you see ralo leaders rising up to share the alac burden, not the other way around. vice chairs from ralos should then be allowed to participate in alac work if there is too much burden. Have the vice chairs from ralos come in as additional vice chairs to alac should the need arise but 5 vice chairs in alac is out of the question and gives undue authority to members to male public statements without following the bottom up process. No more structures should be made. The new gtlds do not call for more structures, they call for efficiency while sustaining transparency. Resolve the process obstacles and you will he happy without more structures. If our regional reps made such suggestions for new vice chairs without discussing with their ralo then I will be disappointed. Fouad Bajwa On Jun 29, 2012 4:07 PM, "JJS" <jjs.global@gmail.com> wrote:
*Dear Olivier & Colleagues,* * * *at the end of today's ExeCom meeting, under AOB, Olivier kindly gave me the opportunity to present some views on ALAC in an evolving ICANN. * * * *Background & rationale * * * *At the age of 10, ALAC naturally shares many characteristics with its parent, ICANN. One striking characteristic is the pioneer spirit in approaching major challenges and more routine work alike.* * * *Times are changing. Youth want to be included. Though faulty, the new gTLD programme is about to provide a sizeable increase in ICANN revenue, the allocation of which has not yet been prioritized according to clear principles. In some areas, project overlay and the constraints of PDP are making us susceptible to burnout. And the concerns of the wider community are still not in focus in our house, in which terms like globalization and the public interest ring empty in the large corridors.* * * *Change in ICANN is coming. The international dimension of ICANN will impose its logic, even without the full consent of this corporation. Echelons of decision will be simplified, because failing to accomplish this would push our structures into irrelevance. The new CEO seems committed to accomplishing tasks begun, before being drawn into new areas.* * * *The ALAC should seize this moment to examine its efficiency, and therefore its structures. My proposal is based on a few simple ideas whose implementation has proven efficient elsewhere.* * * *Clear, committed lines of responsibility. * * * *ALAC's tasks can be handled under three main lines. Each line would be led by a Vice Chair, and each member would be required to join at least one of the three lines:* *1) Community, Outreach, Communication* *2) Policy, Process, Legal* *3) Finance, administration* * * *Naturally, this would remain under the overall guidance of the Chair, whose responsibilities would not change, but he/she would no longer be expected to accept being constantly submerged. Support Staff, a crucial element for ALAC, would not require more people, at least in the first stage.* * * *Why 3 Vice Chairs? Why not 5, which would make regional representation comfortable? I believe that the challenges facing ALAC are well beyond the pale of regions, and require both a holistic approach and equal engagement from all. My proposal is to concentrate on the efficiency of our structures, rather than on representation, as the latter is ensured at other levels.* * * *This is, in a few lines, what motivated my brief presentation this morning at the end of the ExeCom meeting. I'm looking forward to your comments.* * * *Best regards,* *Jean-Jacques.* * * * * * * * * _______________________________________________ ALAC-Internal mailing list ALAC-Internal@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal
ALAC Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
At-Large Website: http://atlarge.icann.org
Dear Jean-Jacques, thank you for your intervention in Prague and the the kind follow-up note below, incorporating all of your suggestions. I have also read much of the follow-up discussions and agree with many points raised. As some people have mentioned, the issue of several Vice Chairs, each with more specific areas of responsibility, is one of the many solutions that present themselves for the future scaling up of At-Large. Indeed, the demands on the Chair are likely to continue increasing as activity continues to grow and as the community expands. We therefore need, as a community, to look at expanding roles and this is exactly what the Rules of Procedure (RoP) Working Group is tasked to do. Your suggestions are to be taken into account without forgetting the At-Large improvement recommendations, especially 8.3 recommending the establishment of a Policy Scheduling Team (PST) and Policy Review Committee (PRC). There are others too, all found in the report. https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/30345801/ALAC+At-Large+Impr... The Rules of Procedure WG will no doubt be using all of this valuable input in its discussions. Kind regards, Olivier ps. Just for future reference, no need to include the alac-internal list which is only used for administrative discussions like travel & logistic issues. On 29/06/2012 16:05, JJS wrote :
*Dear Olivier & Colleagues,* * * *at the end of today's ExeCom meeting, under AOB, Olivier kindly gave me the opportunity to present some views on ALAC in an evolving ICANN. * * * *Background & rationale * * * *At the age of 10, ALAC naturally shares many characteristics with its parent, ICANN. One striking characteristic is the pioneer spirit in approaching major challenges and more routine work alike.* * * *Times are changing. Youth want to be included. Though faulty, the new gTLD programme is about to provide a sizeable increase in ICANN revenue, the allocation of which has not yet been prioritized according to clear principles. In some areas, project overlay and the constraints of PDP are making us susceptible to burnout. And the concerns of the wider community are still not in focus in our house, in which terms like globalization and the public interest ring empty in the large corridors.* * * *Change in ICANN is coming. The international dimension of ICANN will impose its logic, even without the full consent of this corporation. Echelons of decision will be simplified, because failing to accomplish this would push our structures into irrelevance. The new CEO seems committed to accomplishing tasks begun, before being drawn into new areas.* * * *The ALAC should seize this moment to examine its efficiency, and therefore its structures. My proposal is based on a few simple ideas whose implementation has proven efficient elsewhere.* * * *Clear, committed lines of responsibility. * * * *ALAC's tasks can be handled under three main lines. Each line would be led by a Vice Chair, and each member would be required to join at least one of the three lines:* *1) Community, Outreach, Communication* *2) Policy, Process, Legal* *3) Finance, administration* * * *Naturally, this would remain under the overall guidance of the Chair, whose responsibilities would not change, but he/she would no longer be expected to accept being constantly submerged. Support Staff, a crucial element for ALAC, would not require more people, at least in the first stage.* * * *Why 3 Vice Chairs? Why not 5, which would make regional representation comfortable? I believe that the challenges facing ALAC are well beyond the pale of regions, and require both a holistic approach and equal engagement from all. My proposal is to concentrate on the efficiency of our structures, rather than on representation, as the latter is ensured at other levels.* * * *This is, in a few lines, what motivated my brief presentation this morning at the end of the ExeCom meeting. I'm looking forward to your comments.* * * *Best regards,* *Jean-Jacques.* * * * * * * * * _______________________________________________ ALAC-Internal mailing list ALAC-Internal@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal
ALAC Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
At-Large Website: http://atlarge.icann.org
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
First -thank you JJ for starting what has been a very interesting discussion about ALAC - its role and organisation in challenging times. I agree with Alan - I'm not terribly fussed about labels. Where we got to in the Rules of Procedure (RoP) discussion was to have an Executive Committee officially recognised and for it to have 5 members - each representing a different region. It will have a chair - and 4 other members. I'm not sure that we should spend a lot of time debating what they are called. It's more process debate and I agree with Evan - let's spend less time on process and more on outcomes. I also welcome the idea of having some specific tasks - sharing the load around. And I would go further - to bring the RALOS in - maybe a RALO can take up or initiate discussion on an issue of particular concern, and the relevant ALAC person can work with the RALO(S). My hope is that any changes do not impact on the RoP discussions. We should keep those rule at a higher level so that we don't have to keep changing them if we organise along the lines suggested by JJS. (And a reminder - so far there are only 4 meeting reports - 2 from Dev, one from Yaovi and one from me - this is one of the metrics on performance of both ALAC and RALO membership!) Holly
First -thank you JJ for starting what has been a very interesting discussion about ALAC - its role and organisation in challenging times. I agree with Alan - I'm not terribly fussed about labels. Where we got to in the Rules of Procedure (RoP) discussion was to have an Executive Committee officially recognised and for it to have 5 members - each representing a different region. It will have a chair - and 4 other members. I'm not sure that we should spend a lot of time debating what they are called. It's more process debate and I agree with Evan - let's spend less time on process and more on outcomes. I also welcome the idea of having some specific tasks - sharing the load around. And I would go further - to bring the RALOS in - maybe a RALO can take up or initiate discussion on an issue of particular concern, and the relevant ALAC person can work with the RALO(S). My hope is that any changes do not impact on the RoP discussions. We should keep those rule at a higher level so that we don't have to keep changing them if we organise along the lines suggested by JJS. (And a reminder - so far there are only 4 meeting reports - 2 from Dev, one from Yaovi and one from me - this is one of the metrics on performance of both ALAC and RALO membership!) Holly
participants (5)
-
Carlton Samuels -
Fouad Bajwa -
Holly Raiche -
JJS -
Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond