Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by faraday.auda.org.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 937DC900003 for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2009 07:06:06 +1000 (EST) Received: from faraday.auda.org.au (faraday-int.auda.org.au [203.202.88.217]) by barkly.auda.org.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBA17270293 for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2009 07:05:06 +1000 (EST) Received: from faraday.auda.org.au ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (faraday.auda.org.au [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id f7uPxAfZIwa6 for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2009 07:06:03 +1000 (EST) Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] helo=[127.0.0.1]) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1MCK7x-0007vR-VB; Thu, 04 Jun 2009 21:05:41 +0000 Received: from psg.com (psg.com [147.28.0.62]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by faraday.auda.org.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F4B3900002 for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2009 07:05:51 +1000 (EST) Received: from barkly.auda.org.au ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (barkly.auda.org.au [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bQVtQNbBcZPs for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2009 07:05:06 +1000 (EST) Received: from barkly.auda.org.au (LHLO barkly.auda.org.au) (203.202.88.220) by barkly.auda.org.au with LMTP; Fri, 5 Jun 2009 07:05:11 +1000 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by barkly.auda.org.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4A0D270294 for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2009 07:05:11 +1000 (EST) Return-Path: From: "Avri Doria" To: , "Peter Dengate Thrush" Cc: "Kieren McCarthy" Subject: Letter to the ICANN Board on CEO/President Selection Process Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 07:05:31 +1000 Message-ID: <3D376E5A-5ECE-4F17-9D08-D4654F9B5604@ltu.se> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0591_01C9EDC4.B80925F0" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AcnlWCXALbr4dMm1TKu3lBmlXkqS7A== This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0591_01C9EDC4.B80925F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To the Members of the Board and Interested Commuity Participants I am writing this note to express a concern with the current process for selecting a new CEO/President. I am writing this note as an ICANN participant in my personal capacity: in no way should this note be attributed to the SO I serve in. I am writing this as a concerned volunteer who has invested much of her life for the past 5 years working for an organization that I believe is an important guiding light in the world of Internet governance for its open, bottom up and transparent multistakeholder processes. My primary concern, which I will explain below, concerns the opacity of this process and a risk incurred by that opacity. Several people have already commented, both in public and private, on some of the conditions that are allegedly being applied by either the Board's Search Committee or by the Executive search firm hired for this process. The comments I have head include, inter alia, - The search firm is only to consider executives who have experience in the running of corporations with a profit and loss of over 100 MUSD. - The search firm is not to submit any applications from ICANN participants, either staff or volunteer. - Other Board members have limited knowledge of what is occurring in the search committee or of what decisions they may have made about search constraints. - When someone questions the activities of the search committee they are told that all of the complaints are merely the ranting of disgruntled applicants. Except for the last claim of which I have personal knowledge, I have to admit that all of my knowledge on these is hearsay, I am not now nor have I ever been an applicant or considered being an applicant. I have, however, spoken confidentially to applicants whose paper was rejected and have spoken confidentially to some who decided not to apply because they were informed of the situation in advance. I have also spoken to a variety of community members including some Board members. I have not seen a great deal of physical evidence for any of these points, then again it is not my role to investigate the comments. The lack of open information is what worries me most and is what breeds rumor and discontent. While I would personally disagree with some of the alleged constraints, if they were publicly announced decisions made by the Board or its search committee, I would probably eventually accept them because doing the search is the job of the search committee and it is their responsibility to determine the conditions of that search after an analysis of public comment on the process to be used. By keeping the ICANN community in the dark we have avoided one of ICANN's major strengths, its commitment to transparency and openness. As a community when we hear the alleged claims, we have no way of knowing the truth of the situation. This process opacity leaves the community in a state of ignorance that will make it hard to accept any selection as being fair and open. Assuming the worse, this could leave a new CEO/President in the position of starting the job under a cloud of suspicion. A cloud that might only be dissipated by an external review of the process to find if the constraints listed above were actually the case, and if so, whether they were imposed by the Board's Search Committee or by the Executive Search firm itself. The fact of such an external investigation and its results would not be helpful to ICANN, especially in this time of JPA review, or to the efficiency of the new CEO/President. I strongly encourage the Board to bring this process into the light and to clarify the conditions under which applications were accepted, solicited, reviewed and sent to the Board for consideration. I further encourage the Board to do this before making any decision on a short list and encourage them to solicit community comment on the process being followed. Thank You Avri Doria Adjunct Professor Lule=E5 University of Technology Note: This is being sent to secretary@icann.org for forwarding to the ICANN Board, to Chair of the Board, selected board members, the director of public participation and others. As I could not find an open place for comments on general ongoing Board activities, I am copying the people should feel free to treat this as if it had been openly contributed to such a public comment area. __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4130 (20090604) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com ------=_NextPart_000_0591_01C9EDC4.B80925F0 Content-Type: text/html; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Letter to the ICANN Board on CEO/President Selection = Process

To the Members of the Board and Interested Commuity = Participants

I am writing this note to express a concern with the = current process 
for selecting a new CEO/President.    = I am writing this note as an 
ICANN participant in my personal capacity:  in = no way should this note 
be attributed to the SO I serve in.  I am = writing this as a concerned 
volunteer who has invested much of her life for the = past 5 years 
working for an organization that I believe is an = important guiding 
light in the world of Internet governance for its = open, bottom up and 
transparent multistakeholder processes.  My = primary concern, which I 
will explain below, concerns the opacity of this = process and a risk 
incurred by that opacity.

Several people have already commented, both in public = and private, on 
some of the conditions that are allegedly being = applied by either the 
Board's Search Committee or by the Executive search = firm hired for 
this process.  The comments I have head include, = inter alia,

- The search firm is only to consider executives who = have experience 
in the running of corporations with a profit and loss = of over 100 MUSD.

- The search firm is not to submit any applications = from ICANN 
participants, either staff or volunteer.

- Other Board members have limited knowledge of what = is occurring in 
the search committee or of what decisions they may = have made about 
search constraints.

- When someone questions the activities of the search = committee they 
are told that all of the complaints are merely the = ranting of 
disgruntled applicants.

Except for the last claim of which I have personal = knowledge, I have 
to admit that all of my knowledge on these is = hearsay, I am not now 
nor have I ever been an applicant or considered being = an applicant.  I 
have, however, spoken confidentially to applicants = whose paper was 
rejected and have spoken confidentially to some who = decided not to 
apply because they were informed of the situation in = advance.   I have 
also spoken to a variety of community members = including some Board 
members. I have not seen a great deal of physical = evidence for any of 
these points, then again it is not my role to = investigate the comments.

The lack of open information is what worries me most = and is what 
breeds rumor and discontent.  While I would = personally disagree with 
some of the alleged constraints, if they were = publicly announced 
decisions made by the Board or its search committee, = I would probably 
eventually accept them because doing the search is = the job of the 
search committee and it is their responsibility to = determine the 
conditions of that search after an analysis of public = comment on the 
process to be used.

By keeping the ICANN community in the dark we have = avoided one of 
ICANN's major strengths, its commitment to = transparency and openness.  
As a community when we hear the alleged claims, we = have no way of 
knowing the truth of the situation.  This = process opacity leaves the 
community in a state of ignorance that will make it = hard to accept any 
selection as being fair and open.  Assuming the = worse, this could 
leave a new CEO/President in the position of starting = the job under a 
cloud of suspicion.  A cloud that might only be = dissipated by an 
external review of the process to find if the = constraints listed above 
were actually the case, and if so, whether they were = imposed by the 
Board's Search Committee or by the Executive Search = firm itself.  The 
fact of such an external investigation and its = results would not be 
helpful to ICANN, especially in this time of JPA = review, or to the 
efficiency of the new CEO/President.

I strongly encourage the Board to bring this process = into the light 
and to clarify the conditions under which = applications were accepted, 
solicited, reviewed and sent to the Board for = consideration. I further 
encourage the Board to do this before making any = decision on a short 
list and encourage them to solicit community comment = on the process 
being followed.

Thank You

Avri Doria
Adjunct Professor
Lule=E5 University of Technology

Note: This is being sent to secretary@icann.org for = forwarding to the 
ICANN Board, to Chair of the Board, selected board = members, the 
director of public participation and others.  As = I could not find an 
open place for comments on general ongoing Board = activities, I am 
copying the people should feel free to treat this as = if it had been 
openly contributed to such a public comment = area.

 

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, = version of virus signature database 4130 (20090604) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 = Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
 

------=_NextPart_000_0591_01C9EDC4.B80925F0--