Response to Proposal of the New Fellowship Program Approach As a returning fellow, when I reviewed the proposal, some parts seemed somewhat unrealistic and overambitious. Firstly, the amount of engagement required at the policy development level as a first-time fellow and even for returning fellows, seems to me to assume that fellows have no life outside of ICANN. I have found that it takes time to integrate and begin to provide meaningful contribution after participating at only one or two meetings. More importantly, it appears that the way the proposal is worded, meaningful contribution can only take place within an approved SO/AC structure.
From my own experience, I believe it is possible to advance the mandate of ICANN at the community level by continuing to focus in the area where the participant has knowledge, reach and a level of comfort. As a returning fellow, it can be very intimidating to contribute on working group conference calls or discussion lists. I have found some to be downright disrespectful and as a result have kept my contribution to a minimal. While I encourage participation in the SO/AC constituencies, there is a role for the Global Stakeholder relationship teams to continue to work with and steer the fellows through the maze of the ICANN organization.
It would be a mistake to apply too much pressure too early strictly for the sake of achieving specific metrics. It is important to remember, that fellow, like the rest of the stakeholder community are volunteers and may have full lives outside of ICANN, but see the importance of the work of ICANN and are offering themselves to provide support. There are those who would be ready to contribute, but there are also those who would need nurturing, but have true long term potential. Every effort should be made to identify the stage of engagement that the fellow feels comfortable. The terms of engagement for the fellow should not push the person away for contributing, but its main goal should be to encourage collaboration and comradery. Finally, the committee structure should include an independent non-SO/AC member similar to the NomCom. I think this would bring some balance to the structure.