Hi Jaime I've been thru so many formal priority setting processes - using computers, sticky notes, ranking scales, etc etc I now think we can only do this in discussion What confuses me is trying to externalize and express in advance my idea of "priorities" All life is negotiation and this is another example ......I think????????? A baseline would be whether the projects fit with the ICANN Strategic Plan and AoC but then how do we deal with the "bottom up" nature of community project identification??? It's what make ICANN such an interesting beast! Cheers Rosemary Rosemary Sinclair Managing Director, ATUG Chairman, INTUG T: +61 2 94958901 F: +61 2 94193889 M: +61 413734490 Email: rosemary.sinclair@atug.org.au <mailto:rosemary.sinclair@atug.org.au> Skype: rasinclair Please visit the ATUG website for Updates and Information www.atug.com.au ________________________________ From: Jaime Wagner - PowerSelf [mailto:jaime@powerself.com.br] Sent: Friday, 19 November 2010 2:00 PM To: Rosemary Sinclair Cc: council@gnso.icann.org Subject: RES: SPAM-LOW: Re: [council] Prioritizatio process Dear Rosemary, The problem still rests in the phrase "if priority is agreed". How to do that without a method to score relative value among all councilors? Jaime Wagner jaime@powerself.com.br Direto (51) 3219-5955 Cel (51) 8126-0916 Geral (51) 3233-3551 DDG: 0800-703-6366 www.powerself.com.br <http://www.powerself.com.br/> De: rosemary.sinclair@atug.org.au [mailto:rosemary.sinclair@atug.org.au] Enviada em: quinta-feira, 18 de novembro de 2010 10:53 Para: Stéphane Van Gelder; owner-council@gnso.icann.org; Jaime Wagner - PowerSelf Cc: 'Gomes, Chuck'; GNSO Council Assunto: Re: SPAM-LOW: Re: [council] Prioritizatio process One other way to prioritise is to work backwards from the available resources If we combine this with a process of reviewing progress being made on policy issues we get to a practical assessment of what can be done with the resources available and what priority the Community is indicating by its actions So for me we need a process of identifying resources and reviewing progress Issues that outstanding could be reviewed as part of the Strat Plan/Operations planning process - and if priority is agreed, resources could be identified and with the possible consequence that some projects may need to be wound up or deferred.. Cheers Rosemary Sent from my BlackBerry® from Optus ________________________________ From: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@indom.com> Sender: <owner-council@gnso.icann.org> Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 00:15:23 +1100 To: Jaime Wagner - PowerSelf<jaime@powerself.com.br> Cc: 'Gomes, Chuck'<cgomes@verisign.com>; <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: SPAM-LOW: Re: [council] Prioritizatio process Thanks Jaimie, and here's a short recap of what I was saying, as Chuck requested: - Keep a model-based approach but simplify. - Council Leadership could play a part in suggesting priority projects to Council, those suggestions based on model approach. - Or we could take our thinking "outside the box". One idea: use US Congress style system of wiping the slate clean at the end of each calendar year. Others will no doubt have different ideas to suggest as well. Stéphane Le 18 nov. 2010 à 13:09, Jaime Wagner - PowerSelf a écrit : Chuck, As you asked me to put in writing my thoughts shared during today's call on prioritization of GNSO work, here they are. I would like the Council to consider doing an annual update of the process brought up by the WG, because of two benefits 1) Improving general awareness by the Councli members of the work going on; 2) A valuable tool for leadership in figuring the degree of consensus on the relative value of the different projects. Jaime Wagner jaime@powerself.com.br Direto (51) 3219-5955 Cel (51) 8126-0916 Geral (51) 3233-3551 DDG: 0800-703-6366 www.powerself.com.br <http://www.powerself.com.br/>