I'll restate my recommendation that the Council has to actually look more deeply at 'management' of its processes, and procedures and documentation of same, not merely assume that election of a vice chair, or deputy chair, is the solution to improving and strengthening management processes. Bruce, can you forward the 'draft procedures' document that was discussed in Wellington? A maturing organization has to look at the longer term, as well as the short term needs. As I consider the challenges that the Council and the GNSO itself face, "succession planning" isn't really the right term. That makes it sound like the present chair at any point would be determining who replaces him/her. The discussion topic should be leadership development; leadership continuity, etc.; and the discussion should include what roles and functions are needed to ensure a transparent, effective, professionally supported leadership function(s) -- whether it is a chair, a chair/vice/deputy chair; a chair, vice/deputy chair + more. The GAC, for instance, is an interesting example of an organization within ICANN that has decided to have a sort of management team. As is the ASO. The GNSO -- NOT the Council -- who according to the bylaws is limited in its function -- also needs to have a discussion about its management team. It could be that the chair of the Council would be a defacto member or even chair of that management team, or it could be that the functions of the Council should remain focused only on policy development. Personally and individually, I'd see a linkage between the leadership of the council and the GNSO -- but that is a topic that deserves some consideration. Right now, we seem to be leaping to solve a short term challenge of a chair for Lisbon. Instead, we need to be focused on the longer term needs for sustainable leadership, which include chairing in Lisbon. Options seem to be: Identify a chair for Lisbon, and elect that person for that event; present chair mentors and works closely with the interim session chair for that event. Longer term analysis and work goes on to determine the work/job description of a vice chair. One should not assume that a vice chair will be fully up to speed on all issues unless that is the assigned job description. Recall that we have in the past rotated hosting/chairing roles; very early in the history of the DNSO Council, for instance. Not suggesting that is an answer, just noting that there are some precedents. We should ask the senior staff to advise us of how the need fro a temporary chair is handled in the Board. Is it a designation that is based on the unavailability of the vice chair? Then, if we take that approach, we can focus in on the 'job description' of a vice chair. I do not support that there is an automatic assumption that a vice chair will be elected to chair. If that is to be the operational decision, then that has to be debated and considered. For instance, certainly hasn't been the case at the Board level. We need to give consideration to the job description of the chair as well, as we move into a newer phase of an improved and enhanced GNSO, and Council. Much of the work that is related to that phase should take place in 2007; and in parallel to the policy development work. Just assuming the status quo on how things are done seems ill advised. So, as I said, while in theory, a vice chair election process seems useful; it should come with a consideration of the job description and functions to be fulfilled by both a chair and a vice chair; how management of the GNSO relates to the Council's policy work, and documenting and stabilizing procedures and processes, including normalizing such functions; putting as much as possible the administrative organization and scheduling in the hands of the secretariat, etc. Again, I am not sure that I feel comfortable with the term 'succession planning' and prefer that we work on a leadership continuity process. Marilyn Cade -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Norbert Klein Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 9:50 PM To: Bruce Tonkin Cc: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Idea for Deputy Chair Thanks Bruce, this is a very good suggestion which I welcome - it is important not only in terms of looking into the future, but the normal procedures of the Council should also not be meet some problems if you are not available (like for Lisbon) and we should have an "natural" alternative chairperson for such cases. Norbert Klein = Bruce Tonkin wrote:
Hello All,
As a discussion item for the Council call tomorrow, I would like to suggest the Council formally appoint a deputy chair. If the Council thinks that is a good idea, we could initiate a call for nominations etc.
Personally I will be unavailable for the next ICANN meeting in Lisbon, Portugal due to other business commitments. My term on the GNSO Council also finishes at the 2007 AGM (currently scheduled around early November 2007).
I think it would be useful in terms of succession planning for the Council to designate a deputy chair - hopefully someone that will continue to be on the Council for the next couple of years. This person could also act as chair at the Lisbon, Portugal meeting.
Regards, Bruce Tonkin