July 2013 - Gnso-improvem-impl-sc

RE: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Draft WG Self-Assessment Questionnaire Now Online
by Ron Andruff July 11, 2013

July 11, 2013

Thanks for this update, Ken. Indeed, en route to Durbin now, but did want to thank you for the work and encourage Committee Members to follow your recommemdation to test drive the survey at everyone's soonest convenience. Kind regards, RA Ron Andruff www.lifedotsport.com -------- Original message -------- From: Ken Bour <ken.bour(a)verizon.net> Date: 07/11/2013 16:05 (GMT-05:00) To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Draft WG Self-Assessment Questionnaire Now Online SCI Team Members: As I indicated in my last email message to the SCI list, I have completed programming the Draft v3 WG Self-Assessment questionnaire within QuestionPro (QP) for which ICANN maintains an active membership account. I created an illustrative Working Group called “SCI Test,” which can be accessed at: http://scitestwg.questionpro.com. Unless we elect to make any subsequent changes, this is exactly how the online questionnaire would appear to a prospective WG member providing a self-assessment. I understand that many, if not most of you, are shortly en route to Durban, South Africa for the ICANN meeting; however, if you have an opportunity to take a test drive between now and our next SCI teleconference (6 Aug), please feel free to do so. If you would like to invite any other Durban attendees to test the online questionnaire, such additional feedback would also be welcome. Please be assured that any data entered is considered “test” only and will be discarded once we complete this final design phase. If you have any suggestions or comments about the instrument, language, methodology, online presentation, etc., you can use the questionnaire’s free-form text fields to document them or, if you prefer, send them to the SCI email list. I will browse through each response submitted and collect all feedback until we deactivate this informal test. Please note that you will need to click the “Record My Answers!” button on the last page in order to commit a complete questionnaire to the QP database. Once we are satisfied with the final product, perhaps we can find a recently disbanded Working Group that will agree to be our first customer as a way of putting the entire process, including analysis, through an exhaustive test. Regards, Ken Bour

1 0

SCI Charter considerations
by Ron Andruff July 10, 2013

July 10, 2013

Dear Jonathan, As you know, the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) will provide an update on its work to the GNSO Council in Durban on 13 July. One of issues the SCI is considering is an update of its Charter, as we have reported previously. This began as an effort to update the Charter to include procedures to elect the SCI Chair and Vice Chair, but recently the SCI also has considered whether other updates are necessary. SCI members have realized that they need guidance from the GNSO Council as to whether the scope of the SCI's work should be limited to a review of the procedures developed in the GNSO Implementations process, or whether the SCI should also address other procedural issues not related to the improvements process. The current Charter states: "The GNSO Standing Committee on Improvement Implementation (SCI) will be responsible for reviewing and assessing the effective functioning of recommendations provided by the Operational Steering Committee (OSC), Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC) and Policy Development Process Work Team (PDP-WT) and approved by the GNSO Council: . On request for those recommendations that have been identified to present immediate problems . On a periodic timescale for all recommendations in order to identify possible issues and/or improvements (subject to a clear definition by the SCI on which recommendations should be reviewed)" The SCI also seeks guidance from the Council with respect to the duration of the SCI work. Should the SCI be considered the last in the series of committees that arose from the Board review and thus cease to exist when it has completed its review of that work? Or should the SCI continue indefinitely, as an ongoing body that considers procedural questions as raised by the GNSO Council or a group Chartered by the Council? The SCI requests that these fundamental questions be addressed before the SCI considers revisions to the Charter. The SCI members look forward to discussing these questions with the Council in Durban. Sincerely, Ron Andruff, Chair, SCI

2 1

WG Self-Assessment Questionnaire (Draft v3)
by Ken Bour July 9, 2013

July 9, 2013

SCI Team Members: I recognize that everyone is busy especially in this period just before the next ICANN meeting. In order to keep moving forward on the WG Self-Assessment project, I propose that I begin the process of programming the current questionnaire into an online tool. In this case, after evaluating the pros/cons, I am inclined to utilize QuestionPro <http://www.questionpro.com/> because of its excellent features including security protection and back-end reporting. Once it is operational, I would then suggest that we open the questionnaire to a limited test. One suggestion would be to invite 6-10 individuals who have recently served on a Working Group and ask them if they would complete the instrument and, then, comment upon its ease-of-use, time (< 30 minutes), clarity, et al. Unless I hear differently, I will begin building an online version in QuestionPro so that the SCI can see how this instrument will actually appear to future Working Group members who participate in the self-assessment. Taking this action does not mean that we cannot continue making further changes and improvements to the questionnaire, but my sense is that it we are ready to proceed to this next phase of the project. Ken Bour From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org] On Behalf Of Mike O'Connor Sent: Friday, July 05, 2013 12:08 PM To: Ken Bour Cc: gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] WG Self-Assessment Questionnaire (Draft v3) hi Ken, i'm on board with all your proposed changes. i think this is getting really close to "ship it!" for me. :-) mikey On Jul 4, 2013, at 11:28 AM, Ken Bour <ken.bour(a)verizon.net> wrote: SCI Team Members: After our last teleconference (2 July), I continued my own evaluation of the questionnaire looking for ways to sharpen and improve it including addressing your feedback received thus far. I developed a new Draft v3 for your review at: <https://community.icann.org/x/eEZ-Ag> https://community.icann.org/x/eEZ-Ag. In this version of the questionnaire, I made the following substantive changes: 1. The "Expertise" question (Section II) was modified in an attempt to address Ron's observation about the expected variability in team members' knowledge/skill. 2. Tangential to Ron's concern, I added a new disclaimer in the note just before Section II to explain how respondents might approach the challenge of assigning individual ratings to complex dimensions. 3. In Section V, I substituted "Engagement" for "Participation" and changed the wording of the first question to address Wolf-Ulrich's feedback entered as a comment to Draft v2. 4. I elected to break out Personal Dimensions and Demographics into two independent sections. Each one represents a logically distinct category; furthermore, the table headings simply did not apply correctly to the Demographics questions. 5. Added a third question to the Personal Dimensions which I labeled "Willingness-to-Serve" for want of a better noun. This question seeks to understand whether the WG experience influences one's propensity to serve again in the future assuming all other conditions (e.g., topic, need/fit, availability) are favorable. In other words, are we systematically building or eroding volunteer capacity? I look forward to your feedback on this third iteration of the WG Self-Assessment instrument. As you may know, I will not be present in Durban; however, if the team wishes to continue working on this project and would like my involvement, I am willing to join in any/all sessions remotely if technical conditions (e.g., room connections) permit. Regards, Ken PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)

1 0

FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter
by Julie Hedlund July 8, 2013

July 8, 2013

Dear SCI members, As discussed in our meeting yesterday, below for your review is a draft message alerting Jonathan that the SCI would like to discuss the issues concerning the SCI Charter with the Council during the working session in Durban. Please send any comments by Friday, 05 July. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director ----------------------------- Draft Message to Jonathan ------------------------ Dear Jonathan, As you know, the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) will provide an update on its work to the GNSO Council in Durban on 13 July. One of issues the SCI is considering is an update of its Charter, as we have reported previously. This began as an effort to update the Charter to include procedures to elect the SCI Chair and Vice Chair, but recently the SCI also has considered whether other updates are necessary. After discussing possible updates the SCI members realized that they need guidance from the GNSO Council as to whether the SCI's work should be limited to a review of the procedures developed in the GNSO Implementations process, or whether the GNSO Council intends for the SCI to address other procedural issues not related to the improvements process. One such example might be the re-submission of a motion, which is an issue the Council asked the SCI to address and for which the SCI currently is considering revised procedures. The current Charter states: "The GNSO Standing Committee on Improvement Implementation (SCI) will be responsible for reviewing and assessing the effective functioning of recommendations provided by the Operational Steering Committee (OSC), Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC) and Policy Development Process Work Team (PDP-WT) and approved by the GNSO Council: * On request for those recommendations that have been identified to present immediate problems * On a periodic timescale for all recommendations in order to identify possible issues and/or improvements (subject to a clear definition by the SCI on which recommendations should be reviewed)" The SCI seeks guidance from the Council on what is its intent with respect to the duration of the SCI work. Should the SCI cease to exist when it has completed the second bullet above from the Charter? Or should the SCI continue indefinitely to consider procedural questions as raised the the GNSO Council or a group Chartered by the Council? It seems that these fundamental questions need to be addressed before the SCI can consider revisions to the Charter. The SCI members look forward to discussing these questions with the Council in Durban. Best regards, Ron Ron Andruff, Chair, SCI

5 10

Re: Final Draft Letter to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter
by Julie Hedlund July 8, 2013

July 8, 2013

Ron, I've attached the letter. Please copy the SCI list at: gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org. That will cover all who need to be copied. Thanks, Julie From: Ron Andruff <randruff(a)rnapartners.com> Date: Monday, July 8, 2013 2:36 PM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org> Subject: RE: Final Draft Letter to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter Julie, I am having some trouble with my PC software to pull the final doc together Can you kindly prepare the final draft letter for Jonathan and send it to me with the email addresses for all those who should be copied, so that I can send it on? Thank you, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners www.rnapartners.com <http://www.rnapartners.com> From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: Friday, July 5, 2013 12:23 To: Julie Hedlund; gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter And of course I mean Mikey, and not Mickey! From: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org> Date: Friday, July 5, 2013 12:07 PM To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org> Subject: FW: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter Thanks Mickey for the changes. SCI members, Please see the attached version from Mickey and let us know if you have changes/comments ASAP. Best regards, Julie From: Mike O'Conner <mike(a)haven2.com> Date: Friday, July 5, 2013 11:56 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org> Cc: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org>, WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben(a)t-online.de> Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter here goes i've shifted this over to a Word document, as the formatting won't survive the listserv for some.

1 0

RE: FINAL REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter
by Ron Andruff July 5, 2013

July 5, 2013

Dear Committee Members, If there are no other changes proposed in the coming 24 hours, I will send a clean version of the final draft that Julie circulated today to the GNSO Council Chair, as discussed on our call of this past Tuesday. Thanks to Julie, Wolf-Ulrich and Mikey for their contributions. Kind regards, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners <http://www.rnapartners.com> www.rnapartners.com From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: Friday, July 5, 2013 12:23 To: Julie Hedlund; gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter And of course I mean Mikey, and not Mickey! From: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org <mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org> > Date: Friday, July 5, 2013 12:07 PM To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org <mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org> " <gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org <mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org> > Subject: FW: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter Thanks Mickey for the changes. SCI members, Please see the attached version from Mickey and let us know if you have changes/comments ASAP. Best regards, Julie From: Mike O'Conner <mike(a)haven2.com <mailto:mike@haven2.com> > Date: Friday, July 5, 2013 11:56 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org <mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org> > Cc: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org <mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org> " <gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org <mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org> >, WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben(a)t-online.de <mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> > Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter here goes. i've shifted this over to a Word document, as the formatting won't survive the listserv for some.

1 0

WG Self-Assessment Questionnaire (Draft v3)
by Ken Bour July 5, 2013

July 5, 2013

SCI Team Members: After our last teleconference (2 July), I continued my own evaluation of the questionnaire looking for ways to sharpen and improve it including addressing your feedback received thus far. I developed a new Draft v3 for your review at: https://community.icann.org/x/eEZ-Ag. In this version of the questionnaire, I made the following substantive changes: 1. The "Expertise" question (Section II) was modified in an attempt to address Ron's observation about the expected variability in team members' knowledge/skill. 2. Tangential to Ron's concern, I added a new disclaimer in the note just before Section II to explain how respondents might approach the challenge of assigning individual ratings to complex dimensions. 3. In Section V, I substituted "Engagement" for "Participation" and changed the wording of the first question to address Wolf-Ulrich's feedback entered as a comment to Draft v2. 4. I elected to break out Personal Dimensions and Demographics into two independent sections. Each one represents a logically distinct category; furthermore, the table headings simply did not apply correctly to the Demographics questions. 5. Added a third question to the Personal Dimensions which I labeled "Willingness-to-Serve" for want of a better noun. This question seeks to understand whether the WG experience influences one's propensity to serve again in the future assuming all other conditions (e.g., topic, need/fit, availability) are favorable. In other words, are we systematically building or eroding volunteer capacity? I look forward to your feedback on this third iteration of the WG Self-Assessment instrument. As you may know, I will not be present in Durban; however, if the team wishes to continue working on this project and would like my involvement, I am willing to join in any/all sessions remotely if technical conditions (e.g., room connections) permit. Regards, Ken

3 2

MP3 recording of the SCI meeting - 2 July 2013
by Julia Charvolen July 2, 2013

July 2, 2013

Dear All, The next Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation meeting will be held in Durban. Please find the MP3 recording of the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation meeting held on Tuesday, 2 July 2013 at 19:00UTC. http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-sci-20130702-en.mp3 On page: http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#<http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#oct>jul (transcripts and recording are found on the calendar page) Attendees: James Bladel – Registrar Stakeholder Group – Primary Ray Fassett – Registry Stakeholder Group - Primary Ronald Andruff – Commercial and Business Users Constituency – Primary – Chair Angie Graves - Commercial and Business Users Constituency – Alternate Wolf-Ulrich Knoben – ISPCP – Primary Mikey O’Connor – ISPCP – Alternate Anne Aikman-Scalese – IPC Primary Avri Doria – Non Commercial SG – Primary – Vice-Chair Ken Bour – guest speaker Apologies: Jennifer Wolfe – NCA primary ICANN Staff: Julie Hedlund Julia Charvolen ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Julia Charvolen For GNSO Secretariat Adobe Connect chat transcript 2 July 2013: Ron A:Apologies... coming online now. Bladel:James on the line. Bladel:Apologies, everyone, but I have to drop in 30 min due to a medical appointment. :( Bladel:I hear Ron fine. Julie Hedlund:Strange. Maybe it's me. I've going to dial back in. Julie Hedlund:Actually I've fixed my problem. Julie Hedlund:I think that we are coalescing around option 2 if I recall. Avri Doria:Option2 was where i thought the consensus was2 Julie Hedlund:James sent on 25 May: Registrars agree with the proposed criteria listed, - except - for item #2.4, which they note could be redundant if items 2.1 and 2.3 are followed. Avri Doria:ship it. Julia Charvolen:Please mute your lines if you are not speaking, thank you Julie Hedlund:Not publishing the re-submission procedure, but "publishing" related to criteria 2.2. Avri Doria:If you can't get someone from the other house to second it ain't gonna pass. Avri Doria:I was was suggesting it stay inIts Mike O'Connor:can the SCI take a look at the letter before it goes to the Council? Avri Doria:I won't be there, I expect. All dayAtrt Anne:Yes, add to slides julie! Anne:I cant' attend Durban in person, unfortunately. Ken Bour:https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=41889388 Julie Hedlund: The main WG Assessments page is located under the GNSO tab, Working Group Resources space: https://community.icann.org/x/2Cp-Ag·<https://community.icann.org/x/2Cp-Ag%C2%B7> The latest version of the questionnaire (v2) is located here: https://community.icann.org/x/bC5-Ag Mike O'Connor:i could she my screen so that people can see the questionnaire Mike O'Connor:"she" = "share" Avri Doria:And someone like me will sometimes agree with the extreme. Mike O'Connor:VI? Fast Flux? Julie Hedlund:Mikey has solved our issue re: showing the screen Julie Hedlund:Thanks Mikey! Julia Charvolen:Thank you Mikey! Wolf Knoben:Mikey captures ICANN programming!? Mike O'Connor:I got it off my NSA feed Wolf Knoben:Ah you're behind... Avri Doria:And over time we can track trends Avri Doria:And can use it for metrics on what changes hero or hinder. Avri Doria:Help not hero Anne:Sorry I will have to drop off . Will check for updates on the list. Thank you. Anne Avri Doria:Oops I have another meeting thanks'

1 0

Tomorrow's Conference Call
by Ken Bour July 2, 2013

July 2, 2013

SCI Team Members: I noticed that a 10 minute agenda item has been scheduled to discuss the Working Group Self-Assessment. I have sent two emails to the SCI List in which I described progress toward the development of an assessment instrument, which are located on ICANN's Community Wiki: 1) 10 June (Original Draft) 2) 12 June (Draft v2) There has been some feedback and follow-up discussion on the SCI List about these versions which I hope you have time to review. For technical reasons, Julie does not think that she will be able to link directly to the Wiki pages during the Adobe call and asked me to remind you to look at the following links, if you can, prior to the call tomorrow. . The main WG Assessments page is located under the GNSO tab, Working Group Resources space: https://community.icann.org/x/2Cp-Ag . The latest version of the questionnaire (v2) is located here: https://community.icann.org/x/bC5-Ag In just 10 minutes, there won't be adequate time to walk through all of the material I have developed (e.g., Design Considerations <https://community.icann.org/x/USt-Ag> , Learning Objectives <https://community.icann.org/x/hit-Ag> ). Unless I hear differently, I plan to dive right into the Draft v2 design that represents my latest thinking on the subject and incorporates feedback that I have received from a few SCI members. Thanks, Ken Bour

3 2

SCI Charter -- Latest Version from Mickey
by Julie Hedlund July 2, 2013

July 2, 2013

All, For reference for our discussion tomorrow, please see the latest version of the SCI Charter that includes the suggested edits from Mickey. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director

3 9