Hi Julie, with regard to recommendation 33 about diversity, yes there is ongoing work at CCWG with the diversity subgroup and I am the co-rapporteur there. we are at the initial phase discussing diversity definition and collecting information. Best, Rafik 2016-10-26 0:36 GMT+09:00 Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org>:
Dear GNSO Review WG Members,
Please see below the discussion notes captured by staff from the meeting on 24 October. These high-level notes are designed to help WG members navigate through the content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the recording or the transcript. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided separately and are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/GRWG/2016-10-06+GNSO+ Review+Working+Group. In addition, please see the wiki home page for your reference at: https://community.icann.org/display/GRWG/GNSO+Review+ Working+Group+Home.
Best regards,
Julie
Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
*GNSO Review WG Meeting, 24 October 2016*: *Actions/Discussion Notes*
*1. Vice Chair *
Lawrence proposes Wolf-Ulrich Knoben; Donna Austin seconds.
*2. Discussion of Strawman Draft of GNSO Review Recommendations Implementation Plan*
No new comments
*3. Discussion of Batching Approaches*
*Action Item:* Staff will incorporate revisions from the call, arrange the recommendations in batches, and fill in additional dependencies including between recommendations, resource requirements, and budget. Staff also will add a row for suggested actions by the WG for each recommendation.
*Discussion Notes:*
*Batching:*
· First batch: Look first at work that is already being done. Identify some mechanism to have some accountability for that work. For example, on recommendation 8, the work of the Policy & Implementation Working Group already completed a while back so it may just require the WG to confirm that the implementation of those recommendations met the objective of that GNSO review recommendation.
· Second batch: Look at the recommendations that were prioritized as high.
· Third batch: Recommendations that were medium or low.
*Timeline:*
First batch Jan-Dec 2017, Second batch Jun-May 2018, Third batch Oct-Sep 2018. Note: The timeline will be refined once the WG looks at the batches and dependencies. Likely to be much more overlap between first batch and second batches. Timine will be more specific and deadlines for deliverables should be incorporated.
*Discussion of Recommendations in Work Already Underway:*
*Recommendation 8*: Implementation of the recommendations of the Policy & Implementation WG. Required to form an implementation review team to address implementation related issues.
· Action: GNSO Review WG should decide if this meets the requirements of recommendation 8.
· Does the WG need to review to make sure that what has been done is fully implemented? Could be a sub-working group for each batch.
*Recommendation 15*: This is a project that was recently considered complete. Share the project status that was given to the Council noting some items are being finalized.
· Action: WG review whether the work meets the recommendation or whether further work needs to be undertaken. Staff could put together all the efforts that relate to this recommendation, such as new procedures.
*Recommendation 16*: PIA should be included as a standard part of any policy process.
· See DMPM Final Report in process of being implemented.
· PIA is part of the PDP Manual.
· Guidance for measuring impact -- look to DMPM.
*Recommendation 18*: Relates to Recommendation 16 and the DMPM Final Report.
· Add recent experience to review some policies that have been implemented.
· Look at whether there can be a standard approach and timeline for review. May not be possible to have one size fits all.
· The DMPM part provided a strawman to assist the community in identifying metrics that can be used to test policy effectiveness. However, it is at a high level, b/c each PDP is fairly unique and difficult to identify metrics. Agree that it ties into Rec. 16 framework action item.
*Recommendation 10*: Pilot already underway.
· Action: Look at the outcome of the pilot. Pilot was a combination of face-to-face time with our without a facilitator. Very successful for the PDP WGs. This is now a standard feature to recommend for PDP WGs to meet before or after ICANN meetings and a moderator could be involved. Staff should come up with a list of guidelines or rules for these sessions. This is work in progress and will go back to the Council for approval, but could pass through this WG.
· Add dependency: Budget for moderator, but may not always be helpful -- case-by-case basis. Develop criteria for when it would be helpful. It is up to the WG to decide whether they need a moderator.
· Add examples of where moderator may be helpful. Include the evaluation document sent to the GNSO Council. Example: ICANN had a professional facilitator (external to ICANN) for one F2F WG meeting and one ICANN facilitator (not a member of the WG but very familiar with ICANN and the subject matter) - the second experience received better reviews than the former. But again, it may very much depend on the specific circumstances of a WG - in certain cases, disagreement evolves around substance while in others it may be the result of process matters. Different experience / expertise may be needed, depending on the circumstances.
*Recommendation 33*:
· Are we tracking diversity? It is captured in Statements of Interest, but not tallied.
· SGs and Cs have specific requirements in their charters re: geographic diversity for Council members, but allows exceptions (such as contracted parties). Look at what SGs and Cs are doing.
· CCWG Accountability looking at diversity and what this means -- WG could look at that work in addition to the GNSO work.
· Depends on how we define diversity. Need to be careful how we approach this.
· Look at time zone management, outreach -- dependencies with other recommendations. Extract and combine with related recommendations.
*Recommendation 11*: Relates to recommendation 10. Combine the two recommendations.
*Recommendation 14*: WG can determine if this is continuing to happen. Note that nothing prevents PDP WG from doing this and PDP WG are already doing this (give examples).
*3. Next steps/Meetings: *
· Next meeting is a face-to-face meeting at ICANN57 in Hyderabad on 07 November at ICANN57. The next call is 15 November.
· Staff will incorporate changes and also arrange recommendations by batches and fill in dependencies and additional information.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-review-wg mailing list Gnso-review-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-review-wg