Update on Monday's Plenary Call & Next Steps
Hello Team - We are currently working to coordinate a meeting with the Board’s Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC) in response to León’s request. Since it is unlikely that the meeting with the OEC will occur prior to the team’s next scheduled plenary call, the Monday, 03 February PHR call will be canceled. In lieu of the plenary call, we would like to encourage continued discussion on the survey from the last call, via the mailing list, on the issue of defining “good practices”. There was agreement in the survey that “[r]eviewing continuous improvement efforts of SO/AC/NC based on good practices”, is within our remit. With this in mind, we would like to ask: 1. How should best practices be defined? (Pg 22 & 72 of ATRT3 Final Report<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atrt3-report-29may20-en.pdf>). 2. Should best practices be understood/agreed upon by the SO/AC/NomCom before each group undertakes its work? We look forward to hearing your thoughts and perspective on this issue. Best Regards Co-Chairs Chris & Sophie -- Jessica Puccio Sr Coordinator, Review Support and Accountability Projects Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN<http://www.icann.org/>)
HAPPY BIRTHDAY to CHRIS !! Joy and Success!! Thank you Jessica, work on the “best practice s” concepts. Kisses Vanda From: Jessica Puccio via Phr <phr@icann.org> Date: Wednesday, 29 January 2025 at 14:26 To: phr@icann.org <phr@icann.org> Subject: [Phr] Update on Monday's Plenary Call & Next Steps Hello Team - We are currently working to coordinate a meeting with the Board’s Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC) in response to León’s request. Since it is unlikely that the meeting with the OEC will occur prior to the team’s next scheduled plenary call, the Monday, 03 February PHR call will be canceled. In lieu of the plenary call, we would like to encourage continued discussion on the survey from the last call, via the mailing list, on the issue of defining “good practices”. There was agreement in the survey that “[r]eviewing continuous improvement efforts of SO/AC/NC based on good practices”, is within our remit. With this in mind, we would like to ask: 1. How should best practices be defined? (Pg 22 & 72 of ATRT3 Final Report<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atrt3-report-29may20-en.pdf>). 2. Should best practices be understood/agreed upon by the SO/AC/NomCom before each group undertakes its work? We look forward to hearing your thoughts and perspective on this issue. Best Regards Co-Chairs Chris & Sophie -- Jessica Puccio Sr Coordinator, Review Support and Accountability Projects Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN<http://www.icann.org/>)
Thank you Chris ( and HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!) because at ATRT3 we spend days discussing this … Vanda From: Chris Disspain via Phr <phr@icann.org> Date: Thursday, 30 January 2025 at 15:58 To: Jessica Puccio <jessica.puccio@icann.org> Cc: phr@icann.org <phr@icann.org> Subject: [Phr] Re: Update on Monday's Plenary Call & Next Steps Hello All, For best practices below please read good practices as per the atrt recommendations. Cheers, CD On 29 Jan 2025, at 17:26, Jessica Puccio via Phr <phr@icann.org> wrote: Hello Team - We are currently working to coordinate a meeting with the Board’s Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC) in response to León’s request. Since it is unlikely that the meeting with the OEC will occur prior to the team’s next scheduled plenary call, the Monday, 03 February PHR call will be canceled. In lieu of the plenary call, we would like to encourage continued discussion on the survey from the last call, via the mailing list, on the issue of defining “good practices”. There was agreement in the survey that “[r]eviewing continuous improvement efforts of SO/AC/NC based on good practices”, is within our remit. With this in mind, we would like to ask: 1. How should best practices be defined? (Pg 22 & 72 of ATRT3 Final Report<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atrt3-report-29may20-en.pdf>). 2. Should best practices be understood/agreed upon by the SO/AC/NomCom before each group undertakes its work? We look forward to hearing your thoughts and perspective on this issue. Best Regards Co-Chairs Chris & Sophie -- Jessica Puccio Sr Coordinator, Review Support and Accountability Projects Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN<http://www.icann.org/>) _______________________________________________ Phr mailing list -- phr@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to phr-leave@icann.org
Hello All,
How should best good practices be defined? (Pg 22 & 72 of ATRT3 Final Report <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atrt3-report-29may20-en.pdf>). Should best good practices be understood/agreed upon by the SO/AC/NomCom before each group undertakes its work?
I have a question… The ATRT 3 Final Report says - 'Review continuous improvement efforts of SO/AC/NC based on good practices’. Does this mean that the review should consider whether the CIP efforts of an SO are based on good practices or does it mean that the review should be based on good practices? Obviously good practice for doing a review is a different set of practices from those for continuous improvement efforts. Thoughts? Cheers, Chris Disspain chris@disspain.uk +44 7880 642456 
On 29 Jan 2025, at 17:26, Jessica Puccio via Phr <phr@icann.org> wrote:
Hello Team -
We are currently working to coordinate a meeting with the Board’s Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC) in response to León’s request. Since it is unlikely that the meeting with the OEC will occur prior to the team’s next scheduled plenary call, the Monday, 03 February PHR call will be canceled.
In lieu of the plenary call, we would like to encourage continued discussion on the survey from the last call, via the mailing list, on the issue of defining “good practices”. There was agreement in the survey that “[r]eviewing continuous improvement efforts of SO/AC/NC based on good practices”, is within our remit. With this in mind, we would like to ask:
How should best practices be defined? (Pg 22 & 72 of ATRT3 Final Report <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atrt3-report-29may20-en.pdf>). Should best practices be understood/agreed upon by the SO/AC/NomCom before each group undertakes its work?
We look forward to hearing your thoughts and perspective on this issue.
Best Regards Co-Chairs Chris & Sophie
-- Jessica Puccio Sr Coordinator, Review Support and Accountability Projects Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN <http://www.icann.org/>)
_______________________________________________ Phr mailing list -- phr@icann.org <mailto:phr@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to phr-leave@icann.org <mailto:phr-leave@icann.org>
Hi Chris and All, My understanding that this means: Reviewing the CIP against established good practices, like benchmarking improvement efforts against relevant recognized good efforts. If so, I suppose each SO/AC/NomCom needs to identify those good practices. Best wishes Hadia Elminiawi From: Chris Disspain via Phr <phr@icann.org> Sent: 08 February 2025 13:53 To: phr@icann.org Cc: Jessica Puccio <jessica.puccio@icann.org> Subject: [External] [Phr] Re: Update on Monday's Plenary Call & Next Steps Hello All, 1. How should best good practices be defined? (Pg 22 & 72 of ATRT3 Final Report<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atrt3-report-29may20-en.pdf>). 2. Should best good practices be understood/agreed upon by the SO/AC/NomCom before each group undertakes its work? I have a question… The ATRT 3 Final Report says - 'Review continuous improvement efforts of SO/AC/NC based on good practices’. Does this mean that the review should consider whether the CIP efforts of an SO are based on good practices or does it mean that the review should be based on good practices? Obviously good practice for doing a review is a different set of practices from those for continuous improvement efforts. Thoughts? Cheers, Chris Disspain chris@disspain.uk<mailto:chris@disspain.uk> +44 7880 642456 [PastedGraphic-2.tiff] On 29 Jan 2025, at 17:26, Jessica Puccio via Phr <phr@icann.org<mailto:phr@icann.org>> wrote: Hello Team - We are currently working to coordinate a meeting with the Board’s Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC) in response to León’s request. Since it is unlikely that the meeting with the OEC will occur prior to the team’s next scheduled plenary call, the Monday, 03 February PHR call will be canceled. In lieu of the plenary call, we would like to encourage continued discussion on the survey from the last call, via the mailing list, on the issue of defining “good practices”. There was agreement in the survey that “[r]eviewing continuous improvement efforts of SO/AC/NC based on good practices”, is within our remit. With this in mind, we would like to ask: 1. How should best practices be defined? (Pg 22 & 72 of ATRT3 Final Report<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atrt3-report-29may20-en.pdf>). 2. Should best practices be understood/agreed upon by the SO/AC/NomCom before each group undertakes its work? We look forward to hearing your thoughts and perspective on this issue. Best Regards Co-Chairs Chris & Sophie -- Jessica Puccio Sr Coordinator, Review Support and Accountability Projects Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN<http://www.icann.org/>) _______________________________________________ Phr mailing list -- phr@icann.org<mailto:phr@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to phr-leave@icann.org<mailto:phr-leave@icann.org>
Good practices could be defined as the things groups have implemented and have brought good results along the time - some examples for Nomcom : Note all suggestions that have been suggested during the NC work to guarantee it will be part of the recommendations to the next NomCom Have a recommendation committee itself is also a good practice Vanda Scartezini Sent from my iPhone Sorry for typos On 9 Feb 2025, at 08:24, Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi via Phr <phr@icann.org> wrote: Hi Chris and All, My understanding that this means: Reviewing the CIP against established good practices, like benchmarking improvement efforts against relevant recognized good efforts. If so, I suppose each SO/AC/NomCom needs to identify those good practices. Best wishes Hadia Elminiawi From: Chris Disspain via Phr <phr@icann.org> Sent: 08 February 2025 13:53 To: phr@icann.org Cc: Jessica Puccio <jessica.puccio@icann.org> Subject: [External] [Phr] Re: Update on Monday's Plenary Call & Next Steps Hello All, 1. How should best good practices be defined? (Pg 22 & 72 of ATRT3 Final Report<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atrt3-report-29may20-en.pdf>). 2. Should best good practices be understood/agreed upon by the SO/AC/NomCom before each group undertakes its work? I have a question… The ATRT 3 Final Report says - 'Review continuous improvement efforts of SO/AC/NC based on good practices’. Does this mean that the review should consider whether the CIP efforts of an SO are based on good practices or does it mean that the review should be based on good practices? Obviously good practice for doing a review is a different set of practices from those for continuous improvement efforts. Thoughts? Cheers, Chris Disspain chris@disspain.uk<mailto:chris@disspain.uk> +44 7880 642456 <image001.png> On 29 Jan 2025, at 17:26, Jessica Puccio via Phr <phr@icann.org<mailto:phr@icann.org>> wrote: Hello Team - We are currently working to coordinate a meeting with the Board’s Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC) in response to León’s request. Since it is unlikely that the meeting with the OEC will occur prior to the team’s next scheduled plenary call, the Monday, 03 February PHR call will be canceled. In lieu of the plenary call, we would like to encourage continued discussion on the survey from the last call, via the mailing list, on the issue of defining “good practices”. There was agreement in the survey that “[r]eviewing continuous improvement efforts of SO/AC/NC based on good practices”, is within our remit. With this in mind, we would like to ask: 1. How should best practices be defined? (Pg 22 & 72 of ATRT3 Final Report<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atrt3-report-29may20-en.pdf>). 2. Should best practices be understood/agreed upon by the SO/AC/NomCom before each group undertakes its work? We look forward to hearing your thoughts and perspective on this issue. Best Regards Co-Chairs Chris & Sophie -- Jessica Puccio Sr Coordinator, Review Support and Accountability Projects Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN<http://www.icann.org/>) _______________________________________________ Phr mailing list -- phr@icann.org<mailto:phr@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to phr-leave@icann.org<mailto:phr-leave@icann.org> _______________________________________________ Phr mailing list -- phr@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to phr-leave@icann.org
Hi all again, I just realized that I had not responded to the timing aspect in my previous email. I think good practices are to be defined by each AC/SO/NomCom as part of their CIP efforts rather than before undertaking their work. This would ensure that best practices are integrated within the process. Best Hadia From: Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi via Phr <phr@icann.org> Sent: 09 February 2025 13:24 To: Chris Disspain <chris@disspain.uk>; phr@icann.org Cc: Jessica Puccio <jessica.puccio@icann.org> Subject: [Phr] Re: [External] Re: Update on Monday's Plenary Call & Next Steps Hi Chris and All, My understanding that this means: Reviewing the CIP against established good practices, like benchmarking improvement efforts against relevant recognized good efforts. If so, I suppose each SO/AC/NomCom needs to identify those good practices. Best wishes Hadia Elminiawi From: Chris Disspain via Phr <phr@icann.org<mailto:phr@icann.org>> Sent: 08 February 2025 13:53 To: phr@icann.org<mailto:phr@icann.org> Cc: Jessica Puccio <jessica.puccio@icann.org<mailto:jessica.puccio@icann.org>> Subject: [External] [Phr] Re: Update on Monday's Plenary Call & Next Steps Hello All, 1. How should best good practices be defined? (Pg 22 & 72 of ATRT3 Final Report<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atrt3-report-29may20-en.pdf>). 2. Should best good practices be understood/agreed upon by the SO/AC/NomCom before each group undertakes its work? I have a question… The ATRT 3 Final Report says - 'Review continuous improvement efforts of SO/AC/NC based on good practices’. Does this mean that the review should consider whether the CIP efforts of an SO are based on good practices or does it mean that the review should be based on good practices? Obviously good practice for doing a review is a different set of practices from those for continuous improvement efforts. Thoughts? Cheers, Chris Disspain chris@disspain.uk<mailto:chris@disspain.uk> +44 7880 642456 [PastedGraphic-2.tiff] On 29 Jan 2025, at 17:26, Jessica Puccio via Phr <phr@icann.org<mailto:phr@icann.org>> wrote: Hello Team - We are currently working to coordinate a meeting with the Board’s Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC) in response to León’s request. Since it is unlikely that the meeting with the OEC will occur prior to the team’s next scheduled plenary call, the Monday, 03 February PHR call will be canceled. In lieu of the plenary call, we would like to encourage continued discussion on the survey from the last call, via the mailing list, on the issue of defining “good practices”. There was agreement in the survey that “[r]eviewing continuous improvement efforts of SO/AC/NC based on good practices”, is within our remit. With this in mind, we would like to ask: 1. How should best practices be defined? (Pg 22 & 72 of ATRT3 Final Report<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atrt3-report-29may20-en.pdf>). 2. Should best practices be understood/agreed upon by the SO/AC/NomCom before each group undertakes its work? We look forward to hearing your thoughts and perspective on this issue. Best Regards Co-Chairs Chris & Sophie -- Jessica Puccio Sr Coordinator, Review Support and Accountability Projects Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN<http://www.icann.org/>) _______________________________________________ Phr mailing list -- phr@icann.org<mailto:phr@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to phr-leave@icann.org<mailto:phr-leave@icann.org>
Thanks Hadia. That makes sense to me. What do others think? Cheers, Chris Disspain chris@disspain.uk +44 7880 642456 
On 11 Feb 2025, at 14:24, Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi via Phr <phr@icann.org> wrote:
Hi all again,
I just realized that I had not responded to the timing aspect in my previous email. I think good practices are to be defined by each AC/SO/NomCom as part of their CIP efforts rather than before undertaking their work. This would ensure that best practices are integrated within the process.
Best Hadia From: Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi via Phr <phr@icann.org <mailto:phr@icann.org>> Sent: 09 February 2025 13:24 To: Chris Disspain <chris@disspain.uk <mailto:chris@disspain.uk>>; phr@icann.org <mailto:phr@icann.org> Cc: Jessica Puccio <jessica.puccio@icann.org <mailto:jessica.puccio@icann.org>> Subject: [Phr] Re: [External] Re: Update on Monday's Plenary Call & Next Steps
Hi Chris and All,
My understanding that this means: Reviewing the CIP against established good practices, like benchmarking improvement efforts against relevant recognized good efforts. If so, I suppose each SO/AC/NomCom needs to identify those good practices.
Best wishes Hadia Elminiawi
From: Chris Disspain via Phr <phr@icann.org <mailto:phr@icann.org>> Sent: 08 February 2025 13:53 To: phr@icann.org <mailto:phr@icann.org> Cc: Jessica Puccio <jessica.puccio@icann.org <mailto:jessica.puccio@icann.org>> Subject: [External] [Phr] Re: Update on Monday's Plenary Call & Next Steps
Hello All,
How should best good practices be defined? (Pg 22 & 72 of ATRT3 Final Report <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atrt3-report-29may20-en.pdf>). Should best good practices be understood/agreed upon by the SO/AC/NomCom before each group undertakes its work?
I have a question…
The ATRT 3 Final Report says - 'Review continuous improvement efforts of SO/AC/NC based on good practices’. Does this mean that the review should consider whether the CIP efforts of an SO are based on good practices or does it mean that the review should be based on good practices?
Obviously good practice for doing a review is a different set of practices from those for continuous improvement efforts.
Thoughts?
Cheers,
Chris Disspain chris@disspain.uk <mailto:chris@disspain.uk>
+44 7880 642456
<image001.png>
On 29 Jan 2025, at 17:26, Jessica Puccio via Phr <phr@icann.org <mailto:phr@icann.org>> wrote:
Hello Team -
We are currently working to coordinate a meeting with the Board’s Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC) in response to León’s request. Since it is unlikely that the meeting with the OEC will occur prior to the team’s next scheduled plenary call, the Monday, 03 February PHR call will be canceled.
In lieu of the plenary call, we would like to encourage continued discussion on the survey from the last call, via the mailing list, on the issue of defining “good practices”. There was agreement in the survey that “[r]eviewing continuous improvement efforts of SO/AC/NC based on good practices”, is within our remit. With this in mind, we would like to ask:
How should best practices be defined? (Pg 22 & 72 of ATRT3 Final Report <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atrt3-report-29may20-en.pdf>). Should best practices be understood/agreed upon by the SO/AC/NomCom before each group undertakes its work?
We look forward to hearing your thoughts and perspective on this issue.
Best Regards Co-Chairs Chris & Sophie
-- Jessica Puccio Sr Coordinator, Review Support and Accountability Projects Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN <http://www.icann.org/>)
_______________________________________________ Phr mailing list -- phr@icann.org <mailto:phr@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to phr-leave@icann.org <mailto:phr-leave@icann.org>
_______________________________________________ Phr mailing list -- phr@icann.org <mailto:phr@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to phr-leave@icann.org <mailto:phr-leave@icann.org>
I agree with Hadia. Good practices are to be defined by each SO/AC/NC and this is part of their CIP efforts. Kind regards, Bukola.
On 11 Feb 2025, at 15:26, Chris Disspain via Phr <phr@icann.org> wrote:
Thanks Hadia.
That makes sense to me. What do others think?
Cheers,
Chris Disspain chris@disspain.uk
+44 7880 642456
<PastedGraphic-2.tiff>
On 11 Feb 2025, at 14:24, Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi via Phr <phr@icann.org> wrote:
Hi all again,
I just realized that I had not responded to the timing aspect in my previous email. I think good practices are to be defined by each AC/SO/NomCom as part of their CIP efforts rather than before undertaking their work. This would ensure that best practices are integrated within the process.
Best Hadia From: Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi via Phr <phr@icann.org <mailto:phr@icann.org>> Sent: 09 February 2025 13:24 To: Chris Disspain <chris@disspain.uk <mailto:chris@disspain.uk>>; phr@icann.org <mailto:phr@icann.org> Cc: Jessica Puccio <jessica.puccio@icann.org <mailto:jessica.puccio@icann.org>> Subject: [Phr] Re: [External] Re: Update on Monday's Plenary Call & Next Steps
Hi Chris and All,
My understanding that this means: Reviewing the CIP against established good practices, like benchmarking improvement efforts against relevant recognized good efforts. If so, I suppose each SO/AC/NomCom needs to identify those good practices.
Best wishes Hadia Elminiawi
From: Chris Disspain via Phr <phr@icann.org <mailto:phr@icann.org>> Sent: 08 February 2025 13:53 To: phr@icann.org <mailto:phr@icann.org> Cc: Jessica Puccio <jessica.puccio@icann.org <mailto:jessica.puccio@icann.org>> Subject: [External] [Phr] Re: Update on Monday's Plenary Call & Next Steps
Hello All,
How should best good practices be defined? (Pg 22 & 72 of ATRT3 Final Report <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atrt3-report-29may20-en.pdf>). Should best good practices be understood/agreed upon by the SO/AC/NomCom before each group undertakes its work?
I have a question…
The ATRT 3 Final Report says - 'Review continuous improvement efforts of SO/AC/NC based on good practices’. Does this mean that the review should consider whether the CIP efforts of an SO are based on good practices or does it mean that the review should be based on good practices?
Obviously good practice for doing a review is a different set of practices from those for continuous improvement efforts.
Thoughts?
Cheers,
Chris Disspain chris@disspain.uk <mailto:chris@disspain.uk>
+44 7880 642456
<image001.png>
On 29 Jan 2025, at 17:26, Jessica Puccio via Phr <phr@icann.org <mailto:phr@icann.org>> wrote:
Hello Team -
We are currently working to coordinate a meeting with the Board’s Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC) in response to León’s request. Since it is unlikely that the meeting with the OEC will occur prior to the team’s next scheduled plenary call, the Monday, 03 February PHR call will be canceled.
In lieu of the plenary call, we would like to encourage continued discussion on the survey from the last call, via the mailing list, on the issue of defining “good practices”. There was agreement in the survey that “[r]eviewing continuous improvement efforts of SO/AC/NC based on good practices”, is within our remit. With this in mind, we would like to ask:
How should best practices be defined? (Pg 22 & 72 of ATRT3 Final Report <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atrt3-report-29may20-en.pdf>). Should best practices be understood/agreed upon by the SO/AC/NomCom before each group undertakes its work?
We look forward to hearing your thoughts and perspective on this issue.
Best Regards Co-Chairs Chris & Sophie
-- Jessica Puccio Sr Coordinator, Review Support and Accountability Projects Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN <http://www.icann.org/>)
_______________________________________________ Phr mailing list -- phr@icann.org <mailto:phr@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to phr-leave@icann.org <mailto:phr-leave@icann.org>
_______________________________________________ Phr mailing list -- phr@icann.org <mailto:phr@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to phr-leave@icann.org <mailto:phr-leave@icann.org>
Phr mailing list -- phr@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to phr-leave@icann.org
Agree . for instance as I exemplified for NOMCOM, ( we already have a kid of constant improvement process, so one good practice is the recommendation to next team. This applies to Nomcom only, others does not change every year.. Makes sense to allow each SO/AC and Nomcom define the best way to proceed and then define which are the good practices for them. Vanda From: Bukola Oronti via Phr <phr@icann.org> Date: Tuesday, 11 February 2025 at 11:35 To: Chris Disspain <chris@disspain.uk> Cc: Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi <Hadia@tra.gov.eg>, phr@icann.org <phr@icann.org>, Jessica Puccio <jessica.puccio@icann.org> Subject: [Phr] Re: [External] Re: Update on Monday's Plenary Call & Next Steps I agree with Hadia. Good practices are to be defined by each SO/AC/NC and this is part of their CIP efforts. Kind regards, Bukola. On 11 Feb 2025, at 15:26, Chris Disspain via Phr <phr@icann.org> wrote: Thanks Hadia. That makes sense to me. What do others think? Cheers, Chris Disspain chris@disspain.uk +44 7880 642456 <PastedGraphic-2.tiff> On 11 Feb 2025, at 14:24, Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi via Phr <phr@icann.org> wrote: Hi all again, I just realized that I had not responded to the timing aspect in my previous email. I think good practices are to be defined by each AC/SO/NomCom as part of their CIP efforts rather than before undertaking their work. This would ensure that best practices are integrated within the process. Best Hadia From: Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi via Phr <phr@icann.org<mailto:phr@icann.org>> Sent: 09 February 2025 13:24 To: Chris Disspain <chris@disspain.uk<mailto:chris@disspain.uk>>; phr@icann.org<mailto:phr@icann.org> Cc: Jessica Puccio <jessica.puccio@icann.org<mailto:jessica.puccio@icann.org>> Subject: [Phr] Re: [External] Re: Update on Monday's Plenary Call & Next Steps Hi Chris and All, My understanding that this means: Reviewing the CIP against established good practices, like benchmarking improvement efforts against relevant recognized good efforts. If so, I suppose each SO/AC/NomCom needs to identify those good practices. Best wishes Hadia Elminiawi From: Chris Disspain via Phr <phr@icann.org<mailto:phr@icann.org>> Sent: 08 February 2025 13:53 To: phr@icann.org<mailto:phr@icann.org> Cc: Jessica Puccio <jessica.puccio@icann.org<mailto:jessica.puccio@icann.org>> Subject: [External] [Phr] Re: Update on Monday's Plenary Call & Next Steps Hello All, 1. How should best good practices be defined? (Pg 22 & 72 of ATRT3 Final Report<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atrt3-report-29may20-en.pdf>). 2. Should best good practices be understood/agreed upon by the SO/AC/NomCom before each group undertakes its work? I have a question… The ATRT 3 Final Report says - 'Review continuous improvement efforts of SO/AC/NC based on good practices’. Does this mean that the review should consider whether the CIP efforts of an SO are based on good practices or does it mean that the review should be based on good practices? Obviously good practice for doing a review is a different set of practices from those for continuous improvement efforts. Thoughts? Cheers, Chris Disspain chris@disspain.uk<mailto:chris@disspain.uk> +44 7880 642456 <image001.png> On 29 Jan 2025, at 17:26, Jessica Puccio via Phr <phr@icann.org<mailto:phr@icann.org>> wrote: Hello Team - We are currently working to coordinate a meeting with the Board’s Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC) in response to León’s request. Since it is unlikely that the meeting with the OEC will occur prior to the team’s next scheduled plenary call, the Monday, 03 February PHR call will be canceled. In lieu of the plenary call, we would like to encourage continued discussion on the survey from the last call, via the mailing list, on the issue of defining “good practices”. There was agreement in the survey that “[r]eviewing continuous improvement efforts of SO/AC/NC based on good practices”, is within our remit. With this in mind, we would like to ask: 1. How should best practices be defined? (Pg 22 & 72 of ATRT3 Final Report<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atrt3-report-29may20-en.pdf>). 2. Should best practices be understood/agreed upon by the SO/AC/NomCom before each group undertakes its work? We look forward to hearing your thoughts and perspective on this issue. Best Regards Co-Chairs Chris & Sophie -- Jessica Puccio Sr Coordinator, Review Support and Accountability Projects Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN<http://www.icann.org/>) _______________________________________________ Phr mailing list -- phr@icann.org<mailto:phr@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to phr-leave@icann.org<mailto:phr-leave@icann.org> _______________________________________________ Phr mailing list -- phr@icann.org<mailto:phr@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to phr-leave@icann.org<mailto:phr-leave@icann.org> _______________________________________________ Phr mailing list -- phr@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to phr-leave@icann.org
Chris and team, My apologies for the late response. I wanted to consider your question thoroughly, and now I'm ready to provide my thoughts. Please take a look at my comments below. On Sat, Feb 8, 2025 at 7:53 AM Chris Disspain via Phr <phr@icann.org> wrote:
Hello All,
1. How should best *good* practices be defined? (Pg 22 & 72 of ATRT3 Final Report <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atrt3-report-29may20-en.pdf> ).
-ed: Good practices should begin with a clear definition of the scope and objectives, ensuring the review remains focused and targeted on the relevant areas. Stakeholder engagement is also crucial, as it ensures that diverse perspectives are considered, which improves the quality of the review and fosters transparency. The use of data and evidence further strengthens the process, providing a solid foundation for conclusions and helping identify areas for improvement. Additionally, transparency and accountability should guide the review, maintaining public trust and ensuring that actions are taken when necessary. Finally, effective follow-up mechanisms should be established to track progress and ensure that the recommendations are implemented and improvements continue.
1. 2. Should best *good* practices be understood/agreed upon by the SO/AC/NomCom before each group undertakes its work?
-ed: I don't think so. The HR is holistic, meaning it will review all the
SO/AC/NomCom, so these groups do not need to agree on a set of good practices for the HR to follow, but the PHR team does. In any case, the PHR draft report will be made public, and at that time, everyone will have the opportunity to comment on it. This will provide an opportunity to reach an agreement on these practices from the HR perspective. The SO/AC/NomCom will follow whatever good practices, if any, are ultimately agreed upon in the CIP framework. Since the PHR is not involved in the development of that framework, any discussions suggesting what the SO/AC/NomCom should or should not do from the perspective of our work should be considered out of scope for us.
I have a question…
The ATRT 3 Final Report says - 'Review continuous improvement efforts of SO/AC/NC based on good practices’. Does this mean that the review should consider whether the CIP efforts of an SO are based on good practices or does it mean that the review should be based on good practices?
-ed: Given that this recommendation comes from the ATRT 3, it should be understood that the Holistic Review (HR) is expected to evaluate the CIP efforts by applying good practices in the review process.
Obviously good practice for doing a review is a different set of practices from those for continuous improvement efforts.
Thoughts?
Cheers,
Chris Disspain chris@disspain.uk
+44 7880 642456
[image: PastedGraphic-2.tiff]
On 29 Jan 2025, at 17:26, Jessica Puccio via Phr <phr@icann.org> wrote:
Hello Team -
We are currently working to coordinate a meeting with the Board’s Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC) in response to León’s request. Since it is unlikely that the meeting with the OEC will occur prior to the team’s next scheduled plenary call, the Monday, 03 February PHR call will be canceled.
In lieu of the plenary call, we would like to encourage continued discussion on the survey from the last call, via the mailing list, on the issue of defining “good practices”. There was agreement in the survey that “[r]eviewing continuous improvement efforts of SO/AC/NC based on good practices”, is within our remit. With this in mind, we would like to ask:
1. How should best practices be defined? (Pg 22 & 72 of ATRT3 Final Report <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atrt3-report-29may20-en.pdf> ). 2. Should best practices be understood/agreed upon by the SO/AC/NomCom before each group undertakes its work?
We look forward to hearing your thoughts and perspective on this issue.
Best Regards Co-Chairs Chris & Sophie
-- Jessica Puccio Sr Coordinator, Review Support and Accountability Projects Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN <http://www.icann.org/>)
_______________________________________________ Phr mailing list -- phr@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to phr-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________ Phr mailing list -- phr@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to phr-leave@icann.org
-- *Notice*: This email may contain confidential information, is subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
Hello all, My inputs The ATRT3 spent (a lot of) time to discuss best practices vs good practices. It could be useful, not to reinvent the wheel, to go back to the work done by ATRT3? It was evaluated in great detail by the Third Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3). ALAC / At-Large’s view is that there is no need to relitigate; just reacquaint with the material, as needed, hold current discussions, and act accordingly. To summarize if we talk about best practices it will need to be implemented by all the groups. ATR3 uses good practices to allow each group to adapt the practice of one group to its own need. The future holistic reviews will have to review the Continuous Improvement efforts but not the way they are done (that the responsibility of each SO/AC/NomCom and all together in the CIP). SeB Le 29/01/2025 à 18:26, Jessica Puccio via Phr a écrit :
Hello Team -
We are currently working to coordinate a meeting with the Board’s Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC) in response to León’s request. Since it is unlikely that the meeting with the OEC will occur prior to the team’s next scheduled plenary call, the Monday, 03 February PHR call will be canceled.
In lieu of the plenary call, we would like to encourage continued discussion on the survey from the last call, via the mailing list, on the issue of defining “good practices”. There was agreement in the survey that “[r]eviewing continuous improvement efforts of SO/AC/NC based on good practices”, is within our remit. With this in mind, we would like to ask:
1. How should best practices be defined? (Pg 22 & 72 of ATRT3 Final Report <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atrt3-report-29may20-en.pdf>). 2. Should best practices be understood/agreed upon by the SO/AC/NomCom before each group undertakes its work?
We look forward to hearing your thoughts and perspective on this issue.
Best Regards Co-Chairs Chris & Sophie
--
Jessica Puccio
Sr Coordinator, Review Support and Accountability Projects
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN <http://www.icann.org/>)
_______________________________________________ Phr mailing list --phr@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email tophr-leave@icann.org
-- Sebastien Bachollet Chair of EURALO President d'honneur Isoc France President Espace SocioCulturel du Val du Sauzay (Nievre France) +33 6 07 66 89 33
Agree Seb. It is clear each Ac/SO and NOMCOM will establish its good practice, adequated to its work. Vanda From: SeB ICANN via Phr <phr@icann.org> Date: Tuesday, 18 February 2025 at 11:28 To: phr@icann.org <phr@icann.org> Subject: [Phr] Re: Update on Monday's Plenary Call & Next Steps Hello all, My inputs The ATRT3 spent (a lot of) time to discuss best practices vs good practices. It could be useful, not to reinvent the wheel, to go back to the work done by ATRT3? It was evaluated in great detail by the Third Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT3). ALAC / At-Large’s view is that there is no need to relitigate; just reacquaint with the material, as needed, hold current discussions, and act accordingly. To summarize if we talk about best practices it will need to be implemented by all the groups. ATR3 uses good practices to allow each group to adapt the practice of one group to its own need. The future holistic reviews will have to review the Continuous Improvement efforts but not the way they are done (that the responsibility of each SO/AC/NomCom and all together in the CIP). SeB Le 29/01/2025 à 18:26, Jessica Puccio via Phr a écrit : Hello Team - We are currently working to coordinate a meeting with the Board’s Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC) in response to León’s request. Since it is unlikely that the meeting with the OEC will occur prior to the team’s next scheduled plenary call, the Monday, 03 February PHR call will be canceled. In lieu of the plenary call, we would like to encourage continued discussion on the survey from the last call, via the mailing list, on the issue of defining “good practices”. There was agreement in the survey that “[r]eviewing continuous improvement efforts of SO/AC/NC based on good practices”, is within our remit. With this in mind, we would like to ask: 1. How should best practices be defined? (Pg 22 & 72 of ATRT3 Final Report<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/atrt3-report-29may20-en.pdf>). 2. Should best practices be understood/agreed upon by the SO/AC/NomCom before each group undertakes its work? We look forward to hearing your thoughts and perspective on this issue. Best Regards Co-Chairs Chris & Sophie -- Jessica Puccio Sr Coordinator, Review Support and Accountability Projects Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN<http://www.icann.org/>) _______________________________________________ Phr mailing list -- phr@icann.org<mailto:phr@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to phr-leave@icann.org<mailto:phr-leave@icann.org> -- Sebastien Bachollet Chair of EURALO President d'honneur Isoc France President Espace SocioCulturel du Val du Sauzay (Nievre France) +33 6 07 66 89 33
participants (8)
-
anil Jain -
Bukola Oronti -
Chris Disspain -
Eduardo Diaz -
Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi -
Jessica Puccio -
SeB ICANN -
Vanda Scartezini