FEEDBACK on DIVERSITY FROM CCWG-A WS2 F2F MEETING AT ICANN58
Hi Everyone, In the interests of updating our Diversity Questionnaire as soon as possible, I have been through the recording of the session on Friday 10th March and made the following notes. Please let me know if you do not think I have accurately captured the feedback provided during the Plenary. 1. The introduction to the Questionnaire should make it more explicit that the list of Diversity elements stated is not exhaustive. 2. The term “SO/AC/group” should be clarified and it should be stated more specifically who are the target groups for this Questionnaire. 3. In the list of diversity elements, “Skills” should remain but should be listed as “Diversity of Skills” to avoid confusion. 4. In the list of diversity elements, “Physical Ability” is ambiguous and should be listed as “Disability”. 5. In Q4, the concept of being "proportionally represented within your SO/AC/group and its leadership” is neither clear nor necessarily useful. “Members" of a group/constituency may or may not participate, and of those who do participate, it is the ones who are actively engaged that are most likely to be those who are appointed to leadership positions. This question could create a great deal of confusion. 6. Q1-3 are asking for current information about diversity; Q4-6 are more aspirational. They are asking about ways to promote diversity. The questions should be amended as follows: - Q4 should focus on asking about ways to promote diversity in membership and leadership - Q5 should ask about educational or informational initiative to promote diversity awareness - Q6 should focus on asking about policies/practices which promote diversity I would also like to add one further suggestion of my own. In our original list of questions, we had one which asked "Does your SO/AC/group have any formal policies and procedures relating to diversity? If so, please provide details of these.” as well as "Does your SO/AC/group have any informal practices relating to diversity? If so, please provide details of these.” We seem to have retained the latter question but not the former. I do think it would be useful to ask about both formal and informal, but I am conscious that we don’t want to increase the number of questions so I have merged both of these aspects in the new Q6. Taking the above feedback into account, I have attempted to incorporate all these points into an updated Questionnaire which is attached for your review. I realise that the Diversity Sub-Group has not necessarily collectively agreed with all these recommendations, but if any of the suggestions we received are not agreed, then we can change the Questionnaire accordingly. I have not used “track changes” as I felt the list above adequately details the changes that have been made. Cheers, Julie
Dear All Thanks Julie for the summary The adjusted questions as per the discussion at the plenary summarised by Julie in earlier email is as follows: ************************* The CCWG Work Stream 2 Diversity Sub-Group has identified the following elements of diversity as potentially relevant to ICANN SO/AC/groups: A. Geographic/regional representation B. Language C. Gender D. Age E. Physical dis-ability F. Diverse Skills G. Stakeholder group or constituency 1. What relative importance does your SO/AC/group give to these six dimensions of diversity? 2. What, if any, additional dimensions of diversity are important to your SO/AC/group? 3. How, if at all, does your SO/AC/group measure and track diversity issues related to its work? 4. How, if at all, does your SO/AC/group seek to promote diversity in its membership, its active participation, and its leadership? 5. What, if any, educational and informational initiatives does your SO/AC/group pursue to promote diversity awareness? 6. What, if any, formal or informal practices or written or unwritten policies are pursued in your SO/AC/group to promote diversity? ***************************** We would appreciate if the WS2 Diversity group members can provide their feedback on the questions. Kind regards Fiona Asonga ----- Original Message ----- From: "Julie Hammer" <julie.hammer@bigpond.com> To: ws2-diversity@icann.org Cc: "ACCT-Staff" <acct-staff@icann.org> Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2017 6:12:16 AM Subject: [Ws2-diversity] FEEDBACK on DIVERSITY FROM CCWG-A WS2 F2F MEETING AT ICANN58 Hi Everyone, In the interests of updating our Diversity Questionnaire as soon as possible, I have been through the recording of the session on Friday 10th March and made the following notes. Please let me know if you do not think I have accurately captured the feedback provided during the Plenary. 1. The introduction to the Questionnaire should make it more explicit that the list of Diversity elements stated is not exhaustive. 2. The term “SO/AC/group” should be clarified and it should be stated more specifically who are the target groups for this Questionnaire. 3. In the list of diversity elements, “Skills” should remain but should be listed as “Diversity of Skills” to avoid confusion. 4. In the list of diversity elements, “Physical Ability” is ambiguous and should be listed as “Disability”. 5. In Q4, the concept of being "proportionally represented within your SO/AC/group and its leadership” is neither clear nor necessarily useful. “Members" of a group/constituency may or may not participate, and of those who do participate, it is the ones who are actively engaged that are most likely to be those who are appointed to leadership positions. This question could create a great deal of confusion. 6. Q1-3 are asking for current information about diversity; Q4-6 are more aspirational. They are asking about ways to promote diversity. The questions should be amended as follows: - Q4 should focus on asking about ways to promote diversity in membership and leadership - Q5 should ask about educational or informational initiative to promote diversity awareness - Q6 should focus on asking about policies/practices which promote diversity I would also like to add one further suggestion of my own. In our original list of questions, we had one which asked "Does your SO/AC/group have any formal policies and procedures relating to diversity? If so, please provide details of these.” as well as "Does your SO/AC/group have any informal practices relating to diversity? If so, please provide details of these.” We seem to have retained the latter question but not the former. I do think it would be useful to ask about both formal and informal, but I am conscious that we don’t want to increase the number of questions so I have merged both of these aspects in the new Q6. Taking the above feedback into account, I have attempted to incorporate all these points into an updated Questionnaire which is attached for your review. I realise that the Diversity Sub-Group has not necessarily collectively agreed with all these recommendations, but if any of the suggestions we received are not agreed, then we can change the Questionnaire accordingly. I have not used “track changes” as I felt the list above adequately details the changes that have been made. Cheers, Julie _______________________________________________ Ws2-diversity mailing list Ws2-diversity@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity --
Dear Colleagues Thanks for sharing and consolidating these questions. Unfortunately I wasn't able to attend the meeting nor participate remotely as I'm on maternity leave. Will the questionnaire be shared for all participants / members of SOs/ACs/ groups or is it expected that one representative from each SO/AC/Group to fill in? If the latter is the case I would suggest this is revised in order to receive as much feedback as possible, even if there is contradictory input from one same group. I have a comment related with the format of the questionnaire: I would suggest that the 6 dimensions identified at the beginning (A-G) be included again in the text of questions 1, 3 and 4 in order to aid respondents as well as to elicit specific actions for each of these dimensions. I would also leave an open text box at the end of these as well in order to receive additional feedback in these questions. Best, Carolina Aguerre 2017-03-12 7:10 GMT-03:00 Fiona Asonga <fasonga@kixp.or.ke>:
Dear All
Thanks Julie for the summary
The adjusted questions as per the discussion at the plenary summarised by Julie in earlier email is as follows:
************************* The CCWG Work Stream 2 Diversity Sub-Group has identified the following elements of diversity as potentially relevant to ICANN SO/AC/groups:
A. Geographic/regional representation B. Language C. Gender D. Age E. Physical dis-ability F. Diverse Skills G. Stakeholder group or constituency
1. What relative importance does your SO/AC/group give to these six dimensions of diversity?
2. What, if any, additional dimensions of diversity are important to your SO/AC/group?
3. How, if at all, does your SO/AC/group measure and track diversity issues related to its work?
4. How, if at all, does your SO/AC/group seek to promote diversity in its membership, its active participation, and its leadership?
5. What, if any, educational and informational initiatives does your SO/AC/group pursue to promote diversity awareness?
6. What, if any, formal or informal practices or written or unwritten policies are pursued in your SO/AC/group to promote diversity?
*****************************
We would appreciate if the WS2 Diversity group members can provide their feedback on the questions.
Kind regards
Fiona Asonga
----- Original Message ----- From: "Julie Hammer" <julie.hammer@bigpond.com> To: ws2-diversity@icann.org Cc: "ACCT-Staff" <acct-staff@icann.org> Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2017 6:12:16 AM Subject: [Ws2-diversity] FEEDBACK on DIVERSITY FROM CCWG-A WS2 F2F MEETING AT ICANN58
Hi Everyone,
In the interests of updating our Diversity Questionnaire as soon as possible, I have been through the recording of the session on Friday 10th March and made the following notes. Please let me know if you do not think I have accurately captured the feedback provided during the Plenary.
1. The introduction to the Questionnaire should make it more explicit that the list of Diversity elements stated is not exhaustive.
2. The term “SO/AC/group” should be clarified and it should be stated more specifically who are the target groups for this Questionnaire.
3. In the list of diversity elements, “Skills” should remain but should be listed as “Diversity of Skills” to avoid confusion.
4. In the list of diversity elements, “Physical Ability” is ambiguous and should be listed as “Disability”.
5. In Q4, the concept of being "proportionally represented within your SO/AC/group and its leadership” is neither clear nor necessarily useful. “Members" of a group/constituency may or may not participate, and of those who do participate, it is the ones who are actively engaged that are most likely to be those who are appointed to leadership positions. This question could create a great deal of confusion.
6. Q1-3 are asking for current information about diversity; Q4-6 are more aspirational. They are asking about ways to promote diversity. The questions should be amended as follows:
- Q4 should focus on asking about ways to promote diversity in membership and leadership - Q5 should ask about educational or informational initiative to promote diversity awareness - Q6 should focus on asking about policies/practices which promote diversity
I would also like to add one further suggestion of my own. In our original list of questions, we had one which asked "Does your SO/AC/group have any formal policies and procedures relating to diversity? If so, please provide details of these.” as well as "Does your SO/AC/group have any informal practices relating to diversity? If so, please provide details of these.” We seem to have retained the latter question but not the former. I do think it would be useful to ask about both formal and informal, but I am conscious that we don’t want to increase the number of questions so I have merged both of these aspects in the new Q6.
Taking the above feedback into account, I have attempted to incorporate all these points into an updated Questionnaire which is attached for your review. I realise that the Diversity Sub-Group has not necessarily collectively agreed with all these recommendations, but if any of the suggestions we received are not agreed, then we can change the Questionnaire accordingly. I have not used “track changes” as I felt the list above adequately details the changes that have been made.
Cheers, Julie
_______________________________________________ Ws2-diversity mailing list Ws2-diversity@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity
-- _______________________________________________ Ws2-diversity mailing list Ws2-diversity@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity
Dear Fiona, Thank you for this revised version. As mentioned during the CCWG plenary, we suggest specifying that elements identified are non-exhaustive (see square brackets below), to acknowledge that there are other elements to diversity, but these are the ones we have chosen to focus on in the subgroup. Best regards, Andreea Government of Canada -----Original Message----- From: ws2-diversity-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ws2-diversity-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Fiona Asonga Sent: March-12-17 6:11 AM To: Julie Hammer Cc: ACCT-Staff; ws2-diversity@icann.org Subject: Re: [Ws2-diversity] FEEDBACK on DIVERSITY FROM CCWG-A WS2 F2F MEETING AT ICANN58 Dear All Thanks Julie for the summary The adjusted questions as per the discussion at the plenary summarised by Julie in earlier email is as follows: ************************* The CCWG Work Stream 2 Diversity Sub-Group has identified the following [non-exhaustive] elements of diversity as potentially relevant to ICANN SO/AC/groups: A. Geographic/regional representation B. Language C. Gender D. Age E. Physical dis-ability F. Diverse Skills G. Stakeholder group or constituency 1. What relative importance does your SO/AC/group give to these six dimensions of diversity? 2. What, if any, additional dimensions of diversity are important to your SO/AC/group? 3. How, if at all, does your SO/AC/group measure and track diversity issues related to its work? 4. How, if at all, does your SO/AC/group seek to promote diversity in its membership, its active participation, and its leadership? 5. What, if any, educational and informational initiatives does your SO/AC/group pursue to promote diversity awareness? 6. What, if any, formal or informal practices or written or unwritten policies are pursued in your SO/AC/group to promote diversity? ***************************** We would appreciate if the WS2 Diversity group members can provide their feedback on the questions. Kind regards Fiona Asonga ----- Original Message ----- From: "Julie Hammer" <julie.hammer@bigpond.com> To: ws2-diversity@icann.org Cc: "ACCT-Staff" <acct-staff@icann.org> Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2017 6:12:16 AM Subject: [Ws2-diversity] FEEDBACK on DIVERSITY FROM CCWG-A WS2 F2F MEETING AT ICANN58 Hi Everyone, In the interests of updating our Diversity Questionnaire as soon as possible, I have been through the recording of the session on Friday 10th March and made the following notes. Please let me know if you do not think I have accurately captured the feedback provided during the Plenary. 1. The introduction to the Questionnaire should make it more explicit that the list of Diversity elements stated is not exhaustive. 2. The term “SO/AC/group” should be clarified and it should be stated more specifically who are the target groups for this Questionnaire. 3. In the list of diversity elements, “Skills” should remain but should be listed as “Diversity of Skills” to avoid confusion. 4. In the list of diversity elements, “Physical Ability” is ambiguous and should be listed as “Disability”. 5. In Q4, the concept of being "proportionally represented within your SO/AC/group and its leadership” is neither clear nor necessarily useful. “Members" of a group/constituency may or may not participate, and of those who do participate, it is the ones who are actively engaged that are most likely to be those who are appointed to leadership positions. This question could create a great deal of confusion. 6. Q1-3 are asking for current information about diversity; Q4-6 are more aspirational. They are asking about ways to promote diversity. The questions should be amended as follows: - Q4 should focus on asking about ways to promote diversity in membership and leadership - Q5 should ask about educational or informational initiative to promote diversity awareness - Q6 should focus on asking about policies/practices which promote diversity I would also like to add one further suggestion of my own. In our original list of questions, we had one which asked "Does your SO/AC/group have any formal policies and procedures relating to diversity? If so, please provide details of these.” as well as "Does your SO/AC/group have any informal practices relating to diversity? If so, please provide details of these.” We seem to have retained the latter question but not the former. I do think it would be useful to ask about both formal and informal, but I am conscious that we don’t want to increase the number of questions so I have merged both of these aspects in the new Q6. Taking the above feedback into account, I have attempted to incorporate all these points into an updated Questionnaire which is attached for your review. I realise that the Diversity Sub-Group has not necessarily collectively agreed with all these recommendations, but if any of the suggestions we received are not agreed, then we can change the Questionnaire accordingly. I have not used “track changes” as I felt the list above adequately details the changes that have been made. Cheers, Julie _______________________________________________ Ws2-diversity mailing list Ws2-diversity@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity -- _______________________________________________ Ws2-diversity mailing list Ws2-diversity@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity
Good Morning All, I participated on Wednesday 15th on a panel in At-Large which was giving an update to an “end user” audience on selected CCWG-A topics. I was speaking on our work in the Diversity Sub-Team. I just wanted to mention that, during question time, a couple of good points were raised: - Will we be publishing the questionnaire in more than one language? - Will we seek responses to the questionnaire from individuals or groups other than the formal ICANN groups (SO/AC/Board/Nomcom/etc)? eg groups which may represent a specific interest or affiliation I think both are valid points, and suspect that the translation into languages other than English may already be planned. The second point about responses from individuals and other groups is worthwhile incorporating into our draft questionnaire. I will send some proposed wording to Fiona and Rafik for consideration. Cheers, Julie On 12 Mar 2017, at 8:10 PM, Fiona Asonga <fasonga@kixp.or.ke> wrote: Dear All Thanks Julie for the summary The adjusted questions as per the discussion at the plenary summarised by Julie in earlier email is as follows: ************************* The CCWG Work Stream 2 Diversity Sub-Group has identified the following elements of diversity as potentially relevant to ICANN SO/AC/groups: A. Geographic/regional representation B. Language C. Gender D. Age E. Physical dis-ability F. Diverse Skills G. Stakeholder group or constituency 1. What relative importance does your SO/AC/group give to these six dimensions of diversity? 2. What, if any, additional dimensions of diversity are important to your SO/AC/group? 3. How, if at all, does your SO/AC/group measure and track diversity issues related to its work? 4. How, if at all, does your SO/AC/group seek to promote diversity in its membership, its active participation, and its leadership? 5. What, if any, educational and informational initiatives does your SO/AC/group pursue to promote diversity awareness? 6. What, if any, formal or informal practices or written or unwritten policies are pursued in your SO/AC/group to promote diversity? ***************************** We would appreciate if the WS2 Diversity group members can provide their feedback on the questions. Kind regards Fiona Asonga ----- Original Message ----- From: "Julie Hammer" <julie.hammer@bigpond.com> To: ws2-diversity@icann.org Cc: "ACCT-Staff" <acct-staff@icann.org> Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2017 6:12:16 AM Subject: [Ws2-diversity] FEEDBACK on DIVERSITY FROM CCWG-A WS2 F2F MEETING AT ICANN58 Hi Everyone, In the interests of updating our Diversity Questionnaire as soon as possible, I have been through the recording of the session on Friday 10th March and made the following notes. Please let me know if you do not think I have accurately captured the feedback provided during the Plenary. 1. The introduction to the Questionnaire should make it more explicit that the list of Diversity elements stated is not exhaustive. 2. The term “SO/AC/group” should be clarified and it should be stated more specifically who are the target groups for this Questionnaire. 3. In the list of diversity elements, “Skills” should remain but should be listed as “Diversity of Skills” to avoid confusion. 4. In the list of diversity elements, “Physical Ability” is ambiguous and should be listed as “Disability”. 5. In Q4, the concept of being "proportionally represented within your SO/AC/group and its leadership” is neither clear nor necessarily useful. “Members" of a group/constituency may or may not participate, and of those who do participate, it is the ones who are actively engaged that are most likely to be those who are appointed to leadership positions. This question could create a great deal of confusion. 6. Q1-3 are asking for current information about diversity; Q4-6 are more aspirational. They are asking about ways to promote diversity. The questions should be amended as follows: - Q4 should focus on asking about ways to promote diversity in membership and leadership - Q5 should ask about educational or informational initiative to promote diversity awareness - Q6 should focus on asking about policies/practices which promote diversity I would also like to add one further suggestion of my own. In our original list of questions, we had one which asked "Does your SO/AC/group have any formal policies and procedures relating to diversity? If so, please provide details of these.” as well as "Does your SO/AC/group have any informal practices relating to diversity? If so, please provide details of these.” We seem to have retained the latter question but not the former. I do think it would be useful to ask about both formal and informal, but I am conscious that we don’t want to increase the number of questions so I have merged both of these aspects in the new Q6. Taking the above feedback into account, I have attempted to incorporate all these points into an updated Questionnaire which is attached for your review. I realise that the Diversity Sub-Group has not necessarily collectively agreed with all these recommendations, but if any of the suggestions we received are not agreed, then we can change the Questionnaire accordingly. I have not used “track changes” as I felt the list above adequately details the changes that have been made. Cheers, Julie _______________________________________________ Ws2-diversity mailing list Ws2-diversity@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity --
Hello, I do think it will be good to produce the questionnaire in various ICANN languages. I also think the recipient could go beyond ICANN SO/AC. Thanks On 17 Mar 2017 10:46, "Julie Hammer" <julie.hammer@bigpond.com> wrote:
Good Morning All,
I participated on Wednesday 15th on a panel in At-Large which was giving an update to an “end user” audience on selected CCWG-A topics. I was speaking on our work in the Diversity Sub-Team. I just wanted to mention that, during question time, a couple of good points were raised:
- Will we be publishing the questionnaire in more than one language? - Will we seek responses to the questionnaire from individuals or groups other than the formal ICANN groups (SO/AC/Board/Nomcom/etc)? eg groups which may represent a specific interest or affiliation
I think both are valid points, and suspect that the translation into languages other than English may already be planned. The second point about responses from individuals and other groups is worthwhile incorporating into our draft questionnaire. I will send some proposed wording to Fiona and Rafik for consideration.
Cheers, Julie
On 12 Mar 2017, at 8:10 PM, Fiona Asonga <fasonga@kixp.or.ke> wrote:
Dear All
Thanks Julie for the summary
The adjusted questions as per the discussion at the plenary summarised by Julie in earlier email is as follows:
************************* The CCWG Work Stream 2 Diversity Sub-Group has identified the following elements of diversity as potentially relevant to ICANN SO/AC/groups:
A. Geographic/regional representation B. Language C. Gender D. Age E. Physical dis-ability F. Diverse Skills G. Stakeholder group or constituency
1. What relative importance does your SO/AC/group give to these six dimensions of diversity?
2. What, if any, additional dimensions of diversity are important to your SO/AC/group?
3. How, if at all, does your SO/AC/group measure and track diversity issues related to its work?
4. How, if at all, does your SO/AC/group seek to promote diversity in its membership, its active participation, and its leadership?
5. What, if any, educational and informational initiatives does your SO/AC/group pursue to promote diversity awareness?
6. What, if any, formal or informal practices or written or unwritten policies are pursued in your SO/AC/group to promote diversity?
*****************************
We would appreciate if the WS2 Diversity group members can provide their feedback on the questions.
Kind regards
Fiona Asonga
----- Original Message ----- From: "Julie Hammer" <julie.hammer@bigpond.com> To: ws2-diversity@icann.org Cc: "ACCT-Staff" <acct-staff@icann.org> Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2017 6:12:16 AM Subject: [Ws2-diversity] FEEDBACK on DIVERSITY FROM CCWG-A WS2 F2F MEETING AT ICANN58
Hi Everyone,
In the interests of updating our Diversity Questionnaire as soon as possible, I have been through the recording of the session on Friday 10th March and made the following notes. Please let me know if you do not think I have accurately captured the feedback provided during the Plenary.
1. The introduction to the Questionnaire should make it more explicit that the list of Diversity elements stated is not exhaustive.
2. The term “SO/AC/group” should be clarified and it should be stated more specifically who are the target groups for this Questionnaire.
3. In the list of diversity elements, “Skills” should remain but should be listed as “Diversity of Skills” to avoid confusion.
4. In the list of diversity elements, “Physical Ability” is ambiguous and should be listed as “Disability”.
5. In Q4, the concept of being "proportionally represented within your SO/AC/group and its leadership” is neither clear nor necessarily useful. “Members" of a group/constituency may or may not participate, and of those who do participate, it is the ones who are actively engaged that are most likely to be those who are appointed to leadership positions. This question could create a great deal of confusion.
6. Q1-3 are asking for current information about diversity; Q4-6 are more aspirational. They are asking about ways to promote diversity. The questions should be amended as follows:
- Q4 should focus on asking about ways to promote diversity in membership and leadership - Q5 should ask about educational or informational initiative to promote diversity awareness - Q6 should focus on asking about policies/practices which promote diversity
I would also like to add one further suggestion of my own. In our original list of questions, we had one which asked "Does your SO/AC/group have any formal policies and procedures relating to diversity? If so, please provide details of these.” as well as "Does your SO/AC/group have any informal practices relating to diversity? If so, please provide details of these.” We seem to have retained the latter question but not the former. I do think it would be useful to ask about both formal and informal, but I am conscious that we don’t want to increase the number of questions so I have merged both of these aspects in the new Q6.
Taking the above feedback into account, I have attempted to incorporate all these points into an updated Questionnaire which is attached for your review. I realise that the Diversity Sub-Group has not necessarily collectively agreed with all these recommendations, but if any of the suggestions we received are not agreed, then we can change the Questionnaire accordingly. I have not used “track changes” as I felt the list above adequately details the changes that have been made.
Cheers, Julie
_______________________________________________ Ws2-diversity mailing list Ws2-diversity@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity
--
_______________________________________________ Ws2-diversity mailing list Ws2-diversity@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity
Hi Everyone, Well done, Bernie, Fiona and Rafik. I agree that these recommendations should work and I also agree that proposed amendments to the circulated document are friendly ones. With regard to the suggestion on Physical Ability/Disability, I thought I’d remind everyone what happened at the Plenary in Copenhagen on this topic - see email summary below. We actually had Ability in the Questionnaire and the plenary asked us to change is back to Disability because it was ambiguous (but also said to be overly sensitive to “political correctness”). Maybe it should remain as Disability or we may risk having the Plenary ask it to be changed again. I think Cheryl’s comment on the Skills is correct but suggest that we use the term Diverse Skills, as we did in the Questionnaire. Overall, my suggestion is that we stick with the list of elements that we used in the Diversity Questionnaire which was considered by the Plenary in Copenhagen, namely: Geographic/regional representation Language Gender Age Physical Disability Diverse Skills Stakeholder group or constituency Cheers, Julie Begin forwarded message: From: Julie Hammer <julie.hammer@bigpond.com <mailto:julie.hammer@bigpond.com>> Subject: [Ws2-diversity] FEEDBACK on DIVERSITY FROM CCWG-A WS2 F2F MEETING AT ICANN58 Date: 12 March 2017 at 3:12:16 PM AEST To: ws2-diversity@icann.org <mailto:ws2-diversity@icann.org> Cc: ACCT-Staff <acct-staff@icann.org <mailto:acct-staff@icann.org>> Hi Everyone, In the interests of updating our Diversity Questionnaire as soon as possible, I have been through the recording of the session on Friday 10th March and made the following notes. Please let me know if you do not think I have accurately captured the feedback provided during the Plenary. 1. The introduction to the Questionnaire should make it more explicit that the list of Diversity elements stated is not exhaustive. 2. The term “SO/AC/group” should be clarified and it should be stated more specifically who are the target groups for this Questionnaire. 3. In the list of diversity elements, “Skills” should remain but should be listed as “Diversity of Skills” to avoid confusion. 4. In the list of diversity elements, “Physical Ability” is ambiguous and should be listed as “Disability”. 5. In Q4, the concept of being "proportionally represented within your SO/AC/group and its leadership” is neither clear nor necessarily useful. “Members" of a group/constituency may or may not participate, and of those who do participate, it is the ones who are actively engaged that are most likely to be those who are appointed to leadership positions. This question could create a great deal of confusion. 6. Q1-3 are asking for current information about diversity; Q4-6 are more aspirational. They are asking about ways to promote diversity. The questions should be amended as follows: - Q4 should focus on asking about ways to promote diversity in membership and leadership - Q5 should ask about educational or informational initiative to promote diversity awareness - Q6 should focus on asking about policies/practices which promote diversity I would also like to add one further suggestion of my own. In our original list of questions, we had one which asked "Does your SO/AC/group have any formal policies and procedures relating to diversity? If so, please provide details of these.” as well as "Does your SO/AC/group have any informal practices relating to diversity? If so, please provide details of these.” We seem to have retained the latter question but not the former. I do think it would be useful to ask about both formal and informal, but I am conscious that we don’t want to increase the number of questions so I have merged both of these aspects in the new Q6. Taking the above feedback into account, I have attempted to incorporate all these points into an updated Questionnaire which is attached for your review. I realise that the Diversity Sub-Group has not necessarily collectively agreed with all these recommendations, but if any of the suggestions we received are not agreed, then we can change the Questionnaire accordingly. I have not used “track changes” as I felt the list above adequately details the changes that have been made. Cheers, Julie _______________________________________________ Ws2-diversity mailing list Ws2-diversity@icann.org <mailto:Ws2-diversity@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-diversity
participants (5)
-
Brambilla, Andreea (IC) -
Carolina Aguerre -
Fiona Asonga -
Julie Hammer -
Seun Ojedeji