RE: [council] Draft agenda for GNSO teleconference on terms of reference for the GNSO review - 25 August 2005

["Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hello Ross,

> 
> > (1) Review the goals and expected outcomes of the GNSO 
> review, at both 
> > the Council and constituency level
> 
> Whose goals and expectations will we be reviewing? I have 
> mentioned to others that I have an expectation that this 
> process will be a constructive, bi-directional communication 
> that will hopefully provide the GNSO with feedback and 
> direction regarding structural and procedural improvements 
> that will help it serve and work within the ICANN community 
> in a more effective manner. To that end, it would be helpful 
> to understand and discuss not only what our goals and 
> expectations are for this process, but more importantly, 
> those of others (the other SOs, the staff and primarily, the 
> Board having commissioned this review in the first place).
> 

This is a good question. 

The ICANN bylaws set out the high level goals of review for all parts of
the ICANN community.

The goal of the review shall be to determine
(i)     whether that organization has a continuing purpose in the ICANN
structure, 
(ii)    and  if so, whether any change in structure or operations is
desirable to improve its effectiveness. 

The criteria and standards of the review are approved by the Board.

The Board in turn has asked the GNSO Council to prepare with the ICANN
staff and Board a "Terms of Reference" document to guide the independent
entity an outside consultant in conducting a review of the GNSO, and
present the terms of reference to the Board for adoption at the meeting
in December 2005, in Vancouver, Canada.

For this meeting we are getting input from within the GNSO Community.

The output will be a draft terms of reference from the GNSO community.

At the next meeting we will be getting input from the Board.

The output will be a draft terms of reference with input from the Board
and the GNSO community.

The final draft terms of reference will then be submitted to the Board
for approval before the review begins.



The outcome of the GNSO Council review in 2004 was that the Council was
found to have a continuing purpose in the ICANN structure.   The 2004
review also made recommendations for how to improve the effectiveness of
the GNSO Council.   I expect the 2006 review will consider whether the
Council has adopted these recommendations and if it is more effective
than a year ago.


I am working on the assumption that this review will also find that all
the constituencies also have a continuing purpose.  Thus I would like to
focus the meeting on how best to arrive at a set of useful
recommendations that improve the effectiveness of the constituencies.

Ultimately the terms of reference should assist the external reviewer to
develop a set of useful recommendations that improve the effectiveness
of the GNSO.


Regards,
Bruce