Re: [council] Questions for chair

[Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>]

Wolf,

If I may, let me give you a short answer by email and augment that answer 
during our call tomorrow, as planned.

I think prioritization must be at the center of the next Chair's actions. We 
are all stretched very thin at the moment and that is having an adverse impact 
on our work and the Council's effectiveness. Staff are at their limit. But what 
I am more worried about is volunteer burnout: WE are at our limit.

The current DOI situation is a (small) example of what happens when we no 
longer have the time to look at the documents we are asked to ratify in detail. 
We miss something. In this case, it's a relatively easy fix (still it means 
having to go back to the OSC and the GCOT, doing a motion, etc.). Not so if 
we're dealing with a major policy development item...

I do not think that the prioritization work that was undertaken a year ago 
should be given up. But after a year, we really should have had a solution by 
now. Any such initiative needs leadership to see it through. It's just not good 
enough to let us waddle through several months of work and get to an end result 
that no-one is happy with.

If I am elected, prioritization will be a top issue for me because it is the 
key to making everything else work. I think the solution can be in part model 
based, as long as we don't let the model get too complex. But I also think it 
can be part organizational.

What I mean by that is the Council Leaders must be up to the task of suggesting 
ways forward to the Council. Of course, it is then up to the Council to accept 
those suggestions or not. But absent leadership that is able to make these 
suggestions, we risk chasing our tails for a long time to come. So that 
leadership team needs a dedicated Chair but also two equally dedicated Vice 
Chairs. There's just too much to do for the full leadership team not to be up 
to par.

On VI, I would argue that the Council was not weakened by the decision. The 
Board may have been weakened by it... But on our end, the PDP happened by the 
book.

But let's be honest, the Board was left with little choice but to either let 
further delays build in the new gTLD program, or to take a top-down decision. 
The question I think we have to ask ourselves is: how did we, as the initiators 
of the process, put the Board in this position?

Once again, I think in part it comes down to prioritization. When an issues 
report on this was requested, the Council was doing what it should. However, we 
then decided not to follow the recommendations that came out of that issues 
report. That's our prerogative but I think that no matter how we felt about the 
issue itself, if we'd had an effective prioritization system in place then, we 
might have looked twice at what it meant to launch the largest working group in 
recent ICANN history on a 6-month ride towards no result...

So as you can see, prioritization really is a key point for me.

If we get it wrong, or if we don't elect 3 Council Leaders that are dedicated 
to goals that remain realistic as far as volunteer, staff and budget resources 
are concerned, that's how we weaken the Council.

And that's me trying to give you a "short" answer Wolf... ;)

Stéphane

Le 16 nov. 2010 à 09:06, <KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx> <KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :

> I've 2 questions to both candidates:
>  
> I'd appreciate a statement from regarding action item 1. from our last call 
> (prioritization, see attached). Which specific efforts do you have in mind in 
> order to strengthen the council's ability and effectiveness in organizing its 
> work?
> With respect to the fact that the board recently took decision on VI without 
> having received a specific council recommendation: which measures do you have 
> in mind to avoid the council's position in the policy development process 
> becoming more and more weakened?
> Thanks and regards 
> Wolf-Ulrich 
> 
> 
> Please note the following action items from our Council meeting one week ago:
> 
> 1.      Assuming we dispense with the prioritization effort, Councilors are 
> encouraged to communicate ideas on the Council mailing list on how to make 
> decisions regarding whether or not to proceed on a project; the aim would be 
> to compile a list of factors that can be used to make choices, and over time 
> develop criteria for choosing projects and work items.
>