Re: [ga] ICANN uses for-profit companies as "comparables" in its employee compensation

[George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks to Kieren McCarthy's inspiration on the CircleID blog:

http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090105_icann_for_profit_companies_comparables/

I thought it might be educational to analyze his past insights into
ICANN, before he joined the payroll, namely an article at:

http://www.mail-archive.com/nettime-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg03339.html

http://kierenmccarthy.co.uk/2006/03/01/icann-approves-dotcom-contract-signs-own-death-warrant/
(original, backup made just in case it disappears)

1. "But the fact remains that ICANN retains the same culture where
ageing chairman Vint Cerf continues to push his personal and out-dated
views and undermines anyone that argues with him, and CEO Paul Twomey
continues to cut any secret deal he can that will give him control of a
more powerful organisation."

Is the CEO of an organization that is allegedly cutting secret deals
one that should be awarded bonuses for superior performance?

2. "Should VeriSign be given permanent control of the dotcom registry?
The answer is startlingly obvious: No, it shouldn't. It is in no-one's
interests except VeriSign's."

Oops, this appears to be an ICANN failure. Should the Board
compensation committee be rewarding failure??

3. "Should VeriSign be allowed to raise prices? No, of course not. The
prices of domains are going down. Why on earth is ICANN pulling itself
into a contract that rips people off? How stupid does it have to be?"

Oops, they did it again. Yet another ICANN failure. Once again, should
the Board compensation committee be rewarding failure??

4. "The problem with getting used to cutting dodgy deals is that, after
a while, the human being becomes incapable of recognising when they
should just say No. The individual loses that vital bit of wider
clarity which marks great men from powerful men."

Is ICANN's compensation committee able to say "No" and stand up for
what is right? Have they lost clarity?

5. "ICANN has been through a hell of a lot in the past decade but just
when it thinks it is the most powerful and stable it has ever been, the
irony is that it has never been weaker."

Given the contents of the recent USDOJ and DOC letters on new gTLDs,
this statement rings even truer today. If ICANN wants to get back on
the right track, correcting past mistakes is critical. Thus, I
reiterate that paying for poor performance is the wrong path.
Overpaying by using an inappropriate set of comparables for employee
compensation is the wrong path, as it wastes the precious resources
that the public has entrusted with ICANN, namely their money. It's one
thing to waste one's own money, but far more serious to waste the money
that others trust you to manage on their behalf as a custodian.

Kudos to Kieren for inspiring the above analysis. His words of wisdom
above should echo into eternity, and be required reading for new
employees of ICANN, the new ones that replace the overpaid and
underperforming ones that depart.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.leap.com/