Second NomCom Organizational Review: Difference between revisions

Line 52:

...A common concern raised by both interviewees and survey respondents was that NomCom members too often voted as blocs based on the organization that sent them to the NomCom or some other common interest. As a result, these people felt that sending delegates to the NomCom was seen as a way for those organizations to advance an agenda instead of appointing people that acted in the best interest of the broader ICANN community.<ref name="assess" /></blockquote>

Other areas of common concern were the diversity of the NomCom and its candidate pools, consistency in decision-making and evaluation of candidates, and improved communication between the NomCom, the ICANN Board, and other ICANN organizations regarding the needs of those groups whose members are selected by the NomCom.<ref name="assess" />

===Public Comment on the Assessment Report===

Public comment on the assessment report was gathered through a webinar with Analysis Group in mid-January 2018, and an open consultation call in the week following the webinar, as well as written submissions to the RWP listserv.<ref>[https://community.icann.org/display/OR/Webinar NomCom2 Review Workspace - Webinar & Public Comment], last updated June 19, 2018</ref> There was initially an additional call scheduled for February 1, just before the close of the public comment period; however, the first call was well attended and provided an opportunity to gather diverse feedback, and the second call was deemed redundant.<ref>[https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/nomcom2-review/2018-January/000328.html NomCom2 Listserv Archive - Lars Hoffman email announcing decision to cancel Feb. 1 call], January 30, 2018</ref>

The webinar largely focused on an overview of the findings and process of public consultation.<ref>[https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/74587876/ICANN%20NomCom%20Presentation%20-%201.18.2018.pdf NomCom2 Workspace - Webinar Presentation Slides], January 18, 2018</ref> The Q&A period generated largely clarifying questions from attendees.<ref name="webinaraudio">[https://community.icann.org/display/OR/Webinar?preview=/74587876/79430929/NomCom%20Webinar%20-%2018JAN18%20-%202000%20UTC.mp3 NomCom2 Workspace - Audio Recording of Webinar], January 18, 2018</ref> One question inquired whether the Analysis Group had done any investigation into alternatives to the NomCom. The reviewers responded that they would certainly consider that in its final report, but that the assessment work involved largely comparing and contrasting the NomCom to similar mechanisms in other organizations.<ref name="webinaraudio" /> The reviewers stated that, to the extent possible, they examined comparable large, multi-stakeholder, organizations for possible best practices.<ref name="webinaraudio" />

The subsequent consultation call generated more comment.<ref name="callrec">[https://participate.icann.org/p4r7jvke7tm/ NomCom2 Archive - Consultation Call on Assessment Report], January 25, 2018</ref> The first part of the call was again devoted to a presentation of the findings. Mark Engle from Analysis Group noted that "I think there's a recognition that the committee is doing as well as they can with the experience and skillset that they have." However, Engle noted that there were critical gaps in training and experience that reflected the volunteer nature of the ICANN structure.<ref name="callrec" />

The Analysis Group also held a meeting with the ICANN community at [[ICANN 61]] following the close of public comments on the assessment report. The presentation highlighted changes based on public comment, as well as a preview of recommendations to be presented in the final report.<ref name="61preso">[https://61.schedule.icann.org/meetings/RZtnQSnmbYn8Qum6R ICANN 61 Archive - NomCom Review Update], March 14, 2018</ref> <ref name="61audio">[http://audio.icann.org/meetings/sju61/sju61-OPEN-2018-03-14-T1242-208a-7SHo1auWS36pvXjoE4LPL2BfrnpdUlt2-en.m3u ICANN 61 Archive - Audio Recording of NomCom Review Update], March 14, 2018</ref>

==References==

[[Category:Organizational Reviews]]

@@ Line 52: / Line 52: @@
 ...A common concern raised by both interviewees and survey respondents was that NomCom members too often voted as blocs based on the organization that sent them to the NomCom or some other common interest. As a result, these people felt that sending delegates to the NomCom was seen as a way for those organizations to advance an agenda instead of appointing people that acted in the best interest of the broader ICANN community.<ref name="assess" /></blockquote>
+Other areas of common concern were the diversity of the NomCom and its candidate pools, consistency in decision-making and evaluation of candidates, and improved communication between the NomCom, the ICANN Board, and other ICANN organizations regarding the needs of those groups whose members are selected by the NomCom.<ref name="assess" />
+===Public Comment on the Assessment Report===
+Public comment on the assessment report was gathered through a webinar with Analysis Group in mid-January 2018, and an open consultation call in the week following the webinar, as well as written submissions to the RWP listserv.<ref>[https://community.icann.org/display/OR/Webinar NomCom2 Review Workspace - Webinar & Public Comment], last updated June 19, 2018</ref> There was initially an additional call scheduled for February 1, just before the close of the public comment period; however, the first call was well attended and provided an opportunity to gather diverse feedback, and the second call was deemed redundant.<ref>[https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/nomcom2-review/2018-January/000328.html NomCom2 Listserv Archive - Lars Hoffman email announcing decision to cancel Feb. 1 call], January 30, 2018</ref>
+The webinar largely focused on an overview of the findings and process of public consultation.<ref>[https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/74587876/ICANN%20NomCom%20Presentation%20-%201.18.2018.pdf NomCom2 Workspace - Webinar Presentation Slides], January 18, 2018</ref> The Q&A period generated largely clarifying questions from attendees.<ref name="webinaraudio">[https://community.icann.org/display/OR/Webinar?preview=/74587876/79430929/NomCom%20Webinar%20-%2018JAN18%20-%202000%20UTC.mp3 NomCom2 Workspace - Audio Recording of Webinar], January 18, 2018</ref> One question inquired whether the Analysis Group had done any investigation into alternatives to the NomCom. The reviewers responded that they would certainly consider that in its final report, but that the assessment work involved largely comparing and contrasting the NomCom to similar mechanisms in other organizations.<ref name="webinaraudio" /> The reviewers stated that, to the extent possible, they examined comparable large, multi-stakeholder, organizations for possible best practices.<ref name="webinaraudio" />
+The subsequent consultation call generated more comment.<ref name="callrec">[https://participate.icann.org/p4r7jvke7tm/ NomCom2 Archive - Consultation Call on Assessment Report], January 25, 2018</ref> The first part of the call was again devoted to a presentation of the findings. Mark Engle from Analysis Group noted that "I think there's a recognition that the committee is doing as well as they can with the experience and skillset that they have." However, Engle noted that there were critical gaps in training and experience that reflected the volunteer nature of the ICANN structure.<ref name="callrec" />
+The Analysis Group also held a meeting with the ICANN community at [[ICANN 61]] following the close of public comments on the assessment report. The presentation highlighted changes based on public comment, as well as a preview of recommendations to be presented in the final report.<ref name="61preso">[https://61.schedule.icann.org/meetings/RZtnQSnmbYn8Qum6R ICANN 61 Archive - NomCom Review Update], March 14, 2018</ref> <ref name="61audio">[http://audio.icann.org/meetings/sju61/sju61-OPEN-2018-03-14-T1242-208a-7SHo1auWS36pvXjoE4LPL2BfrnpdUlt2-en.m3u ICANN 61 Archive - Audio Recording of NomCom Review Update], March 14, 2018</ref>
 ==References==
 [[Category:Organizational Reviews]]