Changes

The [[ICANN Bylaws]] call for two different types of review - organizational reviews (Article 4.4) and specific reviews (Article 4.6). [[ICANN Reviews#Organizational Reviews|Article 4.4 reviews]] were born from the [[2002 Evolution and Reform Process]], and require periodic review of ICANN's supporting organizations and advisory committees. [[ICANN Reviews#Specific Reviews|Article 4.6 reviews]] originated in the [[Affirmation of Commitments]], and the first round of "specific" reviews occurred before these reviews were enshrined in the bylaws. The amendment to the bylaws came about as a result of the [[IANA Functions Stewardship Transition]], when it was recommended that the bylaws be revised to incorporate ICANN's obligations under the Affirmation of Commitments.

The [[ICANN Bylaws]] call for two different types of review - organizational reviews (Article 4.4) and specific reviews (Article 4.6). [[ICANN Reviews#Organizational Reviews|Article 4.4 reviews]] were born from the [[2002 Evolution and Reform Process]], and require periodic review of ICANN's supporting organizations and advisory committees. [[ICANN Reviews#Specific Reviews|Article 4.6 reviews]] originated in the [[Affirmation of Commitments]], and the first round of "specific" reviews occurred before these reviews were enshrined in the bylaws. The amendment to the bylaws came about as a result of the [[IANA Functions Stewardship Transition]], when it was recommended that the bylaws be revised to incorporate ICANN's obligations under the Affirmation of Commitments.

As the organizational reviews began, ICANN was in the process of entering into the Affirmation of Commitments with the [[United States Department of Commerce]]. As a result, the first specific reviews were launched in 2010, while most of the organizational reviews were still in progress or only recently completed. Many community members since that date have commented on what seems to be a relentless cycle of reviews of one aspect of ICANN, or another, or both at once.

As the organizational reviews began, ICANN was in the process of entering into the Affirmation of Commitments with the [[United States Department of Commerce]]. As a result, the first specific reviews were launched in 2010, while most of the organizational reviews were still in progress or only recently completed. Many community members since that date have commented on what seems to be a relentless cycle of reviews of one aspect of ICANN or another (or many others at the same time).

[[Third Accountability and Transparency Review|ATRT 3]] addressed this issue head-on, suggesting that organizational reviews be replaced by "continuous improvement programs," the results of which could feed into a single, "holistic" review of the organization and its constituent parts, to be performed on a periodic basis. In addition, the ATRT 3 team recommended suspending the next cycle of specific reviews until the completion of the next Accountability and Transparency Review. These recommendations were met with varying levels of enthusiasm. The ICANN Board approved the recommendations in the fall of 2020, with caveats. On the specific review side, the board noted that community approval would be required to amend the bylaws around specific reviews. In the organizational review reforms, the board agreed to implement pilot projects testing both the "holistic" review model and a continuous improvement model.

[[Third Accountability and Transparency Review|ATRT 3]] addressed this issue head-on, suggesting that organizational reviews be replaced by "continuous improvement programs," the results of which could feed into a single, "holistic" review of the organization and its constituent parts, to be performed on a periodic basis. In addition, the ATRT 3 team recommended suspending the next cycle of specific reviews until the completion of the next Accountability and Transparency Review. These recommendations were met with varying levels of enthusiasm. The ICANN Board approved the recommendations in the fall of 2020, with caveats. On the specific review side, the board noted that community approval would be required to amend the bylaws around specific reviews. In the organizational review reforms, the board agreed to implement pilot projects testing both the "holistic" review model and a continuous improvement model.