Second NomCom Organizational Review: Difference between revisions

Line 60:

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. Examples included inconsistent criteria for recruiting and selecting candidates, as well as the lack of open and public discussion of the criteria that a given NomCom is seeking in candidates. Will Brown of the review team noted that each new NomCom "reinvented the wheel" on certain processes and initial work planning.<ref name="callrec" /> Comments and discussion revolved around not only NomCom's evolution and growth, but ensuring strategic alignment with the "new ICANN" after the [[IANA Transition]] and the development of the [[Empowered Community]]. [[Cheryl Langdon-Orr]] commented that this was "delightful opportunity" to generate consistency of practices and procedures, as well as continue to grow the transparency and predictability of the NomCom's work. She noted, also, that the ICANN community would find more opportunities for engagement with the NomCom if those continuity aspects continue to grow.<ref name="callrec" />

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. Examples included inconsistent criteria for recruiting and selecting candidates, as well as the lack of open and public discussion of the criteria that a given NomCom is seeking in candidates. Will Brown of the review team noted that each new NomCom "reinvented the wheel" on certain processes and initial work planning.<ref name="callrec" /> Comments and discussion revolved around not only NomCom's evolution and growth, but ensuring strategic alignment with the "new ICANN" after the [[IANA Transition]] and the development of the [[ICANN Empowered Community]]. [[Cheryl Langdon-Orr]] commented that this was "delightful opportunity" to generate consistency of practices and procedures, as well as continue to grow the transparency and predictability of the NomCom's work. She noted, also, that the ICANN community would find more opportunities for engagement with the NomCom if those continuity aspects continue to grow.<ref name="callrec" /> [[Avri Doria]] noted that the idea that an "external firm of any sort" would be fully responsible for screening candidates would be very worrying for her. She also stated that question of NomCom accountability is complex. In her opinion, the NomCom could itself be seen as an accountability mechanism: a multistakeholder group, reviewing people within the roles that the NomCom appoints, and deciding on renewals for those people as well as evaluating community needs for appointments.<ref name="callrec" />

The [[SSAC]], [[ISPCP]], and [[NCSG]] submitted written comments to the NomCom2 listserv.<ref>[https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/nomcom2-review/2018-February/date.html NomCom2 Listserv Archive], February 2018</ref> The SSAC echoed the concerns expressed in the consultation call, that the NomCom might not be currently be capable of complying with the new commitments imposed by the IANA transition.<ref>[http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/nomcom2-review/attachments/20180216/d8d30613/SSAC2018-03-NomcomReviewAssessmentReportFINAL-0001.pdf NomCom2 Listserv Archive - SSAC Comments to Assessment Report] February 15, 2018</ref> The ISPCP took issue with the assessment methodology, and had a variety of objections to the findings in the report.<ref>[http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/nomcom2-review/attachments/20180202/b7c769ed/ICANNCommentsonNomComReviewAssessmentReport-201802.pdf NomCom2 Listserv Archive - ISPCP Comments to Assessment Report], February 1, 2018</ref> The NCSG, by contrast, agreed with much of the report and emphasized the imbalance of representation both in terms of diversity and in terms of seats allocated to each constituency. It concluded that improvements must continue to ensure a strong and independent NomCom:

<blockquote>A committee that can change its own operating procedures in secret and only announce and

publish the outcome while providing no rational for the changes is very much prone to capture. We respect the independence of the NomCom and it should operate and work for the broader, global public interest. To achieve this, there is a need for more transparency, a more diverse composition of its membership, and better rules to prevent capture. When there is an imbalance of stakeholder group representation on the NomCom (which the first review referred to and which still exists) the independence of the committee cannot be achieved.<ref>[http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/nomcom2-review/attachments/20180209/44b8a8c1/NomComReview-NCSGcomments.pdf NomCom2 Listserv Archive - NCSG Comments to Assessment Report], February 8, 2018</ref>

===Draft Final Report===

The Analysis Group 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>

The Analysis Group held a meeting with the ICANN community at [[ICANN 61]] following the close of public comments on the assessment report. The presentation acknowledged 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> The reviewers provided a summary of its recommendations, grouped in three broad categories: the composition and responsibility of the NomCom and its members; recruitment and evaluation processes; and additional recommendations.<ref name="recslides">[https://community.icann.org/display/OR/Webinar+for+Draft+Final+Report+-+Call+Details?preview=/82412125/84214222/NomCom%20Presentation%20of%20the%20Independent%20Examiner%20-%20Public%20Webinar.pdf NomCom2 Workspace - Presentation Slides, Draft Final Report], April 10, 2018</ref>

* '''Composition and Responsibility of the NomCom and its Members'''

** Formalize and communicate the job description for NomCom members that emphasizes independence and diversity considerations;

** Implement training to improve understanding of director responsibilities;

** Train NomCom leaders regarding responsibilities and authorities, and appoint Chair earlier;

** Implement training in how to interview and assess candidates;

** Retain professional recruiting consultant and codify its role;

** Retain professional evaluation consultant and codify its role;

** Two-year terms for members, maximum two consecutive terms (retain one-year terms for leadership roles);

** All NomCom members should be fully participating and voting members (except leadership);

** Review NomCom composition every five years;

** NomCom senior staff should be accountable to and report to the CEO's office; and

** NomCom leadership should have input on budget and resources.

* '''Recruitment and Evaluation Process'''

** Publish process diagram and codify key elements of NomCom process, and explain annual changes;

** Formalize communication between NomCom and Board, SOACs, and PTI board in regards to competencies;

** Publish job descriptions for open positions;

** Implement feedback process regarding members up for reappointment;

** Publish and codify a candidate communication schedule;

** Develop a marketing plan to better reach prospective candidates;

** Evaluation consultant does preliminary screening;

** Use a standardized matrix to evaluate and prioritize based on competencies and experience;

** Implement consistency in interview questions; and

** Publish data on composition of candidate pool and sources of candidates.

* '''Additional Recommendations'''

** Form empowered body of current & former NomCom members to implement recommendations;

** Inform assessments of NomCom by evaluating performance of the ICANN Board;

** Investigate evolution of NomCom into a Leadership Devleopment function;

** Clarify the definition and desire for independent directors; and

** Designate three seats for independent directors.<ref name="recslides" />

==References==

[[Category:Organizational Reviews]]

@@ Line 60: / Line 60: @@
 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. Examples included inconsistent criteria for recruiting and selecting candidates, as well as the lack of open and public discussion of the criteria that a given NomCom is seeking in candidates. Will Brown of the review team noted that each new NomCom "reinvented the wheel" on certain processes and initial work planning.<ref name="callrec" /> Comments and discussion revolved around not only NomCom's evolution and growth, but ensuring strategic alignment with the "new ICANN" after the [[IANA Transition]] and the development of the [[Empowered Community]]. [[Cheryl Langdon-Orr]] commented that this was "delightful opportunity" to generate consistency of practices and procedures, as well as continue to grow the transparency and predictability of the NomCom's work. She noted, also, that the ICANN community would find more opportunities for engagement with the NomCom if those continuity aspects continue to grow.<ref name="callrec" />
+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. Examples included inconsistent criteria for recruiting and selecting candidates, as well as the lack of open and public discussion of the criteria that a given NomCom is seeking in candidates. Will Brown of the review team noted that each new NomCom "reinvented the wheel" on certain processes and initial work planning.<ref name="callrec" /> Comments and discussion revolved around not only NomCom's evolution and growth, but ensuring strategic alignment with the "new ICANN" after the [[IANA Transition]] and the development of the [[ICANN Empowered Community]]. [[Cheryl Langdon-Orr]] commented that this was "delightful opportunity" to generate consistency of practices and procedures, as well as continue to grow the transparency and predictability of the NomCom's work. She noted, also, that the ICANN community would find more opportunities for engagement with the NomCom if those continuity aspects continue to grow.<ref name="callrec" /> [[Avri Doria]] noted that the idea that an "external firm of any sort" would be fully responsible for screening candidates would be very worrying for her. She also stated that question of NomCom accountability is complex. In her opinion, the NomCom could itself be seen as an accountability mechanism: a multistakeholder group, reviewing people within the roles that the NomCom appoints, and deciding on renewals for those people as well as evaluating community needs for appointments.<ref name="callrec" />
+The [[SSAC]], [[ISPCP]], and [[NCSG]] submitted written comments to the NomCom2 listserv.<ref>[https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/nomcom2-review/2018-February/date.html NomCom2 Listserv Archive], February 2018</ref> The SSAC echoed the concerns expressed in the consultation call, that the NomCom might not be currently be capable of complying with the new commitments imposed by the IANA transition.<ref>[http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/nomcom2-review/attachments/20180216/d8d30613/SSAC2018-03-NomcomReviewAssessmentReportFINAL-0001.pdf NomCom2 Listserv Archive - SSAC Comments to Assessment Report] February 15, 2018</ref> The ISPCP took issue with the assessment methodology, and had a variety of objections to the findings in the report.<ref>[http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/nomcom2-review/attachments/20180202/b7c769ed/ICANNCommentsonNomComReviewAssessmentReport-201802.pdf NomCom2 Listserv Archive - ISPCP Comments to Assessment Report], February 1, 2018</ref> The NCSG, by contrast, agreed with much of the report and emphasized the imbalance of representation both in terms of diversity and in terms of seats allocated to each constituency. It concluded that improvements must continue to ensure a strong and independent NomCom:
+<blockquote>A committee that can change its own operating procedures in secret and only announce and
+publish the outcome while providing no rational for the changes is very much prone to capture. We respect the independence of the NomCom and it should operate and work for the broader, global public interest. To achieve this, there is a need for more transparency, a more diverse composition of its membership, and better rules to prevent capture. When there is an imbalance of stakeholder group representation on the NomCom (which the first review referred to and which still exists) the independence of the committee cannot be achieved.<ref>[http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/nomcom2-review/attachments/20180209/44b8a8c1/NomComReview-NCSGcomments.pdf NomCom2 Listserv Archive - NCSG Comments to Assessment Report], February 8, 2018</ref>
 ===Draft Final Report===
-The Analysis Group 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>
+The Analysis Group held a meeting with the ICANN community at [[ICANN 61]] following the close of public comments on the assessment report. The presentation acknowledged 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> The reviewers provided a summary of its recommendations, grouped in three broad categories: the composition and responsibility of the NomCom and its members; recruitment and evaluation processes; and additional recommendations.<ref name="recslides">[https://community.icann.org/display/OR/Webinar+for+Draft+Final+Report+-+Call+Details?preview=/82412125/84214222/NomCom%20Presentation%20of%20the%20Independent%20Examiner%20-%20Public%20Webinar.pdf NomCom2 Workspace - Presentation Slides, Draft Final Report], April 10, 2018</ref>
+* '''Composition and Responsibility of the NomCom and its Members'''
+** Formalize and communicate the job description for NomCom members that emphasizes independence and diversity considerations;
+** Implement training to improve understanding of director responsibilities;
+** Train NomCom leaders regarding responsibilities and authorities, and appoint Chair earlier;
+** Implement training in how to interview and assess candidates;
+** Retain professional recruiting consultant and codify its role;
+** Retain professional evaluation consultant and codify its role;
+** Two-year terms for members, maximum two consecutive terms (retain one-year terms for leadership roles);
+** All NomCom members should be fully participating and voting members (except leadership);
+** Review NomCom composition every five years;
+** NomCom senior staff should be accountable to and report to the CEO's office; and
+** NomCom leadership should have input on budget and resources.
+* '''Recruitment and Evaluation Process'''
+** Publish process diagram and codify key elements of NomCom process, and explain annual changes;
+** Formalize communication between NomCom and Board, SOACs, and PTI board in regards to competencies;
+** Publish job descriptions for open positions;
+** Implement feedback process regarding members up for reappointment;
+** Publish and codify a candidate communication schedule;
+** Develop a marketing plan to better reach prospective candidates;
+** Evaluation consultant does preliminary screening;
+** Use a standardized matrix to evaluate and prioritize based on competencies and experience;
+** Implement consistency in interview questions; and
+** Publish data on composition of candidate pool and sources of candidates.
+* '''Additional Recommendations'''
+** Form empowered body of current & former NomCom members to implement recommendations;
+** Inform assessments of NomCom by evaluating performance of the ICANN Board;
+** Investigate evolution of NomCom into a Leadership Devleopment function;
+** Clarify the definition and desire for independent directors; and
+** Designate three seats for independent directors.<ref name="recslides" />
 ==References==
 [[Category:Organizational Reviews]]