[ALAC] ALAC Candidate Selection Committee
Alan Greenberg
alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Mon Jun 13 20:03:42 UTC 2016
That is a given, unless the ALAC explicitly
delegates a particular appointment to some other entity.
The proposal made below starts off with the
statement that any selection committee only makes recommendations to the ALAC.
Alan
At 13/06/2016 04:00 AM, Sébastien Bachollet wrote:
>I agree with Carlton on the fact that any
>appointment must be a decision of the full ALAC.
>
>Skills are useful but diversity is essential.
>
>Sébastien Bachollet
>+33 6 07 66 89 33
>Blog: <http://sebastien.bachollet.fr>http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/
>Mail: Sébastien Bachollet
><<mailto:sebastien at bachollet.com>sebastien at bachollet.com>
>
>De :
><<mailto:alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org>alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>on behalf of Carlton Samuels
><<mailto:carlton.samuels at gmail.com>carlton.samuels at gmail.com>
>Date : lundi 13 juin 2016 01:54
>À : Alan Greenberg <<mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>
>Cc : ALAC <<mailto:alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org>alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>Objet : Re: [ALAC] ALAC Candidate Selection Committee
>
>First, let's ground the discussion in what the
>ALAC is; a 15-member body, ten (10) of whom are
>selected by the broad At-Large membership via
>means not always above reproach and five (5)
>selected by the NomCom from a wider set of
>criteria, including some connected to landmass.
>
>While we may not think so, the takeaway here is
>that the structure of the ALAC itself is
>intended to be broadly representative of the
>At-Large interests, howsover those are intuited
>or understood in the several regions.
>
>Seems to me the three (3) overarching criteria
>of importance for any ALAC appointment are 1)
>the appointees desire to serve 2) The
>appointee's capacity to serve 3) The appointee's qualifications for service.
>
>It is my view that for some positions, #'s 2 & 3
>are of heightened importance. For example, a
>liaison must have the capacity to understand and
>accept that s/he is an ambassador to the
>receiving agency or group, there representing
>the views of the appointing agency, in this case the ALAC.
>
>In the case of ALAC-endorsed membership in WGs,
>especially CCWGs and other such structures, the
>requirement is the person holding brief must
>understand that it is the representation of the
>interests of the At-Large as generally
>understood that takes precedence. Broad domain
>or subject knowledge is then the preeminent
>attribute. This is not to say deep knowledge is
>not required. The political analogy is like
>this: you do not take the ALAC whip but may vote
>with the ALAC. The acceptance of the diversity
>of At-Large interests, which may actually
>project a variety of views, is a good substrate
>for action. And it is the fair projection and
>airing of those views that are of heightened
>importance. I can think of the CCT RT as the perfect example.
>
>I would make the NomCom endorsed-membership a
>special case. I will not go into my views on that here and now.
>
>On balance, I am unanimous:
>
>1. Liaisons should be appointed by the ALAC on recommendation of the ALT
>2. All others may be recommended by a Selection
>Committee to the ALAC for endorsement
>
>The Selection Committee may have a broader
>membership than the ALT and could include members not of the ALAC.
>
>-Carlton
>
>
>==============================
>Carlton A Samuels
>Mobile: 876-818-1799
>Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround
>=============================
>
>On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 11:54 PM, Alan Greenberg
><<mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:
>Several months ago, we talked about forming (or
>perhaps reforming since there was one when
>Olivier was Chair) a candidate selection
>committee to make recommendations to the ALAC on
>the appointment of people to various positions.
>
>There are generally two kinds of positions that we consider:
>
>1. Positions appointed to (or recommended for
>appointment to, when the ALAC does not have the
>final say) various groups within ICANN. Examples
>include Cross-Community Working Groups (under
>the current rules used for the CWG-Stewardship
>and the CCWG-Accountability, and in the Draft
>CCWG Framework under consideration), Affirmation
>of Commitments Reviews (a name that probably
>will change under the pending Bylaw changes)
>and the CSC overseeing the new IANA. In these
>cases, the appointee has a responsibility to
>work with the ALAC and At-Large, but does not
>normally formally represent them (thus we have
>found that the appointed members of the
>CCWG-Accountability have at times had different positions on some issues).
>
>2. Positions where the person is a Liaison to
>other bodies, generally within ICANN, and
>formally represents the ALAC in those groups.
>Moreover, in some cases, there are specific requirements that must be met.
>
>In the past, we have not used a selection
>committee for this second type of appointment,
>but the importance of them is such that I think
>that we should have formal discussions on the
>candidates before an ALAC vote. Moreover, our
>Rules of Procedure allow the ALAC to re-appoint
>Liaisons without opening nominations, a practice
>that some people have felt is not appropriate. A
>selection committee would be an ideal place to
>hold the discussion on whether to do so in any given case.
>
>The issue has been discussed within the ALT, and
>the general feeling is that in the case of the
>first class of appointments, there should be a
>committee similar to that used when Olivier was
>Chair. Specifically, a group composed of ten
>people, led by the ALAC Chair, with five of its
>members selected by RALOs (according to their
>own rules ands standards) and five selected by
>the ALAC, one per region in each case. Such an
>ALAC committee is in accordance with RoP Section 18.3.
>
>Most (or perhaps all) ALT members feel that
>using the ALT itself as the ALAC Members on the
>selection committee makes sense (perhaps
>augmented by one additional person from the
>Chair's region). The ALT is selected annually to
>represent the interests of the regions on the
>leadership team, already works well together and
>is geared up for quick responses. But that is open for discussion.
>
>For appointments of Liaisons and any other
>positions that formally represent the ALAC,
>there is a strong (but not unanimous) belief in
>the ALT that such recommendations must be made
>by ALAC members. Ultimately, people recommended
>by this group must represent the ALAC and it is
>ALAC members that must pass judgement. Again, I
>think the ALT is an easy choice for but other
>alternatives are possible. I would have no
>problem with the RALO appointees also
>participating in the discussions, since they
>would already understand the confidentiality
>issues related to personnel selection.
>
>Note that in all cases, the selection committee
>has the option of providing one or more
>candidates for the consideration of the ALAC,
>but with the assurance that all candidates
>presented to the ALAC meet at the very least the minimum requirements.
>
>I would appreciate comments so we can refine
>this quickly and approve it in Helsinki. ALT
>Members who have varying opinions are of course
>welcome to clearly state their positions.
>
>Alan
>
>_______________________________________________
>ALAC mailing list
><mailto:ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>
>At-Large Online: <http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>ALAC Working Wiki:
><https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>ALAC mailing list
><mailto:ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>At-Large Online:
><http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>ALAC Working Wiki:
><https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/attachments/20160613/0e635765/attachment.html>
More information about the ALAC
mailing list