[ALAC] ALAC statement on the WS2 Staff Accountability Recommendations?

Maureen Hilyard maureen.hilyard at gmail.com
Thu Nov 23 06:44:10 UTC 2017


Greetings all

Today, I was given responsibility to comment as to whether the ALAC needs
to make a statement with regards to "The CCWG Accountability WS2, Staff
Accountability Draft Recommendations, October 2017" (thankfully a short
report).

Here is a brief overview before my recommendation.

The CCWG has identified changes that can be used alongside existing systems
and processes not only to enhance ICANN's current processes but to support
continuous improvement within it.  This is important from the perspective
of At-Large and other ICANN communities,  as the primary role of the "ICANN
Organisation" is to work alongside ICANN's volunteer community to gain
their cooperation to assist with the work of ICANN, both directly and out
in the field.



A collaborative relationship with the Organisation is critical to the
success of the work of volunteers within the ICANN system. Clear
delegations, and open and well-communicated processes are critical to the
success of any joint ventures.  The CCWG's recommendations outline actions
that will contribute not only towards improving the visibility and
transparency of the Organisation's existing accountability mechanisms but
also to give more clarity for stakeholders on staff performance and
accountability.



One particular recommendation to address the issue of fairness in regards
to any contentious issues that may be raised by the Empowered Community
(EC), is the creation of a panel consisting of the Ombudsman, the
Complaints Officer, a representative of the Empowered Community and a Board
member. Each being able to contribute the views of their role to the
situation and hopefully resolve it in a way that is acceptable to all.



A final recommendation was that, in the interests of transparency and
accountability, all service level guidelines and the final outcomes of the
WG's recommendations should be published in a specific area of icann.org.



My recommendation is that the ALAC does not need to make any statement
other than to commend the CCWG for their recommendations which identify how
ICANN can better address contentious issues; suggest mechanisms that can
aid more effective and collaborative relationships between the staff and
the community; and provide greater clarity about roles and responsibilities
as well as greater transparency and accountability in relation to ICANN's
performance management and other evaluative processes.


Maureen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/attachments/20171122/4986040c/attachment.html>


More information about the ALAC mailing list