[At-Large] Proposal: Rotating Chair for ALAC

[Alan Greenberg]

Although I like the idea conceptually, I am dubious how successful it 
would be. My intuition tells me that the Chair job is a lot of work. 
Just because a meeting will be in a specific region does not mean 
that one of the three regional people (or less if terms are up) will 
be willing to devote the time to do it, or capable of taking on the 
tasks (that is not meant as a negative comment - I *know* what my 
strengths are and where my interests lie, and I presume others do as 
well). Perhaps once things are working well and on a regular basis 
within the ALAC, it would be time for such a change. In my mind, 
today is not that day.

However, similar to the issue that Izumi raised, I proposed several 
months ago that the chair's responsibilities be somewhat divided. 
Specifically I suggested that there be several vice chairs and that 
for any given task (agenda's, intra-ICANN coordination, etc) that 
either the Chair be the lead person and one of the vice-chairs backs 
them up, or vice versa. This would spread the work around a bit more, 
play to people's strengths, and ensure backup for all responsibilities.

I also agree with Izumi about term. 3-4 months is too short to really 
get the feel of the job (and too long if the wrong person is selected!).

Alan

At 08/07/2007 09:30 PM, Izumi AIZU wrote:
>I am rather conservative on this idea of rotating chair.
>
>I think we should first define/agree on the division of labor of the
>whole committee's works, who is going to work on which areas.
>
>After that, we can agree on how much the Chair should
>do, either with the current model, or with the proposed
>rotating Chair model.
>
>In case we adopt to the rotation, perhaps the term may be
>longer than one meeting. I think 3 to 5 months are too short to
>become effective.
>
>izumi