[At-Large] Proposal: Rotating Chair for ALAC

[Alan Greenberg]

Annette, I am not sure I know what you mean (but it could be lack of 
sleep). Do you mean that there will be an annual chair, but a 
three-person "management team" including the chair, rep from last 
meeting region and rep from next meeting region?

Alan

At 10/07/2007 09:00 AM, Annette Muehlberg wrote:
>All,
>I propose a different concept of rotating chairs. Instead of the EU 
>rotating model, I think the following would be more effective and 
>certainly less bureaucratic:
>
>After each ICANN meeting those three representatives of the ALAC of 
>the region where the next meeting will take place take the lead. One 
>of the old team will join their work (to make sure that "old" issues 
>do not get lost) and of course the regional secretariat will share 
>responsibilities especially in preparing the next meeting.
>
>best
>annette
>
>
>Alan Greenberg schrieb:
>>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
>>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>ALAC mailing list
>>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>
>>At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org
>>ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org
>>
>>