[info] Introducing the New Accountability Indicators - ICANN Blog

[Nick Shorey]

Hi all,

I've now had a chance to review the Accountability Metrics, and have a
couple of additional thoughts.

I don't think we should reject these outright, as I feel this is a welcome
and important first step in making ICANN a more transparent organisation,
and we should encourage further efforts to this end.

I agree with Paul and Zakir that the term 'Accountability' may be a little
misleading in the context that we understand it within the IANA transition
work, and these do look more like performance indicators, but I get the
intent to provide insight on the activities taking place.

Whilst I believe overall the metrics are looking at roughly the right areas
- I agree some of the metrics seem a bit out-of-focus, particularly around
outreach and engagement. It might simply be a case that there is
insufficient data at this stage, but we might consider recommendations
regarding the IMPACT of initiatives, i.e. an outreach and engagement event
in Kenya resulted in 56% of participants joining a CCWG.

Ayden makes a good point around goals - and this is certainly an area we
could recommend more information.  For example, how does the target of a
3-5% increase in remote participation relate to the budget allocation for
this activity? If the budget for 17/18 was to be double what it was for
16/17, perhaps the target should also be revised upwards. Insights like
this would vastly improve our understanding of ICANN's efforts in specific
areas.

I think a response welcoming this initiative and including some positive
recommendations for refining the approach could be a good step to encourage
further transparency across ICANN's operations and activity going forward.

Kind regards,

Nick

*Nick Shorey*
Phone: +44 (0) 7552 455 988
Email: lists at nickshorey.com
Skype: nick.shorey
Twitter: @nickshorey
LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/nicklinkedin
Web: www.nickshorey.com

On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 10:02 PM, Zakir Syed <
00000206f69697ca-dmarc-request at listserv.syr.edu> wrote:

> I agree with Paul and Ayden. After looking at some of these, I think they
> are not about accountability at all. These could be effectiveness and
> performance indicators though but calling they accountability indicators
> makes it confusing and meaningless.
>
> Also, IMHO, its better we forward this discussion to "
> accountability-indicators-feedback at icann.org" as feedback hoping for a
> revised, better, and clear version instead of "rejecting" them which I am
> not sure if we as NCSG can as Paul also mentioned below.
>
> Best,
> Zakir
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Paul Rosenzweig <paul.rosenzweig at REDBRANCHCONSULTING.COM>
> *To:* NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> *Sent:* Saturday, September 9, 2017 7:18 PM
>
> *Subject:* Re: [info] Introducing the New Accountability Indicators -
> ICANN Blog
>
> I don’t know if we as NCSG have authority to “reject” these indicators,
> but I agree completely with Ayden that many of these are not really
> indicators of anything meaningful.  Many of them are not about ICANN’s
> “accountability” in the sense of its accountability to the
> multi-stakeholder community but about something else.  I am glad, for
> example, that community digital services have had a 100% uptime for the
> last 90 days – but why that is an accountability metric (as opposed to a
> performance metric) is not clear.
>
> One thing is, however, clear – you get what you measure.  If THESE are the
> metrics then THESE are the things that ICANN staff will focus on.  To the
> extent they aren’t very helpful, this portends some wasted effort.
>
> Cheers
> Paul
>
> Paul Rosenzweig
> paul.rosenzweig at redbranchconsulting.com
> O: +1 (202) 547-0660 <(202)%20547-0660>
> M: +1 (202) 329-9650 <(202)%20329-9650>
> VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <(202)%20738-1739>
> www.redbranchconsulting.com
> My PGP Key: https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=
> 0x9A830097CA066684
>
> *From:* NCSG-Discuss [mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] *On Behalf Of
> *Ayden Férdeline
> *Sent:* Saturday, September 9, 2017 8:11 AM
> *To:* NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> *Subject:* Re: [info] Introducing the New Accountability Indicators -
> ICANN Blog
>
> These are embarrassingly meaningless metrics. I have just reviewed them
> (which takes more time than it should, given the clunky interface) and they
> tell me very little about ICANN. For instance, you measure "community
> activity in policy development" by measuring the number of opportunities
> for formal public comments to be submitted? (Not the number of people who
> submit comments, but the number of times you open an issue up to comment?)
> And many of the goals are insufficiently unambitious. The target (which,
> incidentally, was not met), was 300 people using the ICANN Learn platform
> in Q2? How does ICANN justify having two or more full-time staff managing
> this tool then, given how little it is utilised? The tool is also
> inaccurate; look at the world map on indicator 5.3. It does not reflect
> ICANN's own geographic regions framework. These "accountability indicators"
> are window dressing, and I think we should reject them.
>
> —Ayden
>
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [info] Introducing the New Accountability Indicators - ICANN Blog
> Local Time: 8 September 2017 2:46 AM
> UTC Time: 8 September 2017 01:46
> From: rafik.dammak at GMAIL.COM
> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>
> Hi all,
>
> please find below an blog post explaining about ICANN accountability
> indicators.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>
>
>
> https://www.icann.org/news/blog/introducing-the-new-
> accountability-indicators
>
> Have you ever wondered how many events ICANN participates in by region and
> how many people we engage with? Or what is the state of ICANN's financials?
> Or how much is being spent on travel and meetings? Now you can find all of
> these answers and more on the beta version of our new Accountability
> Indicators page <https://www.icann.org/accountability-indicators>. It's a
> place where you can keep track of progress made against ICANN's strategic
> and operating plans.
>
> This is an evolution from our previous Key Performance Indicators (KPI)
> Dashboard. Based on feedback from the ICANN community, organization, and
> Board over the last couple of years, we have transformed the KPI Dashboard
> to better demonstrate the organization's accountability and transparency to
> the community. We recognize that ICANN is a unique organization, so market
> trends and industry benchmarks do not always apply. Other measures better
> demonstrate our progress, including perception measures such as
> satisfaction surveys and non-performance measures such as Board composition.
> We will update these indicators monthly. Initially, the page is in
> English, as we want to get your feedback right away. In the coming months,
> we will make the page available in the six U.N. languages.
>
> *What's New?*
> We've made several improvements to the data itself and are introducing a
> new interactive platform that makes the data easier to work with and
> understand. You can drill down to see data in more detail. For example, if
> you click a column in a chart, you'll see a cross-section of data, so you
> can hone in on what matters most to you. You can also download the
> underlying data.
>
> *Your Feedback Is Important*
> This page serves provides a central place where you can clearly see
> progress made against the goals and objectives you set in ICANN's strategic
> and operating plans. We will continue to improve it, and your feedback is
> important. Please email questions or comments to
> accountabililty-indicators-feedback at icann.org.
>
> Author: Susanna Bennett, Senior Vice President and Chief Operating
> Officer, ICANN
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20170916/76162c58/attachment.htm>