A Proposal to Merge NCSG, NCUC and NPOC for More Efficiency in ICANN=?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=99s_?=DNS Work

[dorothy g]

I agree.  If someone could help us with a table of pros and cons
I was also surprised that the total membership is only around 300?


On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 1:22 PM James Gannon <lists at icann.guru> wrote:

> Our charters all have revision clauses that say that such amendments need
> to be proposed and managed by members. There is far too much of a problem
> with people saying that the ECs need to do things, anyone can take the pen
> and start this process if there is support to do so
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 11 Jul 2020, at 13:58, Arsène Tungali <arsenebaguma at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 
> We have elected officers at all levels of the troika, we can ask them to
> concentrate on this, now that there is less travel? And deliver a plan and
> timeline?
>
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2020, 7:05 PM james at icann.guru <lists at icann.guru> wrote:
>
>> I would not be averse to it at all, however the challenge will be who is
>> willing to put in the years of work to make it happen.
>>
>> *---*
>> *James Gannon*
>>
>> On 7/10/2020 6:02:41 PM, Raymond Mamattah <mamattah.raymond at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> Hello Sam,
>>
>> Since all NPOC and NCUC members are automatic members of NCSG I think to
>> an extent that merger is already there.
>>
>> In my views it should remain as it's.
>>
>> Regards
>> Raymond Mamattah
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 10, 2020, 4:14 PM Sam Lanfranco <lanfran at yorku.ca> wrote:
>>
>>>  *A Proposal to Merge NCSG, NCUC and NPOC for More Efficiency in
>>> ICANN’s DNS Work*
>>>
>>>  Sam Lanfranco (NPOC/NCSG member) – July 2020
>>>
>>> This suggestion has been a long time coming. It contains a proposal that
>>> should be considered as a topic for both “in house” and broader global
>>> stakeholder engaged dialogue. It will likely be received with some
>>> resistance and consternation among our “in house” colleagues but resigning
>>> it to the dust bin without consideration and reflection would be mistake.
>>>
>>> The collective mission of  the three entities, NCSG, NCUC and NPOC:
>>> referred to here as “the troika”, within ICANN can be simply put as
>>> advocating for and helping giving voice to the non-profit sector, the
>>> public interest, and marginalized Internet users within the DNS community.
>>> Whether that is an adequate definition of the collective mission within the
>>> ICANN DNS remit may be an issue for further stakeholder discussion, but
>>> that issue is not germane to this proposal to merge the troika into a
>>> single entity.
>>>
>>>  First a bit of simplistic history. NCUC was constituted as the first
>>> stakeholder constituency within the troika. With the creation of NPOC the
>>> NCSG was created as the “uber” member of the troika. The initial impetus
>>> for NPOC was the DNS concerns of large global NGOs such as the Red Cross,
>>> Red Crescent, Salvation Army, and other organizations with an affiliated
>>> global presence. As their concerns progressed through ICANN those concerned
>>> organizations basically bypassed the troika and reached higher up in
>>> dealing with ICANN. The troika role was mainly reduced to offering
>>> stakeholder comments on the process.
>>>
>>>  At the same time, over the better part of a decade there has been a
>>> blend of cooperation and competition between the structures of the troika.
>>> There are “old timers” who still harbor some resentment toward its
>>> creation, and “newcomers” who wonder why there are sore spots.
>>>
>>>  Leaving that history aside what is more important is that in pursuit of
>>> its mission the troika faces several problems. The first, in terms of the
>>> multistakeholder policy making process of ICANN, is that it is the weakest
>>> leg of the process stool. The troika *represents the concerns and
>>> interests* of its constituencies. The troika cannot *represent its
>>> constituencies* the way the contracted parties, non-contracted parties,
>>> or GAC (in its special relationship) can and do. It has no formal induction
>>> process from its constituency, nor does it have formal accountability to
>>> its constituency.
>>>
>>>  Think of the troika as a valiant and under resourced band of public
>>> interest volunteers. Some of that band of have managed to wed career
>>> advancement to troika service and sustain engagement. Most (particularly
>>> those from marginalized communities) have not. One result is that the more
>>> marginalized within the volunteer constituency face greater obstacles,
>>> resulting in lower virtual and literal participation. The troika frequently
>>> pleas for additional ICANN resource support to address this challenge.
>>>
>>> The troika has difficulty providing adequate volunteer labor to serve is
>>> role in terms of ICANN PDP working group and document comment demands. The
>>> troika has difficulty recruiting candidates for the necessary positions
>>> dictated by the troika structure, by the demands of the GNSO, and for other
>>> ICANN activities.
>>>
>>>  Despite the millions of constituent organizations and individuals that
>>> fall within the troika's mission and remit, the troika has difficulty
>>> recruiting adequate new members to each of its three components. Lastly,
>>> while we hope we are voicing the concerns of the wider ngo and civil
>>> society community, it is only our voice, translating what we perceive to be
>>> their concerns into our words. Better engagement and empowerment would be
>>> to give them more direct access to the microphone so they could express
>>> their concerns and we could be more accountable.
>>>
>>>  Given this situation what can be done? There is a way forward and it
>>> draws on organizational wisdom found in other areas of human endeavor. In
>>> business it is the issue of too many managers and too few workers. In
>>> government: too many bureaucrats and too few front-line workers. In the
>>> military: too many generals and not enough soldiers. In the troika this is
>>> further complicated by the fact that those in administrative positions also
>>> do double duty as front-line workers in ICANN’s policy development and
>>> other processes.
>>>
>>>  The troika as now constituted demands multiple chairs, with multiple
>>> executive, policy, membership, finance, and other standing committee
>>> demands. All of this from a mainly self-selected membership community of
>>> around 300 members, where around ten to fifteen percent actively contribute
>>> volunteer labor to the administration of the troika, to the obligations it
>>> faces to the GNSO, to the all-important policy development process and to
>>> related working group and organizational matters. This at the same time it
>>> hopes that it is adequately and properly representing the ngo interests of
>>> tens of thousands of organizations, and the public interest concerns of
>>> hundreds of millions of global citizens.
>>>
>>>  While it is easier to fill positions that come with benefits such as
>>> attendance at ICANN meetings and strategic planning sessions, there is
>>> still a two-part bias against constituency member engagement. First,
>>> personal financial constraints and work requirements make it harder to
>>> accept elected positions. In other ICANN constituencies participation is
>>> usually part of one’s job description. Second, the organizational structure
>>> of the troika results in a considerable portion of ICANN travel support
>>> going to those in executive positions, offering less incentive for
>>> PDP/working group engagement. As well, for some it is less rewarding to
>>> participate in ICANN tasks without the benefit of face-to-face engagement
>>> at global ICANN meetings. This disincentive may grow as virtual meetings
>>> replace global face-to-face meetings.
>>>
>>>  Of the 300 or so members within the troika about 50 sustain relative
>>> activity about half of that number that are highly active. Some of the
>>> “highly active” represent people with relative, if basic, financial
>>> positions and personal work obligations that allow, and may benefit from,
>>> participation. Others face engagement levels constrained by finances and
>>> work obligations. For those who hold membership but are relatively
>>> inactive, we have little information. Many may have expected more when they
>>> joined
>>>
>>>  What is the way forward? The troika should hold an internal
>>> consultation to consider re-constituting the troika as a single structure.
>>> This would reduce the number of “generals” and the make benefits of
>>> participation more available to “foot soldier volunteers” engaged in the
>>> work of ICANN. There were historical reasons for creating the
>>> NCUC+NCSG+NPOC troika. The overall mission and remit remain but there is no
>>> reason for the troika to remain as structured.
>>>
>>>  The troika should initiate a cross-the-troika discussion looking at
>>> reorganizing the three administrative structures into a single
>>> administrative structure. This would free up more volunteer labor,
>>> currently shackled with administrative duties (replicated across the
>>> troika). More labor could do more in the substantive work of stakeholder
>>> engagement in ICANN's core DNS business. A single lean administrative
>>> structure also removes the unproductive occasional competition and
>>> bickering between the constituencies within the troika.
>>>
>>>  This re-organization alone would not fully meet ICANN's and the
>>> constituencies efforts to increase the participation from the global
>>> constituency, and from marginalized DNS communities and individuals. This
>>> is an efficiency proposal. Greater participation is a separate challenge.
>>>
>>>  In conclusion, the proposal here is for the troika to open an internal
>>> discussion to consider re-structuring NCSG, NCUC and NPOC into a single
>>> administrative structure. How to do this, and what it would be called would
>>> be part of that discussion. A single structure would produce more scope for
>>> volunteer non-profit and civil society engagement in the core work of ICANN
>>> while at the same time presenting a more clearly defined single entity for
>>> expanding engagement by the wider global non-profit and civil society
>>> constituency.
>>>
>>>  Sam Lanfranco, NPOC
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>

-- 

stay well, kind regards
Dorothy Gordon
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20200711/b191c734/attachment.htm>