[PC-NCSG] ICANN Staff Pilot Program to assist ICANN document development and drafting

[Rafik Dammak]

Hi Sam,

I think WBC global was recruited to help design the program but not
necessarily to provide the policy support itself.

Best,

Rafik
On Feb 23, 2016 3:33 AM, "Sam Lanfranco" <lanfran at yorku.ca> wrote:

> Some of you will have read the message from David Olive, sent to the SOAC
> leadership list earlier in the month, in which he outlines a Staff
> initiative for "a new pilot program we are developing to assist ICANN
> communities with document development and drafting." I have no idea where
> the proposal stands at the moment, although they hoped to roll it out
> before Marrakesh. (See full message attached).
>
> I have several concerns about the viability of this proposal. They are
> listed below this *brief overview *of the proposal.
>
> ?    The proposal ICANN is working on is with Dan O?Neill of WBC Global to
> help develop, coordinate and manage the implementation of this assistance
> program. WBC Global is mainly a provider of background information to the
> business community, and an arranger for access to staff and representatives
> in the U.S. Congress. I do not know if it currently performs Washington
> work for ICANN.
>
> ?    The proposed pilot program will assist eligible ICANN community
> groups with search, and preparation of issue overviews, participation in
> community calls, writing, editing, or any combination of those services.
> The program will help ICANN test what types of services can be provided and
> in what manner to see if it is possible to establish the capability as a
> regular ICANN support program.
>
> ?    Staff is requesting expressions of interest via a questionnaire [*not
> sure where it is*], to be completed by 29 January 2016. Staff is also
> requesting suggestions for specific individuals who might take on temporary
> assignments to serve in the support role, but [unfortunately] ICANN
> procurement principles would prevent someone from the same community
> helping out within that community. In my view this will almost guarantee
> that support is from sources that poorly understand context and process, no
> matter what their writing and editing skills may be. The goal was to launch
> the pilot program before Marrakesh, but I have heard nothing more.
>
> *Concerns:*
>
> Based on what WBC Global does I think this is a poor match between WBC
> Global's skills and our constituency needs. WBC Global's services are
> listed here: http://www.wbcglobal.com/7022.html
>
> It does briefing papers for the corporate sector, and it does Wash D.C.
> contacting services:  *"**Arrange appointments for client executives with
> Members of Congress or staff,  Administration officials and other policy
> experts in Washington; Organize and staff a customized seminars or
> briefings for visiting senior executives on setting up and carrying out an
> effective government relations program in Washington."*
>
> I wonder if it is already under contract to ICANN for Wash D.C. government
> relations activity.
>
> My reluctance about this proposition has nothing to do with the abilities
> of WBC Global, within its scope of competence. This effort has to be
> targeted primarily at the non-contract and probably mainly the
> non-commercial groups since contracted and commercial groups frequently
> have the resources to pay for/get done what they need worked on.
>
> For the non-commercial and not-for-profit/civil society organization
> groups the challenge is neither a lack of expertise nor a lack of writing
> ability. Many people in our constituencies are occupied doing both in other
> areas, and that is the problem. The problem is a lack of volunteer time to
> devote to what needs to be done. Based on what WBC Global does [see
> website] I do not think it has the appropriate expertise to be of
> significant help here. We could do better with a contract to a dedicated
> constituency person who handed edits and cracks the whip on time lines from
> agreed flow chart milestones.
>
> A model where each WG, PDP, etc. included funding to contract one
> knowledgeable person for x hours over y weeks to "handle the pen" and
> "crack the whip" on time lines would work better and be a lot less costly.
> That ICANN contract procurement principles would prevent this is an issue
> to be dealt with and addressed. The alternative, only retaining people
> without specific knowledge or an understanding of the specific context is
> not a good alternative. It would neither reduce our work nor improve the
> outcome. Our challenge is neither background research, nor editing and
> word-smithing skills, it is access to blocks of time from skilled expertise
> within our community.
>
> Since this deals with how we (NCSG, NCUC, NPOC) would engage in policy
> development, should we have a discussion and reach a consensus position on
> this proposal? Does anyone have updated information on this initiative?
>
> Sam L.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20160223/d9604cff/attachment-0001.html>