RE: [bc-gnso] Nominating Committee

[Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think that discussions like this are better when they are general in nature 
and not only statements between individuals.  So, I'll thank Liz for her 
response on a more personal basis, but take this back to a more general 
proposal and discussion for all BC members interests. 
My proposal was that the BC members think more strategically about NOT 
'necessarily' requiring membership for a highly qualified candidate from the 
business user community to be considered as a NomCom member.  
Of course, within the BC and the GNSO, there are a lot of improvements and 
changes underway. However, we all are aware that the BC is about  GNSO policy 
areas, which is the primary purpose and focus of the BC, as a constituency of 
the GNSO. 
That is very important, and of course, the BC elected councilors will vote on 
two Board members elected from the GNSO Policy Council. 
However, the larger issues of concern about governance of the organization are 
actually NOT about GNSO policy, but broader issues, such as the stability of 
the organization, how it co exists in a larger public policy arena that has the 
IGF, ITU as 'sister players', and is also about an ever improved interaction 
between the other parts of the stakeholder community. 
Some growth in BC membership would be great, and as the services of the BC 
grow, and the merger with the other commercial user constituencies takes place, 
we will probably be assessing how and what to improve in the kinds of 
information and activities that are going to support the GNSO "commercial user 
house". 
Selecting a very senior, highly respected leader like Mike might lead to his 
being chosen as vice chair of the NomCom -- something that won't happen if we 
are sending someone that is viewed as tightly tied to particular policy 
perspectives. And, after all, the Board selection is about governance -- not 
about GNSO policy positions per se. 
At the same time, we need to recognize that the GNSO Policy Council will be 
electing board members, and that the ALAC is seeking elected board seats -- to 
achieve that change will take major changes in the NomCom process. 
Reform and modification of the NomCom procedures/scope, accountability, and 
some form of reasonable transparency are all going to need work and attention. 
That won't be done by the folks are who are 'within' the NomCom, of course, so 
is something to be aware of. 





CC: bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx
From: lizawilliams@xxxxxxx
To: marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] Nominating Committee
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 13:15:20 +0100

Marilyn
I would welcome Mike Robert's participation in the BC.   As one of three 
members [David Fares and Mike O'Connor are the others) of the BC Credentials 
Committee, it would be tremendous to receive an application from him. However, 
asking him, or anyone else, to join the BC for the purpose of standing for 
election as the BC's representative to the Nominating Committee seems to be 
rather a stretch.  
I can think of many existing members in the BC who would do an admirable job in 
a highly complex environment which is very time consuming.  I would also 
suggest that intimate knowledge of the challenges of the Business Constituency 
in a transitioning organisation is critical as is a commitment to the broader 
ICANN community.
As to your comments about "improving the BC presence" in the Nominating 
Committee, the existing representatives (Phil Lodico and I) are always open to 
suggestions for improvements.  We have both provided regular updates to the BC 
but cannot, under the strict confidentiality rules of the Nominating Committee 
provide more detailed notes about the workings of the Committee itself.  Of 
course, everything about the Nominating Committee that can be made public (that 
is everything but candidate names and their details) is available here 
http://nomcom.icann.org/
Kind regards.
Liz
On 29 Jul 2009, at 12:57, Marilyn Cade wrote:I've reviewed the requirements for 
Nom Committee appointments, and I see that actually, we can nominate someone 
who is not a BC member, but is from the business community. I have not yet 
approached Mike Roberts, but call all members attention to that long standing 
role that Mike has had in the Internet, standing up ICANN, and being a BC 
member. He is a micro enterprise owner, and highly respected around the globe. 
Perhaps we should be thinking more broadly, and more globally, about 
'recruiting' someone like Mike for the NomComm. 
I am going to reach out to Mike to 'test' whether he would stand for selection 
from the BC. 
We would certainly 'improve' BC presence by selecting someone like Mike, or his 
counterpart from another part of the globe. 
Business has the ability to think creatively. I'd like to see more of that from 
'us'. Perhaps other members have ideas about business people from other parts 
of the globe that we might nominate. I also know a CEO from Egypt rather well, 
and we could also consider someone like that for the NomComm role. We would 
need to organize a 'support/briefing' team, but some of those who have been on 
the NomCom could offer to do those briefings, with an open conference call for 
all BC members interested to listen in. 
Marilyn Cade ICT StrategiesmCADE llc
micro enterprise member of BC