Board Fee, Size & Skills & Other things that go bump in the night...

["Don Hollander" <don@xxxxxxxxx>]

I would like to strongly support several points raised in the Independent
review recently released for comment:

 

1)      Board Fees - I concur that the Board must be paid a fee for their
service.  There is clearly extensive work involved and, without a fee, we
risk limiting membership of the Board to people of independent means or
people who have the strong support of their employers and the associated
potential conflict of interest.   Individual Board members can always
decline payment or they could have it paid directly to their employer to
compensate for the individual's time away from their core activities.

2)      Board Size - While a smaller Board would be more efficient, I am not
convinced that it would be any more effective at this stage in ICANN's life
and with the extensive challenges the organisation and the community it
services face.  

3)      Board Skills - The Board should give the NomCom a very clear idea of
the skills of the existing members and the optimal skills balance.  A
similar approach should be taken with regards to gender, geography, age,
native tongue, and, no doubt, astrological balance.

4)      Allocation to Staff - I also concur that the Board should allocate
far more activities to Staff.  The meeting site selection, for example,
should not be a Board decision.  Set the parameters and let the staff do
their job.

5)      Conflicts of Interest - Missing from the Executive Summary, I
believe given the nature of the organisation, all the Director's other
interests should be publicly listed to ensure that any potential conflicts
of interest can be identified by their colleagues and the constituencies.
These high conflict standards should also apply to Officers and staff.

 

 

Don Hollander

Partner - www.bookhaven.co.nz

Father of Four, Husband of One