[gnso-arr-dt] RE: RT Applicant Qualifications

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think it would be good to have at least two categories of
qualifications: 1) those identified in the call for volunteers as listed
below; 2) qualifications to be used by the GNSO for endorsement
purposes.  Regarding the latter, here are my suggestions, the first two
of which I suggested some time ago:
1. Availability and willingness to commit the time (This would eliminate
candidates who have other significant GNSO leadership responsibilities
like myself for the first review.)

2. Demonstrated trustworthiness to function neutrally and objectively

3. Basic knowledge of the GNSO community and its various stakeholders

4. Basic understanding of the domain name industry (i.e., the
registry/registrar model, diversity of domain name registrants and
users, etc.)

For each of the above and for the criteria listed below, we should
discourage applicants from simply giving general affirmative answers and
rather ask them to provide specific data points.  For item 1 above, we
may want to request information like the following: a)  List the primary
demands on your time (e.g., full-time job, part-time job, volunteer
tasks, leadership positions, etc.); b) How much time on average do you
estimate you could commit to this task per week?  For item 2 above and
the fifth bullet below, we could ask applicants to cite specific real
life examples where they demonstrated the qualities.  For qualifications
that involve knowledge and understand like items 3 & 4 above and several
of the bulleted items below, we could ask them to explain how they
obtained the knowledge and understanding.

Chuck


________________________________

        From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
        Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 10:23 AM
        To: gnso-arr-dt@xxxxxxxxx
        Cc: Gomes, Chuck
        Subject: RT Applicant Qualifications 
        
        
        Hi, 

        Maybe it'd help to have separate threads per issue, rather than
having points blended and maybe getting lost.  So here's one on
qualifications, in a sec another on process.


        On Feb 1, 2010, at 3:15 PM, Gomes, Chuck wrote:

                *       
                        Whatever we do, I believe that the
qualifications should be clearly communicated before we start the GNSO
process so that possible volunteers are fully aware of the criteria that
the GNSO will use in making endorsements and can explain how they
satisfy those qualifications.  I also think it would be a good idea if
specific questions were asked of volunteers that they would be required
to answer in describing their qualifications.  Using a template for
volunteer statements could greatly help us in evaluating the responses
fairly.

        ICANN's call suggest

                1.      Applicants should possess the following
professional and personal skills:

                        

                        *       Sound knowledge of ICANN and its working
practices and culture; 
                        *       Good knowledge of the subject area of
the review; 
                        *       Team spirit, adaptability; 
                        *       Willingness to learn; 
                        *       Capacity to put aside personal opinions
or preconceptions; 
                        *       Analytical skills; 
                        *       Ability to interpret quantitative and
qualitative evidence; 
                        *       Capacity to draw conclusions purely
based on evidence; 
                        *       Commitment to devote his/her time to the
review process

        These generic qualifications could be difficult to assess in a
manner everyone considers objective and fair.  I don't look forward to
making judgements on someone's "team spirit," etc.

        Either way, are they sufficient for our purposes, in which case
we just reference them?  

        Alternatively, Chuck, in raising the qualifications point
several times, are you thinking that we'd have additional ones optimized
to the GNSO environment?  Specific to the RT in question?  For example,
for the accountability and transparency RT would we expect applicants to
possess identifiable expertise in council work processes?  That might be
something of a barrier to entry for some people who've not been on the
council (who knows, and maybe some who have :-)  For competition &
consumer would we require expertise on VI and related (which) issues?
Could be daunting...for security and WHOIS I suppose it's easier...

        Thoughts anyone?

        Bill