[gnso-improvem-impl-sc] WG Self-Assessment Questionnaire (Draft v3)

["Ken Bour" <ken.bour@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

SCI Team Members:

 

I recognize that everyone is busy especially in this period just before the
next ICANN meeting. 

 

In order to keep moving forward on the WG Self-Assessment project, I propose
that I begin the process of programming the current questionnaire into an
online tool. In this case, after evaluating the pros/cons, I am inclined to
utilize QuestionPro <http://www.questionpro.com/>  because of its excellent
features including security protection and back-end reporting.

 

Once it is operational, I would then suggest that we open the questionnaire
to a limited test. One suggestion would be to invite 6-10 individuals who
have recently served on a Working Group and ask them if they would complete
the instrument and, then, comment upon its ease-of-use, time (< 30 minutes),
clarity, et al. 

 

Unless I hear differently, I will begin building an online version in
QuestionPro so that the SCI can see how this instrument will actually appear
to future Working Group members who participate in the self-assessment. 

 

Taking this action does not mean that we cannot continue making further
changes and improvements to the questionnaire, but my sense is that it we
are ready to proceed to this next phase of the project. 

 

Ken Bour

 

From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike O'Connor
Sent: Friday, July 05, 2013 12:08 PM
To: Ken Bour
Cc: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] WG Self-Assessment Questionnaire (Draft
v3)

 

hi Ken,

 

i'm on board with all your proposed changes.  i think this is getting really
close to "ship it!" for me.  :-)

 

mikey

 

 

On Jul 4, 2013, at 11:28 AM, Ken Bour <ken.bour@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:





SCI Team Members:

 

After our last teleconference (2 July), I continued my own evaluation of the
questionnaire looking for ways to sharpen and improve it including
addressing your feedback received thus far. I developed a new Draft v3 for
your review at:  <https://community.icann.org/x/eEZ-Ag>
https://community.icann.org/x/eEZ-Ag.

 

In this version of the questionnaire, I made the following substantive
changes:

1.      The "Expertise" question (Section II) was modified in an attempt to
address Ron's observation about the expected variability in team members'
knowledge/skill.
2.      Tangential to Ron's concern, I added a new disclaimer in the note
just before Section II to explain how respondents might approach the
challenge of assigning individual ratings to complex dimensions.
3.      In Section V, I substituted "Engagement" for "Participation" and
changed the wording of the first question to address Wolf-Ulrich's feedback
entered as a comment to Draft v2.
4.      I elected to break out Personal Dimensions and Demographics into two
independent sections. Each one represents a logically distinct category;
furthermore, the table headings simply did not apply correctly to the
Demographics questions.
5.      Added a third question to the Personal Dimensions which I labeled
"Willingness-to-Serve" for want of a better noun. This question seeks to
understand whether the WG experience influences one's propensity to serve
again in the future assuming all other conditions (e.g., topic, need/fit,
availability) are favorable. In other words, are we systematically building
or eroding volunteer capacity?

 

I look forward to your feedback on this third iteration of the WG
Self-Assessment instrument.

 

As you may know, I will not be present in Durban; however, if the team
wishes to continue working on this project and would like my involvement, I
am willing to join in any/all sessions remotely if technical conditions
(e.g., room connections) permit.

 

Regards,

 

Ken

 

 


PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE:
OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)