[gnso-osc-ops] FW: GCOT request for input from CBUC members

[Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Work Team members,

Here are the comments I received from Marilyn Cade.  I also will put these into 
a chart I am compiling of all responses.

Thank you,

Julie

------ Forwarded Message
From: Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 10:58:11 -0700
To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>, <bclist@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: GCOT request for input from CBUC members

Dear Julie

My appreciation to the GCOT for the opportunity to comment on the establishment 
of a separate Administrative team.  My response is that it is very much an 
improvement to the GNSO to separate the Policy Council and its work from the 
Administrative functions, as proposed.  I will make a couple of proposed 
changes, however, in the team's proposal.  Since this was distributed via the 
constituencies, I have cc'd the BC list as FYI.

I think that there are very good ideas in this proposal by the GCOT.

Let me try to describe the area where I would propose a change. On page 4, 
under Executive Committee, I propose a change to the role of the Executive 
Committee. First, think of this administrative management group as a 'team'.  
So that group will have a chair, which they elect.  Then,  it is appropriate to 
have the Policy Chair, [or Vice Chair ]and one more rep sit on the Coordinating 
Team to ensure that there is reflection of the Policy Council's priorities, but 
there is not a need to have such a formalized structure that creates a second 
layer on top of the Administrative Coordinating Team.

Thus, I could see that we could strike the new  Executive Committee of 5 
people. This will be perceived by many as creating too much layering. Keep this 
simple. Divide the work as proposed. Have a separate Administrative team, put 
the Policy chair/and one more policy rep on it.    The two chairs then have 
separate functions. There may be instances when both chairs should participate 
in certain events, or meetings, when both administrative management and policy 
development/management are being discussed. I am sure that can happen in a 
cohesive and collegial manner.

So, "yes" to the new Administrative Group, but cut out the 'supra chair' and 
cut out the executive committee idea of 5 people.

The constituencies/groups should all be largely self governing, and will 
hopefully have independent management structures of their own that are seprate 
from their elected policy councilors.

Otherwise, I want to applaud the work of the group in the write up of this 
document. It is well thought out, and succinct in how it describes what is a 
significant change, but one that can  improve the neutral administrative 
functioning of the GNSO, while also enabling the dedication of time and focus 
on the important policy development activities.
Best Regards

Marilyn Cade
ICT Strategies
mCADE llc


------ End of Forwarded Message