Re: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Proposed Agenda - Next Policy & Implementation WG Meeting

[Olga Cavalli <olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx>]

hi
i will do my best to join but i might have to stay in the gac comunique 
drafting meeting that ocerlaps.
best
olga

> On 20/11/2013, at 09:55, Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Hi Maureen,
> 
> Sorry to hear that yo cannot make it, but I hope you will be back on your 
> feet very soon!! Thank you for your feedback, we'll make sure to share it 
> with the community during the F2F meeting.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Marika
> 
> From: mcubberley <mcubberley@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Wednesday 20 November 2013 05:12
> To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Gnosis IP Law & Consulting <gnosisiplaw@xxxxxxxxx>, 
> "gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>, 
> "gnso-definitions-subteam-policyimpl@xxxxxxxxx" 
> <gnso-definitions-subteam-policyimpl@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Proposed Agenda - Next Policy & 
> Implementation WG Meeting
> 
> Hello Marika,
> 
> Regrettably, I am scheduled to meet with another specialist tomorrow to try 
> to determine the best way to get me back on my feet, literally. These bone 
> breaks are more complex than was first thought, and there are some new 
> complications.
> 
> As a result, I will not be able to participate in tomorrow's meeting, which 
> is unfortunate in light of the very interesting recent posts and discussion 
> regarding the fundamental question of the relationship between policy and 
> implementation, and the possibility of elasticity in interpretation.
> 
> I am sure, nonetheless, that the other members of the sub-group will be able 
> to update the working group and the GNSO Council on our progress.  Had I been 
> able to participate, there is one observation I would like to have made, and 
> so, with respect, I will make it here, in this email.
> 
> (With apologies for the lengthy message........but think of all the time that 
> will. be saved in the meeting by reading this now.)
> 
> Observation
> The *draft* definitions the sub-group has developed are a strong starting 
> point in that they are clear and neutral, and most importantly, they enable 
> an understanding of the words and phrases as just that: words for which an 
> agreed-upon definition can be found. As drafts, they will be subject to some 
> editing.
> 
> In my view, (and that of others, or the sub-team would not have been formed), 
> it is essential to seek agreement on the basic definitions themselves, before 
> trying to interpret them in terms that could change their fundamental 
> meaning. 
> 
> Yes, there is a definite link between policy and implementation, as there is 
> a link between principles and policies. I think, however, that in focussing 
> on the relationship between Policy and Implementation, and in assuming it is 
> a *direct* link, we have missed some crucial steps, and the agreement or 
> disagreement over who will have influence over what, and at which stage, has 
> truncated and blurred our understanding of the progression of action from 
> idea to implementation. In other words, we may have left out a few things.
> 
> I see the continuum (Maureen's Quick and Easy Continuum of Activity), in this 
> way:
> 
> PURPOSE and VISION
> tell us why an organization exists, and where it sees itself now and in the 
> future.
> (.....In order for an organization to determine what will guide the 
> development of its vision, the organization will need PRINCIPLES.)
> 
> PRINCIPLES
> are agreed-upon, adopted, basic beliefs, truths or theories that influence 
> decision and action, and represent that which is positive and desirable for 
> an organization.
> (.....In order to make decisions, which will reflect the organization's 
> PRINCIPLES, the organization needs POLICIES.)
> 
> POLICIES are written statements of sets of decisions, which are considered 
> and chosen to determine and guide present and future actions thought to be 
> desirable or necessary.
> (.....in order to enunciate, in terms of achievement and impact, the work 
> that needs to be done, and in a manner consistent with the organization's 
> POLICIES, the organization needs GOALS)
> 
> GOALS are statements of intended achievement and impact, which are consistent 
> with an organization's POLICIES
> (.....in order to achieve those GOALS, specific OBJECTIVES must be developed.)
> 
> OBJECTIVES are statements of the steps, together with indication of the 
> resources (time, money, people), required to achieve the stated GOAL(s).
> 
> IMPLEMENTATION is the stage of working on (carrying out) the OBJECTIVE by 
> using the allocated resources and plans established in the OBJECTIVE.
> 
> COMPLETION is........simply wonderful.
> 
> So......to go from Policy to Implementation, without considering the 
> dependent steps that are between them, seems to complicate our task 
> considerably, and make a successful outcome "a long shot".
> 
> If part of the purpose of our work is to illuminate the point(s) at which it 
> may be appropriate for various parties to have input and influence into the 
> decisions and actions that comprise this continuum, then we would be well 
> advised to look closely at all of the points; They are connected, and 
> influence at one point inevitable opens the door to influence at other points.
> 
> A lot goes on between Policy and Implementation, and I think we have to think 
> about that before thinking about who (which groups) might be able to provide 
> the most valuable input and influence at any or all of the stages. 
> 
> Submitted with Respect by,
> Maureen Cubberley
> 
> 
> Maureen Cubberley
> +1.705.382.3841
> 
>> On 2013-11-13, at 12:40 PM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 
>> Mauren, I'm very sorry to hear about your ankle. Please don't worry about 
>> the call, I'm sure that one of the other sub-team members is able to provide 
>> the update should you not be able to make it.
>> 
>> All, please find attached the latest version of the definitions document. Do 
>> note that this is still work in progress – as a matter of fact, several 
>> comments were submitted earlier today which the sub-team still needs to 
>> review.
>> 
>> With best regards,
>> 
>> Marika
>> 
>> From: mcubberley <mcubberley@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Wednesday 13 November 2013 18:28
>> To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Gnosis IP Law & Consulting <gnosisiplaw@xxxxxxxxx>, 
>> "gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Subject: Re: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Proposed Agenda - Next Policy & 
>> Implementation WG Meeting
>> 
>> Marika and Michael,
>> 
>> Sorry, I missed this. I broke my ankle in a rather complex way Monday 
>> afternoon .... something I really did not need right now :-/.....and have 
>> been back and forth between doctors and the hospital ever since. I have 
>> another appointment at 1pm today and plan to be home in time for the 20:00 
>> utc (3pm Eastern) meeting today, assuming there are no further complications 
>> to deal with.
>> 
>> I have not had a chance to look at the revised document, but I am sure it 
>> reflects our discussions so please go ahead and circulate it.
>> 
>> If for some reason I am unable to participate in the meeting, perhaps you 
>> two could take the lead, and I think Wolf-Ulrich would help too.
>> 
>> Sorry about this, but my schedule is at the mercy of the physicians and 
>> their not-always-helpful assistants! (Some day we must chat about Canadian 
>> health care :)
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> Maureen
>> 
>> Maureen Cubberley
>> +1.705.382.3841
>> +1.705.718.5723
>> 
>>> On 2013-11-12, at 3:18 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Michael, 
>>> 
>>> An updated version was sent to the sub-team yesterday for review and 
>>> discussion. As soon as Maureen indicates that it is ready for broader 
>>> distribution, I will of course do so.
>>> 
>>> Best regards,
>>> 
>>> Marika
>>> 
>>> From: Gnosis IP Law & Consulting <gnosisiplaw@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> Date: Monday 11 November 2013 22:48
>>> To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: "gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-policyimpl-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> Subject: Re: [gnso-policyimpl-wg] Proposed Agenda - Next Policy & 
>>> Implementation WG Meeting
>>> 
>>> Marika:
>>> 
>>> I presume you will also post the Draft Definitions to the Working Group 
>>> when the revisions are completed?
>>> 
>>> Michael R.
>>> 
>>>> On Nov 11, 2013, at 2:51 PM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Dear All,
>>>> 
>>>> Please find below the proposed agenda for the next Policy & Implementation 
>>>> Working Group meeting (Wednesday 13 November 2013).
>>>> 
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> 
>>>> Marika
>>>> 
>>>> Proposed Agenda Policy & Implementation Working Group Meeting – 13 
>>>> November 2013 (20.00 UTC)
>>>> Roll call / SOI  
>>>> Update from Work Plan Sub-Team (Michael)
>>>> Update from Definitions Sub-Team (Maureen)
>>>> Formation of sub-team 0B – next steps
>>>> Review update to GNSO Council presentation (see proposed slides attached)
>>>> Planning for BA – proposed agenda:
>>>> Introductions
>>>> Finalise / sign off on work plan
>>>> Discussion of questions (see attachment for latest version)
>>>> Next steps / confirm next meeting
>>>> 
>>>> <Updated PI WG questions 31 Oct.doc><Policy Implementation Update - 
>>>> Updated 11 November 2013.ppt>
>>> 
>> <Draft definitions - updated 11 November 2013 - 2.doc>