<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [gnso-ppsc-pdp] Recommendation #45: WG Self-Assessment
- To: "Diaz,Paul" <pdiaz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gnso-ppsc-pdp] Recommendation #45: WG Self-Assessment
- From: "James M. Bladel" <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 08:20:13 -0700
<html><body><span style="font-family:Arial; color:#000000;
font-size:10pt;"><div>This is a good addition. I support Paul's
edits.</div><div><br></div><div>J.</div><div><br></div>
<blockquote id="replyBlockquote" webmail="1" style="border-left: 2px solid
blue; margin-left: 8px; padding-left: 8px; font-size: 10pt; color: black;
font-family: verdana;">
<div id="wmQuoteWrapper">
-------- Original Message --------<br>
Subject: RE: [gnso-ppsc-pdp] Recommendation #45: WG Self-Assessment<br>
From: "Diaz, Paul" <<a
href="mailto:pdiaz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>pdiaz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx</a>><br>
Date: Fri, February 11, 2011 8:15 am<br>
To: "James M. Bladel" <<a
href="mailto:jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx";>jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx</a>>, "PPSC
List "<br>
<<a href="mailto:Gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx";>Gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx</a>><br>
<br>
<br>
I think this captures the WT's positions very well. I suggest adding<br>
another clause to the final sentence that reflects the WT's ambiguity<br>
re: who should carry out the assessment (Chair, Liaison and/or WG<br>
participants). That's something that will need to be addressed, or else<br>
we risk lopsided assessments that won't really help the community learn<br>
from the particular experience. <br>
<br>
Perhaps the recommendation could look something like this:<br>
<br>
The PDP Work Team notes that several documents, including the PPSC-WG WT<br>
and the WG Guidelines, reference a "Working Group Self-Assessment,"<br>
which all WGs are encouraged to conduct. The Work Team believes that<br>
this could be a valuable exercise, and encourages PDP WGs to complete a<br>
candid and objective self-assessment at the conclusion of their work.<br>
However, the Work Team also notes that there is no standard or template<br>
for such an assessment, nor clear guidance on who (Chair, Liaison and/or<br>
all WG participants) should conduct the assessment, and recommends that<br>
these guidelines be developed.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: <a
href="mailto:owner-gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx";>owner-gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx</a><br>
[<a
href="mailto:owner-gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx";>mailto:owner-gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx</a>]
On Behalf Of James M. Bladel<br>
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 1:28 AM<br>
To: PPSC List <br>
Subject: [gnso-ppsc-pdp] Recommendation #45: WG Self-Assessment<br>
<br>
<br>
Team:<br>
<br>
During today's call, Marika reminded me that I was on the hook to<br>
propose some language for Recommendation #45. This is regarding the<br>
idea of a post-PDP "Self-Assessment" by the PDP-WG, that would be<br>
submitted to the GNSO Council at the conclusion of their work.<br>
<br>
Reviewing the transcript, there seems to be some agreement on:<br>
<br>
* The self-assessment is currently referenced in the PDP-WT report, and<br>
the WG Guidelines<br>
* The self-assessment being optional, rather than required<br>
* There is currently no standard or template for the self-assessment<br>
* WGs should avoid turning this in to a perfunctory<br>
"self-congratulatory" exercise, <br>
* WGs should avoid using the self-assessment to re-cap the discussions,<br>
debates or material positions of the PDP.<br>
<br>
There was no clear agreement (or disagreement, for that matter) on<br>
whether this should be carried out by the Chair and/or Liaison, or the<br>
WG membership as a whole.<br>
<br>
<br>
PROPOSED LANGUAGE:<br>
The PDP Work Team notes that several documents, including the PPSC-WG WT<br>
and the WG Guidelines, reference a "Working Group Self-Assessment,"<br>
which all WGs are encouraged to conduct. The Work Team believes that<br>
this could be a valuable exercise, and encourages PDP WGs to complete a<br>
candid and objective self-assessment at the conclusion of their work. <br>
However, the Work Team also notes that there is no standard or template<br>
for this assessment, and recommends that this be developed.<br>
<br>
Thoughts? Comments? Criticism?<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Thanks--<br>
<br>
J.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote></span></body></html>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|