Re: [gnso-ppsc-wg] The importance of Liasions in new structures

["Alexei Sozonov" <sozon@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear all,

looks like an important leverage point: liaison is communication 
facilitator, and often  it's a key issue.
If we think from the point that in any WG level, if one just can't speak 
like Tolstoy in English but do has something to say,
liaison and the way Avri described its role for "specific reasons for each 
type of liaison varies with the
group", might be the answer.

AlexeiSozonov


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Avri Doria" <avri@xxxxxxx>
To: <gnso-ppsc-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, May 08, 2009 8:42 AM
Subject: [gnso-ppsc-wg] The importance of Liasions in new structures


> Hi,
>
> One of the topics that has been on my mind lately is the importance of
> creating guideline liaison roles and of having good people fill those
> roles.
>
> And I mean all sorts of liaisons:
>
> - Between the council and any WG, especially PDP working groups
> - Between council and board
> - between council and ccNSO
> - between council and ACs
> ...
>
> While the specific reasons for each type of liaison varies with the
> group, some of the general reasons are:
>
> - can foster greater understanding of the actions and context of actions
> - allows for early view of what is going on
> - allows for early input on issues, so that there are fewer surprises at
> the end
> - avoids having policy staff as the sole communication path between
> ICANN entities
>
>
> In terms of Council and WG, the task of this committee, I think it is
> important part of the management relationship especially in PDPs, and
> signals that a WG is not cast into the wind to come back when it is
> done.  It makes sure that there is someone at every council meeting who
> can speak on the status of the group (in additions to the policy staff
> support person) and someone who can intervene for the group when it need
> charter clarification or change.
>
>
> While the liaison is mentioned, I think we need to develop the notion of
> the role of liaisons.  In the case of the PDP the role should be well
> defined and somewhat constant across all PDP WGs.  In terms of other WG,
> i.e. those formed on some policy issue but not as part of execution  of
> a PDP process, more flexibility might be ok.
>
> I wonder whether it might be useful to create a guidance document on
> liaisons.
>
> (Note: when defining something as guidance instead of rules, i mean that
> in guidance one should be required to document it when they decide to do
> something different.  And in the case of WGs, i think of all of the work
> we are doing as guidance not rules, where a PDP WG has a higher
> threshold on following the guidance more strictly.  I am not sure if my
> understanding is in line with the group or not.  but i am sure that KB
> will tell me where i err.)
>
>
>
> a.