Shortening the time between nominee selection ad announcement
I am posting this comment that was sent to me by a colleague; it's a summary of a discussion that we recently had that could possibly provide a very effective way of drastically shortening the time between the selection of nominees and the announcement by the committee of the complete slate of candidates. As a matter of full disclosure, I have been the chair of ICANN's Nominating Committee for the last three years. "In our informal conversation after the publication of the recommendations document, we discussed the time lag between selection and announcement. Shortening this time lag reduces the window during which leaks can occur and generally improves the actual and perceived "crispness" of the whole process. One obstacle to shortening the process is that the due diligence background investigation process takes time. On first examination, the options appear to be either: 1. Conduct the due diligence process prior to announcing the selections (as is done now), which results in an inevitable lag. 2. Announce selections prior to the due diligence process ("The following candidates are selected, pending due diligence."), which runs the risk of a subsequent reversal and considerable embarrassment, both for the selectee and for ICANN. On further discussion there emerged a third option, which shifts some of the due diligence burden onto the applicant, and which uses the background investigation primarily to verify that the applicant has told the truth. 1. Document very clearly the exclusion criteria underlying the due diligence process. 2. Ask candidates, early in the process, either to remove themselves from consideration or to state that none of the (clearly documented) exclusion criteria apply to them. Make clear that misrepresentation is grounds for dismissal from the position, irrespective of when evidence of the misstatement comes to light. 3. Begin conducting the background investigations once the selections are made. 4. Announce the selections as soon as they are made (without waiting for the background investigations). 5. If the background investigation reveals that the applicant misrepresented the facts, then dismiss the selectee. Yes, that is publicly humiliating, but it should only happen to people who lied on their application. This process must have certainty, though. Much care must be devoted to wording the questionnaire so that it covers the exclusion criteria. It would be a bad thing to dismiss (and publicly humiliate) people because "bad stuff came up in their background check." You can only do it for actually lying on their application."
|