Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Discussion of Financial criteria and how to set them

[Andrew Mack <amack@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Add my voice to support for Olivier's position and Alain's.

My only concern is one mentioned by Alan and others earlier -- that we focus
on improving the possibility for support for as many applicants as possible
(keeping up the pressure for various different kinds of support, including
pricing relief, in kind etc.) so that our process create as little
competition as possible between candidates that would qualify.


On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Alain Berranger
<alain.berranger@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:

> So Olivier, if I understand well, there would be a "pass" mark or "a
> minimum threshold" score based on "objective" criteria... Only those
> applications reaching that level, would be subject to further qualitative
> assessments. A two-step process...., no?
>
> IMHO, this is an established procedure in competitive application processes
> used by granting agencies and foundations when receiving numerous
> applications for subsidies. When I was at IDRC and responsible for a Private
> Sector Development Research Program of $4 million- we used that methodology
> when IDRC/TrustAfrica, in partnership, made well over $2 million of research
> grants to 70 research teams/African organizations in the Investment Climate
> and Business Environment ICBE Research Fund - see
> http://trustafrica.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=302&Itemid=157&lang=en
>  .
>
> This is a justified and smart process because there are limited ICANN
> resources for this and we will not be able to subsidize every "worthy"
> applicants but in reality onlt the best of all "worthy" applications, within
> the constraint of our budget.
>
> Alain
>
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@xxxxxxx>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 26/07/2011 10:58, tijani.benjemaa@xxxxxxxx wrote :
>>
>> I totally agree with you that objective criteria are not sufficient, and
>> that a case by case inquiry should be undertaken to verify the real need of
>> the applicant and prevent gaming. But the absence of objective criteria will
>> lead to the totally subjective judgment with all kind of complaisance. I
>> think we must avoid both gaming and complaisance, and this is possible if we
>> combine objective criteria and specific inquiry for each applicant.
>>
>>
>> I expressed my thoughts on that on the Friday conference call. In case
>> this was misunderstood, I am *not against* objective criteria. I am against
>> *only* using objective criteria.
>> A mix of objective criteria and "deeper diving" with evaluation on a case
>> by case basis is IMHO the correct way to go. Perhaps the objective criteria
>> scoring would already eliminate a first layer of applications - those not
>> scoring very low on the criteria.
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Olivier
>>
>> --
>> Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhDhttp://www.gih.com/ocl.html
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
> http://www.jumo.com/ict4dk
> Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business, www.schulich.yorku.ca
> Vice-Chair, GKP Foundation, www.globalknowledgepartnership.org
> Vice Chair, Canadian Foundation for the Americas - www.focal.ca
> O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
> Skype: alain.berranger
>
>


-- 
*
                                                       *

***Andrew A. Mack
**Principal
*AMGlobal Consulting

+1-202-642-6429  amack@xxxxxxxxxxxx
2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW  First Floor
Washington, DC 20036
www.amglobal.com