Quicksearch
Calendar
|
February '12 | |||||
| Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat | Sun |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | ||||
Is ICANN in danger of overload? Yes!
Monday, August 30. 2010
Just read a post on the ICANN Blog entitled "is ICANN handling too many policy issues?". The post is a response by ICANN VP of Policy Development David Olive to an article published in another blog and asking that very question.
David joined ICANN earlier this year (February) to manage its policy department. As Vice Chair of the GNSO I was fortunate to work with him almost from the get-go while he took over from previous VP Policy Denise Michel (who is now advisor to the ICANN CEO). David is an instantly likeable guy: soft-spoken yet resolute, mild-mannered and extremely easy to get on with, he has brought a new energy to ICANN's policy team.
Now you guessed it, if I start off by being so nice about David it's because I'm about to criticise him 
. Well actually, not so much criticise as simply disagree with his latest post. David argues that ICANN isn't taking on too much policy work because a) everyone's issues are important and ICANN could not say "yes" to one and refuse another and b) the work isn't prioritised so it looks like it's all over the place when it actually isn't.
I think in making those arguments, David is overlooking one important aspect that has worried me for sometime: volunteer burnout. As David rightly states "three Supporting Organizations and a number of Advisory Committees can bring policy issues before the community." That's right, and that whole model which is at the very core of ICANN depends on volunteers inside those SOs and ACs finding the time, energy and will to deal with policy development for ICANN on top of their day jobs/real lives/personal situations and whatever else might get in the way of them giving ICANN their time/professional or personal experience/knowledge.
As a volunteer member of one of those organisations, the GNSO, I don't think this is viable in the long run. The problem is, I just don't have a better alternative to suggest than the current multi stakeholder ICANN model which creates a unique environment where individuals, organisations, entrepreneurs or academics can sit in the same room as governments and talk policy together.
One solution, as David rightly alludes to, is prioritisation of the many tasks at hand. But this is proving difficult. The GNSO has just worked for 6 month on a model to prioritise its tasks but the result has proven so complex and unwieldy that it might end up simply being dropped!
So although I don't agree that ICANN isn't in danger of taking on too much and overloading the very communities that make it such a diverse and dynamic organisation, I don't have an alternative at this stage.
If you have any ideas, answers on a postcard addressed to Marina Del Rey, California…
Read David Olive's post here.
