[governance] ICANNs CEO & President

[Sivasubramanian Muthusamy]

Hello,

The position of CEO of ICANN is halfway between a Corporate and an Electoral
appointment. If it were a position such as the office of a Senator or a
Minister, the process would attract candidates who throw themselves up for
public scrutiny for months beginning with the 'Primary' part of the process.
If it were such an absolute Public Office, there would probably be a
willingness to 'contest' or 'compete' for the office.

This position has public responsibilities but has more features of a
Corporate CEO appointment, so those qualified to offer to be candidates are
likely to insist on confidentially perhaps bordering on Secrecy. If a
serving CEO of a company SUCH AS Nokia Siemens or General Motors were to
offer to be a candidate for the ICANN position, is it likely that we would
expect them to have their names publicly thrown scrutiny in a pool of ten or
more possible candidates? In all probability such candidates might prefer to
keep their candidature unannounced until formally confirmed. Some might even
feel uncomfortable exposing their interest to a committe of five which is
too many...

It depends on what traits the Community looks for. A hundred 'political'
candidates might queue up for public scrutiny if ICANN is looking for a
political person. On the other hand it might take a million dollars in
Headhunting effort to find even one or two candidates with the right
attitude, background and a sense of purpose and this class of candidates
wouldn't like the Primary public screening, secondary hearing, campaign,
influence, caucus, final hearing, appointment, ratification, review cycle...

The community is right in its demand for transparency, but an insistence on
transparency at the initial phase of the process might be counterproductive
in the sense that it could discourage really qualified candidates who might
prefer to be quiet about their pursuits until the time comes to make a
public announcement.

A 'meet the candidates' at Sydney or elsewhere could be a good idea if it
works, if it is feasible, if it is acceptable by the candidates, but if it
can't happen, some alternate form of transparency could be thought of by the
community. Perhaps the community could ask for periodic updates from the
Committee about what it can share of  the progress of the process ?


Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
http://isocmadras.blogspot.com


2009/4/17 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <
wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

> Dear list
>
> as we all know there is a process under way to select/elect a new CEO &
> President for ICANN.
>
> My knowledge for the moment is that a special head hunting company was
> hired and a special board committee with five members (ICANN directors,
> chaird by the ICANN chair) is dealing with the issue. However there is only
> little transparency in the procress of nomination and selection so far.
>
> During the Mexico At Large Summit we called for more transparncy in ICANN
> procedures. I do not know what other members of the list are thinking but my
> understanding is that at least some transparency in the process would be
> important to build trust and institutional confidence into the future of
> ICANN. I understand very well - as a former Associated Chair of the NomCom -
> that some elements of the process has to be handled in a confidential way.
> However the CEO& President is different from an ordinary ICANN Director and
> it would be helpful for the whole community and the various constituencies
> that they are - in one way or another - informed and partly also involved in
> the process.
>
> My understanding of the timetable is that until the Sydney meeting there
> will be a shortlist and after the Sydney meeting the Board will make its
> decision.The CEO is elected by the Board.
>
> One idea to improve and enhance trust and transparency could be that during
> the forthconing Sydney meeting the shortlisted candidates are invited to
> present their views and visions on ICANNs operation and its future. They
> should be available also for a Q&A sessions to the broader ICANN community.
> The At Large Community would be the legtimite body to ask for such a publich
> hearing. It would be very consistent with what we called for in the ATLAS
> Mexico Declaration.
>
> Wolfgang
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>
> For all list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20090417/c7e02e13/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance