ICANN Organizational Reviews
17 August 2009
As part of ICANN's ongoing commitment to its evolution and improvement, the Board approved a comprehensive plan for organizational reviews of ICANN's structures, as well as of the Board.
The following reviews are currently underway:
- Nominating Committee
- DNS Root Server System Advisory Committee (RSSAC)
- Board of Directors
- Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC)
Reviews of the following entities will commence in the near future:
- Country Code Names Supporting Organization (ccNSO)
- Address Supporting Organization (ASO)
The following reviews were completed:
- The independent review of the GNSO was completed and a set of improvement recommendations was adopted by the Board in June 2008. The process of implementing these recommendations is presently ongoing, and a public web portal has been created as a central resource for documents related to the GNSO improvements program.
- The review of the ALAC was completed in June 2009 with the issuing of the final report of the ALAC review Working Group, which was approved by the SIC and received by the Board. Under request of the Board, further analysis is presently ongoing to allow the Board to decide on the recommendation to include two voting Board Directors in representation of the At-Large community. All the other recommendations issued in the final WG report are moved to the implementation phase, and initial work is presently ongoing. Further information can be found on the (archived) webpage of the ALAC review.
Organizational reviews are part of ICANN's program of continuous improvement and are intended to ensure an independent examination of the role and operation of key structures of ICANN.
The process of organizational review includes an assessment of the structure under review, conducted by an external and independent consultant, under guidance from the Board's Structural Improvements Committee (SIC), and with the opportunity for public comments on findings and proposed improvements. After consolidation of comments, the SIC considers the need for potential improvements and prepares recommendations for public comment, and Board approval.
As specified in Article IV, Section 4 of ICANN's Bylaws, the “goal of the review, to be undertaken pursuant to such criteria and standards as the Board shall direct, shall be to determine (i) whether that organization has a continuing purpose in the ICANN structure, and (ii) if so, whether any change in structure or operations is desirable to improve its effectiveness.” The results of these reviews shall be posted for public review and comment, and shall be considered by the Board not later than its second scheduled meeting after being posted for 30 days. The consideration by the Board includes the ability to revise the structure or operation of the parts of ICANN being reviewed by a two-thirds vote of all members of the Board.
Under its Charter, the Structural Improvements Committee of the Board has furthermore the duty of 'Reviewing, and suggesting changes as warranted to, ICANN's policies and processes governing organizational review'.
In this role, and taking stock from the lessons learned in the recent past, the Structural Improvements Committee undertook an analysis of the processes, timeline and methodology of the Organizational Review activity, which is crucial for the organizational improvement of ICANN. Based on this analysis, the Structural Improvements Committee presented for public comments its proposals for a systematization of the OR processes [PDF, 673K], which was then adopted by the Board.
The paper analyses –for each of the phases making up the Organizational Review processes- the opportunities in revising the phases, their objectives, the lessons learnt, and concrete measures for their systematization. It includes an Executive Summary allowing a high-level appreciation of the objectives of the proposed systematization of OR processes.
The adoption of the proposed processes since the present phases of the first round of ORs will contribute to enhance accountability and transparency of organizational reviews, to increase consultation with the communities under review, and to streamline key phases of the processes.