Content Comparison

Background

One of the concepts engineered into the original WG Guidelines framework was that Chartering Organizations would ask each WG to perform a self-assessment at the end of its life-cycle. The idea was to promote a critical examination of the processes/procedures such that the feedback could be incorporated into a continuous improvement of the WG Guidelines. In current version of the WG Guidelines (ANNEX 1 of the GOP), vestiges of the self-assessment concept remain present in the document. In particular, please see the following sections:

Section 5.0 Products & Outputs

The products and outputs of a Working Group may be prescribed by the Charter such as a report, recommendations, guidelines, self-assessment or defined by the process under which the WG operates (e.g., Policy Development Process).

• Self-Assessment Template (TBD)

6.2 Working Group Charter Template

6.2.4.4 Closure and Working Group Self-Assessment

This section of the Charter should describe any instructions for WG final closure including any feedback and/or self-assessment that is requested by the Chartering organization. This section might also indicate if there is any specific format, template, or prescribed manner in which the feedback is to be provided.

It appears as though no Chartering Organization has yet asked a WG to generate a self-assessment. Perhaps one reason is that the original template work was never completed.

In its meeting on 4 June 2013, the SCI approved the development of a draft “WG Self-Assessment" instrument, which would be incorporated into the WG Guidelines (as was originally intended) and completed by all WGs (individually and/or collectively) as part of their closure processes. Advantages to this approach include:

1. Feedback would come from actual and recent WG participants (targeted audience).
2. The information collected should be fresh given that the group recently completed its work (salience).
3. If the self-assessment template is reviewed (Chair checklist item?) with team members the start of deliberations (revealing questions that will be asked at the end) and something occurs that uncovers a gap or error in the guidelines, the WG could note it for later inclusion in the self-assessment.
4. Unlike a static survey, incorporating a self-assessment instrument into each WG’s process provides a dynamic catalyst for continuous improvement.
5. If the Chartering Organization (e.g., GNSO Council) determines, based upon feedback from one or more WG self-assessments, that the guidelines (or even the self-assessment template itself) need to be amended for any reason, it can direct Staff or another community team to address any deficiencies or issues uncovered.

In terms of broad learning objectives, a self-assessment should attempt to assess the effectiveness of:

1. Support Infrastructure … charter, procedures, tools/templates, and mechanics supporting the WG’s operations;
2. WG Processes/Operations … leadership, norms, decision-making (consensus), and outputs.

Any resulting instrument or template should be designed so that it is (a) simple/straightforward to complete and (b) respectful of respondents’ time (length). 

The remaining structure of this Wiki space will address specific design/development considerations and is organized as follows: