[IGFmaglist] Proposal for Improving the Evaluation System

Tue Jul 5 05:22:53 EDT 2016

Agree with the helpful input from Omar and Shita. A few reflections to add to the mix:

1)      The new formats – particularly flash sessions and BoF result in content suggestions that may be interesting and of value but if graded against IGF workshop criteria they don’t meet the requirements, particularly for diversity, which are important to the IGF programme overall.

If we offer these formats as options, however they need to be allowed into the programme without disrupting the balance and quality we seek to arbitrate in this evaluation exercise. I suggest these examples may need to be filtered and considered differently – perhaps we identify how many we could have, we could agree up to that number if those put forward meet an adapted set of criteria? We could also select for diversity among them as opposed to within them, which as we’ve all seen doesn’t work.

2)      Some proposals ended up in the workshop line up that appeared to be open forums so it would be great to filter those out ahead of the process also.

3)      While considering the future, it would be valuable to have a sense for people’s views on including submissions put forward in other languages (at least UN official) but we need a mechanism to ensure they could be reviewed by a critical mass. Knowing how many MAG members could review Spanish, French etc. could help us assess this. My personal view would be favourable towards seeking to accommodate this as it may be more inclusive for those who communicate in verbal English comfortably but feel more daunted by the rigour of a proposal in written English that will be evaluated.

Cheers, Elizabeth

Elizabeth THOMAS-RAYNAUD
International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)
Project Director, ICC Business Action to Support the Information Society (BASIS)
Senior Policy Executive, Digital Economy

From: Igfmaglist [mailto:igfmaglist-bounces at intgovforum.org] On Behalf Of Shita Laksmi
Sent: 05 July 2016 00:54
To: Omar Mansoor Ansari
Cc: IGF Maglist
Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] Proposal for Improving the Evaluation System

+1 for this. Thank you, Omar.

It would be also useful to know:
1. The flexibility of Host Country on how they accepting many types of workshop format in the sitting/room setting. We gave proposers a lot of format choices (flash, panel, debate, BoF, arm-chair, fish bowl, mix between all types), therefore , flexibility of room setting is also important to know. At least during our meeting in New York.
2. There are many flash sessions requested, therefore the number of workshop can be more than usual.

Thank you.
Shita

--
Shita Laksmi
Program Development Manager
OPEN | Transparency and Accountability - Freedom of Expression

Hivos Regional Office Southeast Asia
Jl. Kemang Selatan XII/No. 1 Jakarta Selatan 12560, Indonesia, Tel. +62-21 78837577/ 7892489, Fax. +62-21 7808115
E-mail: slaksmi at hivos.org<mailto:slaksmi at hivos.org>, twitter: @slaksmi, skype: slaksmi, www.hivos.org<http://www.hivos.org>

________________________________
From: "Omar Mansoor Ansari" <omar.m.ansari at gmail.com>
To: "IGF Maglist" <Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 5, 2016 3:23:47 AM
Subject: [IGFmaglist] Proposal for Improving the Evaluation System

Dear all,
While evaluating the workshop proposals I came across following issues:

1. Proposer is not from a developing world, but flagged as a "developing country."
2. Proposer is not a first timer, but flagged as "new proposer."
3. As Renata pointed out as well, there was no gender balance in some panels, yet the proposal was submitted for a MAG review. If this is mandatory, then it should be sorted out before a proposal is submitted to MAG for review.  Same goes with diversity in terms of stakeholder and geography.

I'd like to propose following solutions for the future:

If we can improve the system to be able to validate if proposers are first timer, from a developing country, or if they have submitted their report for previous workshop or not-- this can be done through linking databases. Or through having the secretariat check proposals, for these, first to make sure the information is correct.

For the gender, stakeholder, geography, we also need the system to be able to validate entries. Also, if the speaker list on the main proposal page can display participant name, gender, stockholder group, region etc, with the bio being displayed as a popup or dropdown when clicked, would make it convenient for the evaluators to see details. I had to read individual bios to find out gender, stakeholder groups and other details for some of the proposals.

Regards,
Omar

_______________________________________________
Igfmaglist mailing list
Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org<mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>
http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org/attachments/20160705/fbdaaf57/attachment.htm>