[IGFmaglist] FInal weiights assigned to each criteria in the scoring process

[Khaled Koubaa]

Hi Roberto and all,

First, thank you, Roberto and WS evaluating WG on this proposal.

One question ( I am sorry if it has been already answered ): Are we
publishing the scoring weights to the public?

One suggestion: Should we keep the "Weight" and the scoring system stable
for a few years to ensure continuity and allow the community to better
prepare before each year's forum. We could do a review of the system after
three years.

Khaled

Khaled Koubaa

Twitter : @koubaak <https://twitter.com/koubaak>

LinkedIn : linkedin.com/in/koubaak/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/koubaak/>


On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 5:58 PM Roberto Zambrana <rzambrana at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Dear Ryszard,
>
> Diversity criteria is a very important one, and the fact that the weight
> is lower is related to a different reason. During the past years, most of
> the proposals (if not all), include some way or another, diversity
> approach. So, for the scoring process, this criteria will not provide a
> particular influence to change the overall score. In other words, there is
> a good chance that most proposals will score high (4, 5) regarding this
> criteria, but other criteria, such as  Hybrid Organisation Strategy, will
> have varied scoring for sure, and that criteria, among others, will provide
> the definitive difference between one proposal compared to another.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Roberto Zambrana
>
> El jue, 19 may 2022 a las 9:44, Ryszard Hordynski (<
> ryszard.hordynski at huawei.com>) escribió:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> Shouldn't diversity be weighting a bit higher?
>>
>> I would lower first 2 criterias since they are referring to pretty much
>> the same area
>>
>> Just a suggestion
>>
>> Regards
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Ryszard Hordynski
>> Senior Director, Strategy and Communications
>> M: +48-501199931
>> E: ryszard.hordynski at huawei.com
>>
>>
>> *From:*Roberto Zambrana <rzambrana at gmail.com>
>> *To:*MAG-public <igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>;Luis Bobo <
>> luis.bobogarcia at un.org>
>> *Date:*2022-05-19 15:41:29
>> *Subject:*[IGFmaglist] FInal weiights assigned to each criteria in the
>> scoring process
>>
>> Dear Paul and dear fellow MAG members,
>>
>> We've just finished our last WS evaluation WG meeting and we reviewed and
>> approved the weight distribution for each criteria, to be considered in the
>> scoring platform that we will be using for the individual evaluation
>> after June 3rd (deadline for submitting proposals).
>>
>> Please @Luis Bobo <luis.bobogarcia at un.org>, kindly include this weight
>> distribution in the scoring platform.
>>
>> As suggested, with Eleonora's support, we will work on the SCORING
>> GUIDELINES that will be published, together with the evaluation form.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Pease Oliver Amuge
>> Roberto Zambrana
>> WS Evaluation Process WG Co-facilitators
>>
>>
>> Criterion
>>
>> Weight
>>
>> Proposed Topic – its relevance to Internet Governance and proper
>> alignment with one of the 5 themes
>>
>> 25%
>>
>> Workshop Content – including its clear focus on one of the 5 selected
>> themes
>>
>> 25%
>>
>> Policy Question(s) – including whether they relate closely to the
>> proposed topic
>>
>> 15%
>>
>> Hybrid Organisation Strategy – whether the proposal lays out an
>> effective strategy for hybrid and interactive engagement and takes the
>> hybrid nature of the meeting into account in all planning aspects
>>
>> 25%
>>
>> Diversity – along different vectors of diversity (gender, region,
>> stakeholder group, perspective, taking into account marginalized groups)
>>
>> 10%
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
> Igfmaglist mailing list
> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
> To unsubscribe or manage your options please go to
> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org/attachments/20220524/3943c213/attachment.htm>