You’ll have to excuse my prolonged absence – I’ve been taking some time to have a baby!  His name is Harry and has grown from a tiny, hungry newborn (left) to a whopping, active three month old baby (right).  He’s now so busy trying to eat his toes, grab the cat’s tail and sit upright, that I have much more time to update my blog again.

Luckily, I have been able to continue my Nominet NED work over the last few months!  We’ve been very busy with consultations out on the PAB and two character .uk names.  You can read the responses here.  We’re also welcoming a new chair (Baroness Rennie Fritchie DBE) and independent Non Executive Director (Piers White MBE) to the Board, which is very exciting!  I’m very much looking forward to working with them both.  You can read more about the new appointments here.  The Nominet 2010 Non Executive Director elections are currently open – you can find out more here and if you’re a Nominet Member, please use your vote!

I’ll be at ICANN from Sunday to Monday so hope to catch up with lots of familiar friends and new faces there!

Nora

For the past few months, the PAB (of which I am an elected member) has been conducting a self-evaluation and this week, we published our conclusions. We have all agreed that we need to optimize a few things about the way we work and, more than that, we need to increase the participation of a broader range of people with an interest in .uk matters.  I’d love to hear your thoughts on all this, so have a read of our plans and let me know what you think.

Why the PAB needs to change…

The Internet is constantly throwing out issues and new problems as it evolves, and Nominet – as one of the largest registries in the world – needs to constantly develop a range of policies to deal with such issues.  In order to assist this policy development, in 1999 the Policy Advisory Body – made up of a range of member representatives and other stakeholders – was created to discuss topical issues and give recommendations to Nominet’s board.

What worked well in the early days of the UK’s internet, has however been struggling to cope with the impact of the massive growth of .uk and the associated issues this raises. The issues that are thrown up these days affect more people, need faster solutions, and would benefit from greater expertise than was originally envisaged. Our small group of PAB members has been trying to adequately discuss these often specialist topics by pulling in views and expertise from outside to complement the competencies around the table.  However, a lack of visibility, a cumbersome stakeholder input mechanism and a fixed format made it difficult to find the best and most informed solutions. At the end of last year, we finalized some exciting new ways to work to enable more voices and constituencies to be heard.

Extending our reach

Instead of the closed group of up to 18 meeting in person every few months, we have decided to dramatically extend the process and put you – the Internet user – at the heart of Nominet’s policy process.

The policy process will become issue-led and stakeholder focussed open to all to participate in through open forum meetings and issues based discussion groups.  To facilitate such an open process and ensure it works we need new structures to support it.  One of these new structures is  a Standing Committee that helps draw together those most interested in a particular issue. The Standing Committee will, crucially, support, rather than run, a series of channels for gathering information, holding discussions on that information in different formats, and developing ideas and solutions.

The stakeholder process will follow six clear steps, the first of which is identifying and approaching relevant people that are likely to have an  interest in, or relevant to, the topic under discussion.

The issue itself will then be clearly identified, groups (as relevant) set up, public discussions and consultations held, and then the results analyzed before being passed onto the Board for its consideration and review.

What does this mean for you?

It means that if you have an interest in Nominet issues, domain issues, or related Internet issues, you will be able to become a part of the group itself that decides the best way forward.

The new Standing Committee, will act as a guide, assisting in communication, providing consistency and ensuring that the process isn’t abused. And a support team from Nominet will help different groups with logistics and materials so their work can progress effectively.

This approach will, we hope, enable Nominet to come up with better, more broadly considered, effective solutions and to call on a breadth of experience that any committee of 18 could never have. Most importantly, we want to remove barriers to participation and give you a central stake in policy development of the .uk name space addressing issues that affect us all. The PAB’s original function, I believe, was to add value to Nominet’s policy process – i.e. to reach beyond consultations, mailing lists and Nominet outreach events and to consider broad policy issues from the viewpoint of all member sectors – especially those not traditionally reached by the core outreach initiatives.  The proposed changes will allow us to return to the original intent of the PAB by making it easier for you to be involved, in issues that interest you, in a format that works for you, in a framework that supports and enables you, the .uk stakeholder, to help shape the future of .uk

If you are interested in the formal report from the PAB on this issue, please view the report at: http://www.nominet.org.uk/digitalAssets/39402_DraftPABmeetingreport_november2009.pdf

Get involved

If you have questions, or want to know more, just add a comment to this post or contact me directly – as ever, would be delighted to hear from you!

Today, I attended the Parliament and Internet conference and came away feeling inspired and enlightened.  I gained an understanding of why the preservation of self-regulation in the Internet space is so important.  I learned about why and how the IGF was originally established and heard about how this lead to the UK IGF.  I began to truly appreciate why the IGF and its premise of learning from sucess, sharing ideas and debating solutions internationally is a good thing; that not all organizations have to deal in the business of decisions.

The event was very valuable for me, in learning from the successes of parliamentarian and industry debate on the subject of “the Internet”.  I am beginning to more fully appreciate the balance between local priorities, governance and membership issues and the public purpose role of Nominet.  I begin to see how it all fits together.  I believe that we all can continue to learn from success ; as a registry and as its Members, as Internet users and online businesses, by engaging as UK stakeholders in the UK IGF to help shape the future of the Internet and the future of Internet governance.

Some quotes from today’s conference:

Ed Richards (Ofcom) talked about how our traditional “creaking regulatory architecture” is straining under the weight of providing a basis for entirely new and fast moving technologies.  He commented on how this will have to change as we move “from the broadcast era to the Internet age”.

Martha Lane Fox (Digital Inclusion Champion) spoke about Internet technology as a facilitator and the social and economic imperatives for digital inclusion.  She introduced us to the idea of an “intelligent hub” in encouraging peer to peer mentoring, boosting existing schemes and raising awareness.  She emphasized that affordability and accessibility are fundamental to digital inclusion and that the space continues to develop rapidly so we must be prepared strategically for “game changing technology”.

The Rt. Hon. Stephen Timms (MP) now leads the Digital Britain strategy and spoke about minimums such as 2MB broadband as well as his concerns about behavioural advertising.  He also confirmed that the 50p per month tax on landlines would go ahead as part of the implementation of the Digital Britain strategy.

You can read more about the Parliament and Internet Conference here.

Thought I’d recommence blogging here today with a roundup of some newly released stats from the .ie registry and the .org registry.

Key numbers include:

• Registrations for .ORG grew 11%, up to 7.69 million total registrations in the first half of 2009, compared to a year ago
• This growth rate outpaces other well known Top Level Domains (TLDs) such as .com and .net
• The UK is number two in .ORG’s top ten markets
  
• A total of 9,398 .IE domains were registered in Q3, up 15% on the same period last year
• In the first nine months of the year, new registrations of .IE at 28,522 are up by over 7% compared to the first nine months of 2008
• The growth in .IE registrations is from sole traders or limited companies, states the IEDR report, who account for, the majority (83%) of registrations in Q3

I’ll be back on October 14th – let me know if there are news/topics/issues you’d like me to discuss!

Best wishes,

Nora

Many thanks to all those who voted for me and for your congratulations – they are much appreciated!  I’m delighted to have won a seat!  The candidates were very strong this year and I think it was a very close call.  Congratulations to Clive Grace and to Jonathan Robinson – I’m really looking forward to working together with them and the other Board Members during this exciting time in Nominet’s development.

Best wishes,

Nora

Off to Nominet’s AGM today and to the stakeholder meeting afterwards – hope to see some of you there.  Will update later.  In other news – domain prices on the secondary market are on the increase; first green shoots?  Read more here!

Best wishes,

Nora

Am so glad the heatwave appears to be over – back to normality!  Don’t think I’m cut out for tropical climes…

Busy day today – just popped on to update on last night.  The Nominet Best Practice Awards event held yesterday evening in London was great!  It was a really valuable opportunity to meet .uk stakeholders with whom I would otherwise have little contact.  The diversity of attendees was remarkable and it was great to see success in areas which so often go overlooked, get recognized in such a meaningful way by Nominet.  The venue was of course, wonderful – I almost gave myself neckstrain looking at the beautiful ceiling at Banqueting hall!  Congratulations to all who participated and of course, special thanks to the Nominet team who did a marvellous job in hosting a very successful evening!

Best wishes,

Nora

Thursday’s my favourite day of the week – Monday is safely but a memory and the whole day seems longer with anticipation of Friday!  As a PAB Member, I’m attending the Nominet Best Practice Event this evening in London – should be a good opportunity to catch up with some of the much-discussed “normal people” and wider stakeholders of .uk – including policy makers, government body representatives, charities, educational agencies and even a few registrars.  Hope to see a few of you there?

I was chatting to some Members yesterday and am keen to learn what YOU would like to see from Non Exec Directors at Nominet?  What attributes and skills other than the necessary ones do you see as important in making your choice? Which of the criteria from the job description do you find “a must” in a Nominet NED?  What aspects of a candidate’s statement do you consider most important in deciding your vote?  Is your voting issues-based?  Or personal?  Or based on your evaluation of the candidate’s ability to do the job and fulfill the criteria outlined in the NED job spec?

Would love to hear your views!  As always, call/email or comment here – would be good to hear from you!

Yesterday, I posted a bit “on-list” about my views on the results of the Nominet governance review so thought I’d include them here too.  I’ll update later with more – am working on some PAB stuff this morning and then have a few meetings; hope to be back online by early evening.
For me, the published results of Prof. Garratt’s Nominet governance review, while not surprising, have given us a valuable opportunity to hone in on some of the fundamental issues, (often bitter sources of contention!) which have seen Nominet and its Membership put a very difficult year behind it.  I believe that the review presents us with the potential to move forward with a new era of Nominet and .uk.  I think that the governance review is a really exciting opportunity for Nominet’s Membership to get involved in shaping the future of .uk and its registry, which for most Members, I’m sure, is something that we are committed to doing in a positive and constructive way.  Incidentally, for any Members reading this who were unable to attend a consultation event, or who have not yet completed the online questionnaire on Nominet’s homepage – I would really urge you to do so and “have your say”!

As to whether I support the proposed changes in the Garratt review -
The majority of them, yes.  And those that do not immediately fill me personally with delight, would be subjects for further discussion and analysis, with the Membership and if elected, with my Board colleagues.  Whether a NED agrees or disagrees with policy proposals, I feel it is imperative that the issue is broached and managed in a constructive way and the Director is able to put aside personal feelings to find a path that best fits the organization.  I feel that change is inevitable – the .uk landscape, the international domain name market, Nominet and its Membership have all changed dramatically since the organization’s inception.  Some Members are struggling with the proposed changes, and maybe some even with the concept of change itself at Nominet, while I get the impression that others are rearing to embrace the development or extension of Nominet’s remit.  Finding a balance in progress would be for me, as a candidate in this election, a priority and as a Non Exec, I would strive to manage that progress in a constructive way – channelling broad-spectrum Membership feedback to the Executive, providing specialist insight where required and working with the Board to implement viable solutions, with the overriding goal of the preservation of the self-regulating status of the space.

As ever, if you’d like to discuss further/have any questions, please do give me a call or drop me a line!

Best wishes and have a good Tuesday!

Nora

When I work with Pilotlight as part of a consultancy group for UK charities, one of the first and most challenging tasks we undertake with an organization is the re-evaluation of its mission and vision.  Very often, these may have been written when the charity first was founded and may not have changed since!  As a consultant, I encourage organizations to re-evaluate these on an annual basis to reflect the realities of the evolving charity, its aims and changing trends in donor activity and funding allocation.  We just completed the first step of this process with a charity the week before last, and it got me thinking….

Does Nominet’s vision and mission provide clear insight into its objectives and how it plans to achieve them?

Its vision is a “world where the Internet is a trusted space, which everyone can be a part of and has a positive impact…” while its mission is “to make a positive difference to UK Internet users and to shape the development of the Internet”.  That seems quite open-ended and contrasts with some of the other ccTLD registries.  For example, DENIC identifies themselves as “the central registry for all domains under the Top Level Domain .de” and defines its responsibility as “the operation and the technical reliability of an important resource of the German Internet.   As one Member said to me earlier this month:

“With other registries, you know where you are – they manage the TLD, that’s it.  With Nominet, you never know quite where it ends…”

By positioning itself at the “heart” of the Internet in the UK, Nominet is identifiable by many as the go-to agency for all things “e-“.  Judging by parts of the Digital Britain report, the recent Nominet Governance Review, the BERR representative’s address at last year’s Nominet Registrar Day and the constant presence of broad-spectrum issues on for example, the PAB’s agenda, this certainly seems to be the case for Government and for Enterprise bodies.  However, the recent study I commented upon a few weeks ago seems to indicate that for everyone else, for wider stakeholders outside Government and for the average registrant – their registrar is at the “heart” of their experience of online.

As I’ve written before, my view is that Nominet does substantial work with, and uses a lot of resources in, engaging with global entities such as IGF, ICANN and IANA.  This work is vital and while I believe that broad-spectrum topics such as phishing and e-crime should continue to be addressed by Nominet, and cooperation with international policy drivers must continue, I believe that focus should also be placed on issues relating to Nominet’s CORE BUSINESS – i.e. continuing to function as a stable upstream provider for its Members.  I think a bit more clarity and purpose in its mission and vision could help here – perhaps it would be valuable to include boundaries to its remit or detail in its overriding objectives?

Ultimately, I think a vision and mission should explain WHAT the organization’s goal is, and HOW they’re going to achieve it.  Looking at Nominet’s “about us” section, I feel that some additional detail might be helpful in moving forward.  I know many people are skeptical about “visions and mission” but I think words can be pretty powerful and in my experience of working with NFP organizations, I have seen relatively small changes to their mission statement reap wide rewards in terms of clarity, scope and remit.

I believe that by doing so, Nominet could effectively ensure that on top of its responsibilities as a registry, it is not lumbered with the dubious accolade of People’s Choice for policing the web.  By setting limits to its objectives,  providing clarity in how it plans to reach them and evaluating/updating them regularly, Nominet could, in my opinion, strenthen its position as a distinct, respected and impartial voice in shaping the future of .uk.  As Einstein once said, “once we accept our limits, we go beyond them”.

With the dawn of Digital Britain, I think it’s important that Nominet define its role more clearly, communicate its responsibilities more openly and provide guidelines as to its role in the UK’s online! future  What do you think?  What do you think Nominet’s role in Digital Britain should be?  What should Nominet NOT do?  Should they limit themselves to being “just” a registry?  Or embrace the wider responsibilities of managing a key piece of UK digital infrastructure?  As ever, would be delighted to hear from you!

Best wishes,

Nora