[KI-LC] Types of Group Output
paulmadsen at rogers.com
Tue Sep 8 07:11:06 PDT 2009
Thanks for the overview Trent.
Other than the voting process & resultant 'branding' implications, is
there a difference between report & recommendation in the nature of
their allowed content?
J. Trent Adams wrote:
> All -
> It's exciting that so many groups are actively working. As such, there
> is already interest in the process of moving the final output from the
> groups out into the world. I've put together a couple notes that should
> help provide some guidance.
> The KI rules provide for two output types:
> 1. Report
> 2. Recommendation
> In short, a Report is a general document that's officially published by
> the WG/DGs, but is not branded as KI output. Recommendations, on the
> other hand, are documents produced by WGs (not DGs) that can be ratified
> by an all-member ballot as officially branded KI output. These two
> types provide a lot of flexibility for various opinions to co-exist and
> be heard while protecting the integrity of the voice of the entire
> If, for example, your WG would like to publicly comment on a topic you
> could do so by producing a Report or a Recommendation. The difference
> is that one carries the full weight of the KI membership while the other
> is a statement coming from the WG/DG itself.
> The process for a WG/DG producing a Report is simple. After a Majority
> of the Group votes to approve it, the Report is submitted to the
> Leadership Council, and it is thus recorded as official output of the
> Group. At that point it can be publicized as the voice of the Group.
> The process for a WG producing a Recommendation is a bit more rigorous.
> It starts the same way as a Report out of the WG with a Majority of the
> Group voting to approve it as a Draft Recommendation. Once it is
> submitted, the LC will review it to ensure it's within the scope of the
> WG charter. After the LC approves it by a Simple Majority of those
> voting, it is made available for at least a 45-day review period by the
> full KI Membership. At the end of the review, the LC Secretary
> initiates an All Member Ballot. This ballot will be conducted via email
> and will be open for at least 14 days. The Recommendation will become
> officially branded KI output if a Supermajority of those Voting in the
> All Member Ballot agree.
> As you can see, it's a lot easier (and faster) to produce a Report than
> a Recommendation, though it falls short of being able to carry the
> imprimatur of KI. Also, there is nothing in the rules that indicates a
> Report can't be made into a Recommendation, if that path meets the needs
> of the WG.
> Any output that's short of a Report or Recommendation, though, should be
> considered the opinion of the individual person/people and not the WG/DG
> or KI.
> For more detailed information, you may went to review the following from
> the Operating Procedure (OP)  and the Bylaws :
> * OP 0 "Scope"
> * OP 2.6 "Voting"
> * OP 1.4 “Draft Recommendation”
> * Bylaws 1.15 “Recommendation”
> * OP 1.7 "Report"
> * OP 5 "All-Member Ballot of a Draft Recommendation"
> I hope this helps, but please feel free to reply to this or contact me
> with any comments, questions, or suggestions. If it sounds like we may
> need to modify the OP in any way, we should capture the thoughts in the
> Operating Procedures Review page on the wiki .
More information about the LC