Slips in schedule could result in reduced staff bonuses.
ICANN has clear short term economic incentives to roll out new top level domain names, and bonuses are one of those reasons. Read this exchange at the Cairo ICANN meeting between ICANN Senior Vice President of Services Kurt Pritz and former ICANN board member Michael Palage:
>>MICHAEL PALAGE: Mike Palage. Kurt, as you can appreciate, there are a number of attendees here today that have a vested financial interest in seeing the launch of this new TLD process. I was wondering if you could perhaps answer the question, are there any staff bonuses or performance clauses that are tied to when this process happens?
>>KURT PRITZ: We have essentially a management by objective program at ICANN, and so each trimester, where — each trimester, we each have individual goals to meet. The trimesters run along with the meeting schedules. So each trimester, for example, I have a set of goals to meet. My bonus is based on meeting those goals.
So one of my goals this trimester was to publish the draft RFP. And so part of my bonus will be based on that. But the percentage of bonus is preset as a maximum, and then you get a numerical score for how you did on your goals, and then you get a little bit of a bonus.
>>MICHAEL PALAGE: So just a follow-up question. To understand what the motivation is, obviously a lot of people here want to see this happen sooner as opposed to later. But there are some in the community that are not as, shall we say, opportunistic towards the launch of new gTLDs. So on behalf of that community, I think it would be important if you could perhaps share with the community what the targets are for bonuses.
When do the new TLD process have to start? What is the date? And if, in fact, that date slips, when does staff begin to suffer economically for missing that date?
>>KURT PRITZ: I don’t know. I think I have given you a lot of information that — you know, I don’t know how to go down the path on this question.
>>MICHAEL PALAGE: Thanks.
It’s no surprise that bonuses are tied to meeting objectives. But these goals should take into consideration the overall organizational goal. I have a patent for goal structure and how goals tie into an organization. If the goals are properly aligned, then what this means is ICANN has a goal of introducing TLDs in a timely manner rather than listening to the community.
Regardless, here’s one more reason new TLDs continue to go forward even though most people seem to be opposed to them.
David J Castello says
Guilty.
Great work, Andrew.
Steven says
Major scandal! How can ICANN represent the Internet community’s interests when the decision makers are getting paid to ignore the community input and forge ahead blindly?
packers says
are you kidding me?? Wow.. I would hope the names of the recipients who receive any bonuses come out. Sickening that in this economic climate, that they would take advantage of the internet community for the purposes of lining their own pockets.
Johnny says
Who exactly is giving the orders?
Kurt is saying to the higher-ups “yes boss” and following orders to meet those goals.
So who exactly is hiding behind Kurt, and why won’t they listen to the community?
Great reporting Andrew. BTW…..I gotta’ say again I love the new site design. It’s sharp.
Rob Sequin says
1. “KURT PRITZ: I don’t know. I think I have given you a lot of information that — you know, I don’t know how to go down the path on this question.”
Ummm. It’s called answering the question you jerk!
2. “I have a patent for goal structure and how goals tie into an organization.”
WTF! No kidding??? I see your name on it. A patent on goal structure? Really? Never heard of such a thing. Congrats 🙂
Andrew Allemann says
Rob – the patent is actually for bringing the structure together in a system. And I guess I don’t “have it”, since I signed away all my rights to the company I worked for back then.
Justin Allen says
Andrew,
Perhaps I am reading this differently. The goal was to publish the draft RFP. Are we making an assumption that getting the new Custom TLDs up and functioning is one of the goals? Isnt this a leap? Hasnt ICANN decided to go forward with this change or is this still up in the air?
Justin Allen
NameBio.com
Andrew Allemann says
Justin – that was one of his trimester goals. Others have goals as well. For example, some people probably had a goal of publish the draft guidebook version 2 by a certain date. Even if they should have held it back given the feedback and major issues, they’ll push it out to meet their objectives.
Jorge says
ICANNotbelieveit.com
M. Menius says
What a disgusting revelation which surprises no one. They’ve constructed a performance based system that blindly compensates the ICANN inner circle to the obvious detriment of many thousands. No wonder a small select group are shoving this thing forward. Someone might not get their stupid time sensitive freakin’ bonus? Jesus Christ.
Feels like the lid on this incompetent, morally challenged group is ever closer to being blown off. I believe there is much more where this came from. Peeling back the layers keeps revealing a near total lack of honesty & integrity. A showdown is imminent.
kotot says
it’s not clear and fair … do you think so?
Abigail says
Just out of curiosity – since everyone on this site including the authors seem to be so actively against new TLDs – what is the reasoning? Is it, like with perennial first commenter D. Castello, because of their existing investments in .com domains? I can’t imagine that the readers of Domain Name Wire are that interested in the concerns of TM interests, so what’s the beef? BTW, M. Menius, I see you’re using a .us domain instead of the .biz address you were using before! Why the change?
Adrian Kinderis says
I think this article has been incorrectly slanted. It simply does’t make sense to base staff salaries on time lines that staff have no control over. The IRT Group is only a new development and was not even speculated prior to Cairo. I know if I was employed by ICANN I would like to have my bonus set to factors beyond my control (especially when the Board have the final say).
I think the article is a beat up. Nothing more, nothing less.
Andrew Allemann says
@ Adrian – that’s exactly my point, so I don’t see what the disagreement is. The staff’s goals shouldn’t be set to deadlines on things such as getting a new draft guidebook out, since things like IRT will keep popping up. It’s silly to stick to your deadline for the next guidebook when something like IRT gets thrown into the process (and there are many other issues beyond IRT).
Adrian Kinderis says
So it is riduclous to assume that they are based simply on a conversation with Kurt. The article is an untruth and a beat up. Period.
Andrew Allemann says
“So it is riduclous to assume that they are based simply on a conversation with Kurt”
Huh? This was in an official ICANN session and in the official transcript. Are you suggesting Kurt lied? You’re correct that this article suggests this isn’t a good practice, but to call it an “untruth” is, well, untruthful.