Everyone who reads this blog will know that it hasn’t been plain sailing at auDA for the past 20 to 24 months.
Do I think it will get better in time? Yes, I do. But there needs to be some sensible changes first. And in my opinion, unless there are signals from the auDA Board that these changes are imminent, then members and stakeholders will continue to agitate and express their concerns via all means available to them.
Part of this process will start when the Government Report is released later today. In today’s article by The Age, it’s banner reads:
“Web agency not fit-for-purpose, government review finds”
Here is an excerpt:
“In a statement, Communications Minister Mitch Fifield echoed the review’s findings that the organisation was not fit-for-purpose, and would need to make significant changes to maintain its authority.
The review’s findings include 29 recommendations to bring the operation of .au more into line with the needs of Australian internet users, including increased transparency, greater representation of stakeholders and requirements for conflict of interest checks.
The government has accepted all 29 recommendations.”
Upcoming SGM (Special General Meeting)
Still no word on when this is to be held, but auDA now seems to have a perfect storm about to descend on it. Most people that I speak to (and I still get calls and emails every day) do not want auDA to “Crash & Burn”.
They simply want better leadership, and properly managed processes.
You don’t need to be a Rhodes Scholar to know that both Supply and Demand are lining up with the proverbial “baseball bats” when it comes to Resolution 1 – the vote of no confidence in the current CEO. If you asked me to put money on this resolution passing overwhelmingly, I would have no hesitation. It’s not often that Supply and Demand come together at auDA, but they did last year when it came to removing the then Chair.
If I was the current Chair, I would be reaching out to the organisers of the Grumpier campaign right now. I imagine there are some common sense solutions that could be tabled without the need for an actual SGM. But that’s just my opinion, and I could be wrong.
Having suggested that, it’s not helpful when confidential information about one of the organisers gets leaked to the media. Whoever was behind this – and I’m not suggesting anyone in particular – it was quite despicable – and “dirty pool”. I very much feel for the individual who was targeted so unfairly.
Ned O’Meara – 18th April 2018