1. ICANN Reputation Summary to the ALAC
Prepared for ICANN by: Robert Takacs, Executive Vice President

2. Set-up Notes
“The Reputation of A Thousand Years May Be Determined By The Conduct of One Hour.”
Source: Ancient Proverb

3. About Echo Research
Echo has supported 500 world-class clients including:
23-year track record in communication research and reputation measurement
700 staff working across 18 offices worldwide
Registered Expert Witness on image and reputation supporting Boards of leading organizations on reputation audits and insights
Research complies with the MRS Code of Conduct and ISO 9001:2008 ensuring objective and rigorous assessment
Winner of 89 industry awards for best practice in communications and reputation research

4. 4 6 13 27 Selected Topics Objectives of the Reputation Audit
Methodology
Summary of Findings
Image and Reputation

5. Objectives of the Reputation Audit

6. Objectives Of The Reputation Audit
To provide a deeper understanding of the image and reputation of ICANN including perceptions among its key stakeholders and key influencers which will usefully inform ICANN strategy priorities To uncover key perceptions with respect to ICANN’s leadership, its ability to offer operational excellence and views with respect to its multi-stakeholder organization To establish baseline metrics (KPIs) for ICANN’s reputation among its key global stakeholders, as a basis for tracking progress during 2013 and beyond To deliver actionable, evidence-based insights as the basis for further enhancing ICANN’s reputation in the future, through targeted stakeholder engagement and communications

7. Methodology

8. Our Reputation Audit Model
Echo’s proven and tested model for reputation research is the I³ (I-Cubed) methodology. It works on the basis that the more coherent the story is both inside and outside, the more sustainable the organisation will be.
I³ draws on comparative research findings from audiences to provide an understanding of any disconnects between the way ICANN perceives itself and the way key players outside the company perceive it.
It uses research methods appropriate to the audience and makes use of existing research vehicles where possible.
I³ identifies the causes of any such “Perception gaps” and provides guidance on how to better align ICANN’s IMAGE with its true IDENTITY.
INFLUENCE
Analysis of the influence of third parties via the media and Web 2.0 in positioning ICANN to its audiences
IDENTITY
Detailed understanding of how ICANN seeks to project itself in the marketplace
IMAGE
The perceptions key groups have of ICANN corporately, its offering and attributes
Internal Interviews
Stakeholder Interviews
Content Analysis

9. Technical Liaison Group Internet Engineering Task Force IETF
We Have Interviewed a Wide Array of ICANN’s Multi-Stakeholder Constituencies
Ombudsman
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Government G
Advisory A
Committee C
President and CEO
Technical Liaison Group
TLG
Internet Engineering Task Force IETF
ICANN Staff
MDR – 68
SV -11
DC -9
Sydney – 5
Brussels – 5
Other US – 11
Other non-US - 14
Nominating
Committee
Per ICANN
Bylaws, Article
VII, section 2
ASO
Regional Internet Registries
AfriNIC
APNIC
ARIN
LACNIC
RIPE NCC
GNSO
gTLD Registries
gTLD Registrars
IP interests
ISPs
Businesses
Non-Commercial
Interests
ccNSO
ccTLD Registries (.us, .uk, .au, .it, .be, .nl, etc.)
At-Large
Internet Users
(At-Large Advisory Committee, in conjunction with RALOs)
ALAC
Security & Stability Advisory Committee
SSAC
Root Server System Advisory Committee
RSSAC

10. Internal In-depth Interviews
The IDENTITY Phase – Objectives & Methodology
IDENTITY
Detailed understanding of how ICANN seeks to project itself in the marketplace
Objectives:
To explore and analyze perceptions of the organization’s reputation and brand image and identify key external stakeholders and issues
Provides useful insights into any ‘perception gaps’ between perceptions of ICANN ‘within’ and ‘outside’ the organization as well as detailed intelligence on how to align these perceptions more effectively
Methodology:
In-person in-depth interviews were conducted with senior internal stakeholders at ICANN meeting in Toronto, Canada, October 14-18, 2012; Additional interviews were conducted by telephone through November 7
14 interviews were conducted, a list of respondents can be found in the Appendix
Internal In-depth Interviews
With ICANN Leaders

11. Part 1: Qual: In-depth Stakeholder Interviews
The IMAGE Phase – Objectives & Methodology
Objective:
Provide top-level directional insights to key reputational drivers and perceptions from among key external stakeholders
Methodology:
In-depth telephone interviews were conducted among stakeholders representing: government/policymakers, academics, business & commercial interests, journalists, national & international non-government and non-commercial entities and members of the technical community
Efforts were made to include a mix of emerging and established markets from the U.S., Europe, LATAM, Africa and Asia
Participants were identified by ICANN and through Echo’s desk research
26 interviews were conducted between November 19 and December 13, 2012, a list of respondents can be found in the Appendix
IMAGE
The perceptions key groups have of ICANN corporately, its offering and attributes
Part 1: Qual: In-depth Stakeholder Interviews

12. The INFLUENCE Phase – Objectives & Methodology
Analysis of the influence of third parties via the media and Web 2.0 in positioning ICANN to its audiences
Objective:
An analysis of print and online media to evaluate ICANN’s image and reputation, identify third parties expressing views of ICANN and the key issues, messages and reputational drives coming through.
Methodology:
525 items in key global markets were analyzed in-depth by Echo’s expert analyst team
Articles were analyzed in their original languages English, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, French and German
Articles analyzed for period from July through November, 2012 include those with major mentions of ICANN only, defined as at least two mentions of ICANN
Topics and messages designed in consultation with ICANN
Favorability assessment based on Echo’s quality rating system reflecting impact of ICANN placement, messages, spokespeople and other influencers, content and tone (see next slide)
Content Analysis

13. The INFLUENCE Phase – Measuring Tonality, Echo Rating
Designed to answer not only the question of WAS it favorable, but HOW favorable was it?
Rating is determined by:
Volume of coverage = quantity
The number of times:
An issue appears.
A publication covers the subject.
Spokespeople appear.
Competitors are mentioned..
More favorable
CONTENT / TONE
Messages
Spokespeople
Use of Sources
Together with…..
Neutral
FORM
Headline
Visuals
Prominence
Placement
Size
Rating of articles = quality
Used to assess the impact of coverage on the readership.
Less favorable

14. Summary of Findings

15. We Analyzed Eight Strategic Reputational Drivers
New gTLD Services
Operations
Image
Trust
Multi- Stakeholder Model
Balancing Stakeholder Interests
Internation- alization
Comms

16. Internationalization
Perceptions Across Key Reputation Dimensions
Reputation Dimension Unfavorable Neutral Favorable
Image
Identity
Influence
Image
Image
Identity
Operations
Influence
Image
Identity
Multi-Stakeholder
Image
Influence
Identity
Trust
Image
Identity
Influence
Balancing Interests
Image
Identity
Influence
Internationalization
Identity
Image
Influence
New gTLDs
Image
Identity
Influence
Communications

17. ICANN’s Image and Reputation

18. ICANN Is Aware Its Reputation Varies Across Stakeholders and Geography; Those Who Have A Deeper Engagement Share A More Positive View
IDENTITY
ICANN’s reputation varies based on the stakeholder’s level of exposure and tenor to the group.
Active participants have a mixed view of ICANN that also varies based on geography and level of participation.
Participants who are familiar with ICANN’s past successes are seen as supportive.
The organization is basically unknown to the general Internet At-Large user population
However those who may only be familiar with ICANN through the new gTLD program, have a mostly negative view of the organization.
“The Pacific is very engaged and see ICANN as enhancing usage.”
“There’s a huge trust issue, especially among developing countries.”
“In some regions, it is almost heretical to say anything nice about ICANN.”

19. Externally, ICANN’s Image Is Typically Characterized As Being In A State Of Flux; Most Agree That With New Leadership, It Is Changing For The Better
IMAGE
Many respondents report a changing or evolving perception of ICANN – in most cases, for the better.
Image changes along with ICANN’s leadership, Fadi’s appointment has resulted in much guarded optimism.
ICANN’s U.S. –centric image continues to have a negative impact on its reputation.
Efforts towards improving ICANN’s business operations have not gone unnoticed but most feel that new gTLD program will be the organization’s ultimate test.
External relationships are also key reputational drivers; many see ICANN’s relationships with registrars/registries whose practices may be questionable as having a negative impact on ICANN’s image.
“ICANN is a fascinating mess, but it is very necessary.”
“ICANN has a volatile history – it will take ICANN a long time to recover from poor decisions made by previous leadership.”
“ICANN is a mostly white, business-run, U.S. dominated organization designed to make money on domain names and promote their interests.”
“Fadi may make a difference.”
“ICANN is like a teenager trying to find itself and grow up.”
“I have seen a massive improvement of late.”
“They need to do a better job of vetting the organizations that they work with.”
“ICANN is changing for the good, but there is still a lot of work left.”

20. The Media Portrays Positive CEO Leadership, But ICANN’s Ethics Are Questioned – Mostly With Respect to the New gTLDs
INFLUENCE
Influence
ICANN’s leadership and competence image in the media improved following Fadi’s appointment.
However, prior to Fadi taking charge, ICANN’s stewardship was regarded as ineffectual.
Transparency and accountability were key reputational drivers, aided by positive corporate communications.
ICANN’s ethics were questioned over the perceived ‘true’ motivation behind the new gTLD process.
“If ICANN can feed off the drive of a confident CEO, then perhaps it can start believing in itself, and getting others to believe as well” (circleid.com, 11/12).
“The new myICANN service is designed to increase transparency and participation in the organisation” (ComputerworldUK.com, 10/16).
“There are serious questions about ICANN's ability to manage the huge influx of new gTLDs” (Verizon - Telecommunications Reports, 9/1).
“ICANN serves no point but to make a few old white guys filthy rich” (tech.slashdot.org, 10/12).

21. Leading Messages by volume & favourability
INFLUENCE
ICANN’s Operations And Model Are Viewed As Successes, But The gTLD Process Is Criticized
Influence
The majority of favorable messages were generated by corporate communications. An increase in PR-led coverage would help to boost message placement.
The multi-stakeholder model was positively endorsed in the media as an operational success, while ensuring the participation of diverse groups and interests.
However, the ICANN board were criticized for leaning too heavily towards Western interests.
The new gTLD process generated mixed messages. Its efficiency was largely positive although its public benefit was called into doubt.
Leading Messages by volume & favourability
Aside from poor financial coverage, negative messages around management competence, responsibility and trust feature in media coverage. However, positive messages around financial performance, global network and role in helping clients enhance efficiencies feature too
July – November 2012

22. I3: Opinions of 3 audiences
ICANN Super- SWOT – triangulation of Identity, Image and Influence findings
STRENGTHS
WEAKNESSES
OPPORTUNITIES
THREATS
I3: Opinions of 3 audiences
Global technical beacon
Multi-stakeholder model
Fadi , New Board and Senior Staff
Too U.S. Centric
External comms.
Success in handling new gTLDs
International-ization strategy
Strengthening relationships with non-commercial entities
Inability to effectively manage new gTLDs
Loss of legitimacy by not engaging stakeholders globally
Identity
Image
Influence

23. Set-up Notes
“The Reputation of A Thousand Years May Be Determined By The Conduct of One Hour.”
Source: Ancient Proverb