Re: [ubl-csc] Re: CSC call on 26 November

[Eduardo Gutentag <Eduardo.Gutentag@Sun.COM>]

7-9am Pacific on Dec 4 '03 is ok for me, unfortunately ;)

Jon.Bosak@Sun.COM wrote:
> | the first thing we should do is acknowledge that we have not yet
> | realigned the two groups - just bought time to do so.  the
> | situation with the work on code lists is a case in point.
> | Obviously, this is a management issue - it has nothing to do with
> | who is right or wrong, good or bad technology, personal abilities,
> | willingness of participation, etc.  It is better management that
> | is needed.
> 
> I am in complete agreement with this.
> 
> | In the past we have relied upon overlapping membership and nominal
> | liaison members to ensure we keep our work items aligned.  I do
> | not think this has been successful.  What is more, we now have 4
> | new subcommittees to add into the equation.
> 
> Yup.  
> 
> | It may be that for the next 3 months the chairs group has to
> | become more proactive in its co-ordination activities.  for
> | example, seeking progress and activity reports and initiating
> | tasks when things are not happening.  That is, perhaps we need a
> | project management team and the chairs SC would appear to be the
> | easiest way to do this.
> 
> I can see two alternatives here.
> 
>    1. I can become much more active in project managing this
>       effort at the detail level.
> 
>    2. We can turn the CSC into a project management committee.
> 
> It's an open question whether I could successfully execute
> alternative 1 if I were free to do so.  I like to believe that I
> could if I were able to focus on this, but the fact is that I've
> gotten pretty good at the role of spokesman and talking head, and
> I've already mapped out a schedule for the next six months based
> on the assumption that I will be spending 100 percent of my time
> promoting UBL, not project-managing it.  For example, I'm already
> committed to a two-week promotional swing through Germany, Spain,
> and Portugal (based around an invited keynote in Munich) that will
> basically put me offline for most of January.  So alternative 1 is
> moot, and that leaves us with some kind of collective solution as
> the best approach to solving this.
> 
> I agree with Tim that the CSC is the obvious group to take this
> on.  Add up all the SC chairs, co-chairs, and secretaries, and you
> basically have the people who are most deeply committed to this
> effort.  I am comfortable with the idea that this group could act
> as a steering committee. The fact that Mark chairs the CSC
> actually fits pretty well with the thought that I will be out
> hustling UBL adoption while the rest of you focus on project
> integration heading into the final release in March.
> 
> On the other hand, Eduardo is exactly right when he says:
> 
> | We'd have to change both the goal and the attitude of CSC to
> | attain what you and Tim obviously think is needed, or we would
> | have to put some other mechanism in place. But whatever is done
> | would have to be done explicitly, not just having an existing
> | mechanism silently assume a different role.
> 
> This means that there will have to be a formal decision to adopt a
> different role for the CSC.  My hunch, however, is that no sizable
> proportion of voting members of the TC will disagree that we need
> better management, so I think the task here is simply to be clear
> about the new role and how it's going to work.  Here are what
> appear to me to be the basic features of the new regime:
> 
>  - Weekly 1-2 hour meetings of the CSC.
> 
>  - Specific authorization to act in a coordinative role (in other
>    words, authorization to resolve disputes from above and to
>    impose solutions upon the subcommittees when necessary).
> 
>  - Specific authorization to appoint short-term ad hoc cross-SC
>    teams to ferret out disconnects and work up proposals for their
>    resolution.
> 
>  - Appointment of a couple of CSC members or observers as keepers
>    of the issues and AI lists.
> 
> This list is probably not complete, but I think that these are the
> basics.
> 
> The first item (meeting regularly) is the one that we don't need
> additional authorization to implement, so I suggest that we start
> there and devote the first meeting to mapping out the new role for
> the CSC that we need to propose to the TC.  We can start with the
> list above as points for further discussion and elaboration.
> 
> The earliest slot that I can attend for a kickoff discussion is 7-9
> a.m. California time Thursday 4 December.  Since several of the
> CSC members will be in Philadelphia the following week, it's
> probably then or not until the week of 15 December.
> 
> Jon
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ubl-csc/members/leave_workgroup.php.
> 

-- 
Eduardo Gutentag               |         e-mail: eduardo.gutentag@Sun.COM
Web Technologies and Standards |         Phone:  +1 510 550 4616 x31442
Sun Microsystems Inc.          |
W3C AC Rep / OASIS BoD