[Fiware-coaches] Evaluating FIWARE relevance in Accelerator open-calls

[thierry.nagellen at orange.com]

Hi Franck

I have a skype meeting tomorrow with European Piooners and will check these points with them. For your 2nd point, I think that 1 GE should be fully integrated within a commercial solution to bring new features. If not it should be disqualified.

BR
Thierry

De : fiware-coaches-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-coaches-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] De la part de Franck Le Gall
Envoyé : lundi 20 octobre 2014 16:05
À : fiware-coaches at lists.fi-ware.org
Objet : [Fiware-coaches] Evaluating FIWARE relevance in Accelerator open-calls

Dear all,

I had a telco with the FICHE accelerator which was asking me about the evaluation criteria to be included in their open-call in relation with the use of enablers.

It would be good that within the coaches, we share a common strategy for the evaluation of the "FIWARE relevance" of received proposals.

My view of FIWARE is that a large part of its added value does not come from the GEs taken individually but rather from their integration. This is the basis of my proposed scale:

In their first step (FICHE plan 3 increasing investment steps, with the SMEs being filtered at each step) proposal template, they have one section related to the use of enablers in which proposers have 3000 characters to defend their position.  FICHE asked me for screening strategy to quickly rank the proposals in respect with the planned usage of GEs. A more detailed evaluation would be used for the 2nd step.

So very few details will be  provided by proposers and the time to analyse each of the proposals will be kept minimum. As a fast ranking strategy for this step 1, I then suggested the following ranking scale:


1.       No enablers used > disqualified

2.       1 enabler used > acceptable but this must be strongly documented

o   The GE must be tightly integrated with the solution of the company;

o   Justification of why adding this GE rather than 3rd party solutions should be detailed

3.       Several enablers used > explain how integration will take place

o   Announcing the use of several disconnected enablers is possible. Then each should be justified as for case 1

o   Preferred solution is the use of several integrated enablers. Justification
For the 2nd step, we could start from the questionnaire which was proposed by Juanjo at some point (I welcome the link again).


Have you started anything on your side worth to be shared ? What do you think about the options shown above ?
Should we encourage the use of FI-lab at that stage ?

Kind regards
Franck




_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-coaches/attachments/20141021/29bee479/attachment.html>