[Fiware-foundation-info] Proposal to ICT-12.b call on FIWARE ecosystem creation

pierreyves.danet at orange.com pierreyves.danet at orange.com
Tue Apr 5 12:09:13 CEST 2016

Previous message: [Fiware-foundation-info] Proposal to ICT-12.b call on FIWARE ecosystem creation
Next message: [Fiware-foundation-info] Proposal to ICT-12.b call on FIWARE ecosystem creation
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Hi everyone
Well I shall try, could you please add the FIF PIC and the administrative contact name of Danièle LE BORGNE (daniele.leborgne at orange.com<mailto:daniele.leborgne at orange.com>), she will take care about the FIF
Kind regards
PY

De : Jacques Magen (InterInnov) [mailto:jmagen at interinnov.eu]
Envoyé : mardi 5 avril 2016 11:49
À : DANET Pierre-Yves IMT/OLR; Federico Alvarez; Juanjo Hierro
Cc : LUIS IGNACIO VICENTE DEL OLMO; fiware-foundation-info at lists.fiware.org
Objet : Re: [Fiware-foundation-info] Proposal to ICT-12.b call on FIWARE ecosystem creation

1) I do not think we can have the same person as contact for the Foundation and for Orange.
2) I have already drafted a text for the Foundation in section 4-5, and I will revise it in the next 2 hours. Please wait for this version before you start revising.
Thanks,
Jacques

Le 05/04/2016 10:28, pierreyves.danet at orange.com<mailto:pierreyves.danet at orange.com> a écrit :
Hi Fede,
I am the interim contact for the FIWARE Foundation
We have to write the text to present the FIWARE foundation as well as the description of the contribution, hope we can provide it to you very soon
PY

De : fiware-foundation-info-bounces at lists.fiware.org<mailto:fiware-foundation-info-bounces at lists.fiware.org> [mailto:fiware-foundation-info-bounces at lists.fiware.org] De la part de Federico Alvarez
Envoyé : mardi 5 avril 2016 10:25
À : Jacques Magen (InterInnov); Juanjo Hierro
Cc : LUIS IGNACIO VICENTE DEL OLMO; fiware-foundation-info at lists.fiware.org<mailto:fiware-foundation-info at lists.fiware.org>
Objet : Re: [Fiware-foundation-info] Proposal to ICT-12.b call on FIWARE ecosystem creation

In addition Nuria de Lama wanted to discuss some activities ATOS could perform in the Foundation concerning this proposal.

I suggest you keep in touch for this matter.

I will add you to the proposal in the EC system, but I need confirmation on the contact to use for the portal. Is it you Juanjo?

In addition information for some parts of the proposal related to dissemination/exploitation and contribution to some sections should be provided. Can I count on you for the duties?

Regards,
Fede

El 05/04/2016 a las 9:45, Jacques Magen (InterInnov) escribió:
Dear Juanjo,

The Foundation is integrated into the proposal, almost exclusively on communication activities, as you requested. Pierre-Yves and Stefano are part of the proposal as well as Luis Ignacio and Estan for TID as you know. Fede will register formally the Foundation as a partner with the EC tool. We will update the monthly rate in our budget sheet (currently the budget for the Foundation is around 200 K€).

Please send me asap a description of the activities of the FIWARE Press Office. I will send you later today the description we have put for the Foundation in section4-5 for finalisation.

Thank you and best regards,

Jacques
--
Jacques Magen
jmagen at interinnov.eu<mailto:jmagen at interinnov.eu>
Tel.: +33 9 81 03 98 49 / +33 7 60 46 50 23
www.interinnov.eu<http://www.interinnov.eu>
Twitter: @interinnov_eu<http://twitter.com/interinnov_eu>
Skype: jacques.magen

Le 05/04/2016 07:09, Juanjo Hierro a écrit :
Dear Federico,

Any news on this matter ?

Finally we got the PIC number for the FIWARE Foundation: 919308965

For the direct costs per PM, you may consider 7000 €

We can provide a description of the activities of the FIWARE Press Office.

Note: For your convenience and regarding matters about integration of the FIWARE Foundation in the proposal, you can contact any of the following contacts of the FIWARE Foundation Founder companies. You can also use the fiware-foundation-info at lists.fiware.org<mailto:fiware-foundation-info at lists.fiware.org> mailing list, which can work as kind of help-desk for requesting any info or assistance:

* Nuria De-Lama <nuria.delama at atos.net><mailto:nuria.delama at atos.net> (Atos)
* Stefano De Panfilis <Stefano.DePanfilis at eng.it><mailto:Stefano.DePanfilis at eng.it> (Engineering)
* Pierre Yves Danet <pierreyves.danet at orange.com><mailto:pierreyves.danet at orange.com> (Orange)
* Juanjo Hierro <juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com><mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com> (Telefónica)

Cheers,

-- Juanjo

______________________________________________________

Coordinator and Chief Architect, FIWARE platform

IoT Unit, Telefónica

email: juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com<mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com>

twitter: @JuanjoHierro

You can follow FIWARE at:

website: http://www.fiware.org

twitter: @FIWARE

facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242

linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932
On 24/03/16 13:46, Juanjo Hierro wrote:

On 24/03/16 13:16, Jacques Magen (InterInnov) wrote:
Dear Juanjo,

Thank you for the very good explanation which helps me/us understand the whole picture better. I just discussed with Fede and we agree on the following:

- We take the Foundation on board, and we give them the responsibility for promotion and communication activities, and we will also include the Foundation in the management activities for the interaction with the other projects and bodies. Please send Fede the PIC number as soon as it is available (if not yet). Also who is the contact person and the resources that will be in the Foundation and that will be mentioned in the proposal? It cannot be you and any of us, it should be dedicated personnel. Please think about this and let us know how to proceed in this respect. I had a similar issue with the 5G Infrastructure Association, I can check how we did it and we could follow the same path maybe -I will look into that -except if you have another idea, then let me know.
For the budget let's see where we stand next week, we are currently finalizing all WPs and Tasks and the various sections of the proposal and we will come up with a first provisional budget shortly.

Ok. Sounds good. I don't have a strong position regarding how to handle the matter on contact person and resources, so happy to learn how you has handled it related to the 5G infrastructure association. Let's discuss the details about budget next week.

- We understand your concern about the coverage of all issues in the bullet point that we are addressing, but actually when reading the call text for this topic we will be addressing all aspects, from the international perspective. We assume that the iHubs proposal will also address all aspects, from a European perspective. In this sense merging would only lose the focus of each of the proposals. If you tell us who is coordinating the iHubs proposal we can coordinate with them and make sure we have complementary activities, but we consider that merging is not a good solution at this stage.

Ok. If you believe you are safe, I don't complain. I understand that it would be difficult to merge. My concern was more that both get disqualified because none were presenting a complete proposal, but if you feel safe, that's fine.

What it is important is that combining the two proposals you don't go higher than 3 M€ ... I'm talking to people coordinating the proposal from iHubs so I guess it should not be difficult to coordinate on that.

Thank you again and let's hope we will all have at the end the best possible projects that will be nicely coordinating with each other.

Thanks to you. Cheers,

-- Juanjo

Best regards,

Le 24/03/2016 00:58, Juanjo Hierro a écrit :

On 22/03/16 14:48, Jacques Magen (InterInnov) wrote:
Dear Juanjo,

Thank you for your email. Indeed I am coordinating a proposal for ICT12a.ii (12.b is the RIA) that UPM (Fede in cc) will coordinate, as is the case for the current FI-LINKS project where I am leading the international activities but where Fede is the overall coordinator.

We are grateful for your support to FIWARE Mundus and to a continuation of our activities. You are raising three important issues i.e. 1) the coordination among ICT12a proposals, 2) the participation of the FIWARE Foundation, and 3) the communication activities.

1) Coordination among ICT12a proposals

As you can imagine, we discussed several times with the EC about our proposal. They made it very clear that they want proposals focusing on one bullet point (in our case 12a.ii), that they want from us a proposal focusing on international activities, and that they are expecting another proposal on European regional activities from iHubs. They also clearly told us that the budget for each proposal shall not be more than 1.2 M€, as they are planning to accept between 2 and 4 proposals addressing 12a.ii. In this sense we do agree that the two proposals shall not have a total budget beyond 3 M€, we will be targeting between 1.2 and 1.5 on our side and we expect the iHubs proposal to do the same.

Merging with the iHubs proposal would be contradictory to this feedback that we have got. Besides, we believe that there is a risk that such a merged proposal would lose the focus that is required. So at this stage we are hesitant about your suggestion, also because there is less than one month before the deadline and our proposal is already quite advanced and would need to be completely reshaped probably -not to mention adding new partners.

I have had some informal conversations with the EC this week. Last one yesterday.

They told me they are looking for proposals that cover each of the 4 goals within ICT-12.a in its full extend. That's why I see some risk.

However coordination between projects is indeed very important. In our understanding, there is a project that will support the FIWARE Foundation that should address ICT12.a.iii. and this project should take care of the coordination between the various ICT12a projects. We are fully ready to take a small part in this project i.e. UPM and InterInnov on the FIWARE Mundus chapter, in order to make sure that FIWARE Mundus keeps a consistent approach and is fully in line with the priorities of the Foundation (while we would also contribute to those priorities at international level). We think that involving someone from iHubs would also be good to take care of the European regional chapter -and probably the same for the accelerators.

You seem to have a wrong assumption regarding ICT-12.a.iii. ICT-12.a.iii is not about funding the FIWARE Foundation or about activities of the FIWARE Foundation. Please read the text call and you will immediately realize that.

On the other hand, goals ii to iv under ICT-12.a have to do with supporting activities that would be carried out by members of the FIWARE Community. They map rather nicely, and would help to give continuity, to activities linked to the 5 pillar programmes of the FIWARE initative defined in https://www.fiware.org/about-us/. Actually:

* Continuity of FIWARE and FIWARE Lab activities would be supported in ICT-12.a.iii
* Continuity of the FIWARE Mundus and FIWARE iHub programmes activities would be supported in ICT-12.a.ii
* Continuity of the FIWARE Accelerator programme activities would be supported in ICT-12.a.iv

The FIWARE Foundation, on the other hand, is aimed at supporting activities of the FIWARE Community, therefore activities linked to the 5 mentioned pillars. The necessary funding to cover resources of the Foundation to get involved and therefore ensure proper support and coordination of activities in the 5 pillars should naturally come from projects funded linked to the ICT-12.ii-iv objectives and not just ICT-12.iii

It's time now for those who believe in the FIWARE initiative and lead activities linked to the five pillars of FIWARE to take responsibility and contribute to the sustainability of the FIWARE Foundation. Because of that, we are recommending submitters of proposals to the different subcalls to incorporate resources within their projects to be assigned to the FIWARE Foundation as a partner. Such resources should cover the corresponding involvement of the Press Office in the different programmes (FIWARE, FIWARE Lab, FIWARE iHub, FIWARE Mundus, FIWARE Accelerator programmes). Devoting the funding of 1 FTE/year to the FIWARE Foundation for coordination purposes as well as 10% of the overall funding to FIWARE Press Office activities seem like a reasonable approach). I can tell you that we plan to give away more resources within the proposal that we will submit to ICT-12.a.iii, but the rest of proposals should approach this figures IMHO.

Again, based on informal conversations hold with the EC, I feel that they will welcome proposals submitted to each of the the ICT-12.a goals that incorporate resources assigned to the FIWARE Foundation. You can contact Jesus, Peter, Ragnar or Arian to double-check.

I believe, on the other hand, that proposals that will bring the FIWARE Foundation on board will have higher chances to succeed. Of course, this is my personal opinion.

Then at proposal stage even if we do not merge there is the possibility to interact among proposals and make sure we are not overlapping. This may be a more feasible solution -I mean between the ICT12a.ii proposals from FIWARE Mundus and iHubs, and the ICT12a.iii proposal.

As explained, the more urgent/critical matter is that of incorporating resources of the FIWARE Foundation in the proposal. Merging might look difficult, you simply have to balance the risk of not doing so. I have been told by the EC that proposals targeted to each of the ICT-12.a.x goals will be evaluated against all objectives of the targeted ICT-12.a.x goal. In other words, they have to be "complete". If the EC coach the evaluators in that direction, then you are incurring into a serious risk.

I would kindly suggest that you contact the EC regarding the two points: about completeness of proposals and the fact that the EC will welcome that proposals incorporate resources assigned to the FIWARE Foundation (including Press Office activities). This way you will get feedback directly.

2) Participation of the FIWARE Foundation

Making the FIWARE Foundation a partner in the proposal is definitely welcome. At this stage as you know there are 5 partners in the proposal: UPM, InterInnov, TID, Engineering and ATOS. As you can see there are three of the four founding members of the Foundation. If the Foundation was to appear as such in the proposal, then it should be replacing some of the activities currently planned for TID, Engineering or Orange, not in addition to those. This way it would be clear that there is a tight integration between the Foundation and the activities planned in the project, and no overlap with what TID, Engineering and Orange would do on their own.

I'm not famliar with the details of the activities assigned to TID, Engineering, Orange or Atos. i don't believe that they will run any activity that could be assumed by the Press Office. The rest of resources we recommend to assign to the FIWARE Foundation are more for coordination purposes.

3) Communication activities

Considering the tight budget, we have decided indeed to cut into the communication and promotion activities and relate on other ICT12 project that should do that. I do not know yet how much the communication activities will cost in our project but our intent is indeed to keep them in line with what we believe we can do and focus on international events and promotional activities. In this sense. We are planning to have a kind of a global FIWARE Programme a little bit similar to GCTC to encourage the development of FIWARE-based solutions all over the world, in this sense I believe that the budget dedicated to this will probably in line with the 200-300 K€ you are mentioning, maybe even more,. However going for a broader presence and sponsoring of events may once again make us lose the focus while once again there should be a FIWARE Foundation support proposal including also the current activities of the FIWARE Press Office that should be doing that.
Now I am not really sure I understand why the Foundation would take care of those activities. For me as mentioned in 2 this is part of the proposal under ICT12.a.iii not ours, and then the Foundation should manage the Press Office indeed.

Again your assumption that there should be a single proposal taking care of the FIWARE Foundation support, assuming all the costs covering coordination/support activities or activities of the FIWARE Press Office with regards to each of the FIWARE pillars (FIWARE Platform, FIWARE Lab, FIWARE Mundus, FIWARE iHubs, FIWARE Accelerator) is wrong.

As you know I am in Washington D.C. this week at the GCTC Tech Jam, but if you want to talk on the phone with Fede about this feel free to do that. I trust that Fede and you will find the right way to proceed on all those three important issues. I shall be back in the office only next Monday (maybe Friday afternoon but not for sure). Probably the first thing we we want to do is check this once again with the EC, although at first we are rather hesitant as we are not sure it will actually increase our chances and will for sure make the next weeks more challenging.

Ok. I'll talk to Fede. I hope that despite it's holidays he will ready to talk :-)

Best regards,

-- Juanjo

Best regards,

Le 22/03/2016 14:01, Juanjo Hierro a écrit :
Hi Jacques,

Any feedback about my previous mail below?

I have a conversation with Jesus today and he has told me that an
actual requirement that will be evaluated on any proposal would be that
of covering ALL aspects of the corresponding goal ...

I see now more clearly the need of merge between the two current
ongoing proposals.

Of course, the matter about incorporation of the Foundation as
partner, taking care of communication activities (therefore carrying out
proper coordination with the Press Office) is also rather relevant.

Cheers,

-- Juanjo

______________________________________________________

Coordinator and Chief Architect, FIWARE platform
CTO Industrial IoT, Telefónica

email: juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com<mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com>
twitter: @JuanjoHierro

You can follow FIWARE at:
website: http://www.fiware.org
twitter: @FIWARE
facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242
linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932

On 20/03/16 20:02, Juanjo Hierro wrote:

Dear Jacques,

I hope you are doing well.

Based on conversations hold with Luis Ignacio, I understand that you
are leading the preparation of a proposal to the ICT-12.b call on the
topic of "FIWARE ecosystem creation", trying to give continuity to
activities under the FIWARE mundus programme.

This looks very fine. You know that I'm the first who has advocated
for FIWARE mundus to work as a stable programme and describe it as a
pillar of the FIWARE initiative in all official documents describing
the FIWARE initiative. Therefore, I certainly support the idea of
FIWARE mundus activities being funded under ICT-12 Innovation Actions.

I guess you know that relevant partners behind the FIWARE iHubs
programme are, on the other hand, also preparing a proposal to
ICT-12.b. It is true that such proposal would not overlap with the
one focused on FIWARE mundus. After all, the FIWARE mundus and
FIWARE iHubs programme were defined to be complementary with not that
much overlapping. However, I'm concerned that the two proposals, if
presented separately, reduce their chances to be selected against any
other proposal that may be submitted to the same objective with a more
holistic approach (i.e., covering all aspects regarding FIWARE
ecosystem creation). This might be very well the case because each of
the two will not address the whole objective (objective ii) while a
third may go for addressing it all ...

I would like to propose that the two proposals merge in only one
which can be evaluated as completely addressing the targeted
objective. I can help in achieving such merge. By merging the two
proposals, we believe that there will be more chances to succeed and
synergies can be put in place. In this respect, we believe that a
proposal derived from such merge should not be requesting more than
2,5-3 M€ (3 M€ would be absolutely maximum).

In addition to this, and in any case, I would like to encourage you
to incorporate participation of the FIWARE foundation as partner.
This would be feasible since the FIWARE Foundation founders (Atos,
Engineering, Orange and Telefónica) have agreed to obtain a PIC for
the FIWARE foundation which would allow it to join as partner despite
not yet created (this option was actually double-checked with the
EC). One benefit of it is that this would allow communication
activities to be subcontracted by the Foundation, which as non-profit
organization would get 100% funded. We would also encourage you that
an effort of at least 200-300 K€ of the funding is booked for
communication activities as part of FIWARE Mundus activities. That
would allow to be present as sponsor, and produce all the necessary
material as well as the design of a visible booth, in relevant events.

What are your thoughts? Should we work for the merge? Would you
agree with incorporation of the FIWARE Foundation and the assignment
of budget/funding to it dealing with communication activities?

Cheers,

-- Juanjo

______________________________________________________

Coordinator and Chief Architect, FIWARE platform
CTO Industrial IoT, Telefónica

email: juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com<mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com>
twitter: @JuanjoHierro

You can follow FIWARE at:
website: http://www.fiware.org
twitter: @FIWARE
facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242
linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932

________________________________

Este mensaje y sus adjuntos se dirigen exclusivamente a su destinatario, puede contener información privilegiada o confidencial y es para uso exclusivo de la persona o entidad de destino. Si no es usted. el destinatario indicado, queda notificado de que la lectura, utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin autorización puede estar prohibida en virtud de la legislación vigente. Si ha recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción.

The information contained in this transmission is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, do not read it. Please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error and then delete it.

Esta mensagem e seus anexos se dirigem exclusivamente ao seu destinatário, pode conter informação privilegiada ou confidencial e é para uso exclusivo da pessoa ou entidade de destino. Se não é vossa senhoria o destinatário indicado, fica notificado de que a leitura, utilização, divulgação e/ou cópia sem autorização pode estar proibida em virtude da legislação vigente. Se recebeu esta mensagem por erro, rogamos-lhe que nos o comunique imediatamente por esta mesma via e proceda a sua destruição

________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

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.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

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-foundation-info/attachments/20160405/53eca334/attachment.html>

Previous message: [Fiware-foundation-info] Proposal to ICT-12.b call on FIWARE ecosystem creation
Next message: [Fiware-foundation-info] Proposal to ICT-12.b call on FIWARE ecosystem creation
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

More information about the Fiware-foundation-info mailing list

You can get more information about our cookies and privacy policies clicking on the following links: Privacy policy Cookies policy