[Fiware-ga] [Fiware-pcc] New proposed governance structure

[Juanjo Hierro]

Hi,

  It is also important to highlight that it is the intention of the EC, as explicitly stated in the email of Peter, to make this document be part of the DoWs, therefore it will become a contractual obligation at least for new projects (although I guess they may require to add it in our next amendments also).    Note that text in the DoWs prevails over the Collaboration Agreement, so I guess formally there is no need indeed to change the Collaboration Agreement.

  Best regards,

-- Juanjo


-------------
Product Development and Innovation (PDI) - Telefonica Digital
website: www.tid.es<http://www.tid.es>
email: jhierro at tid.es<mailto:jhierro at tid.es>
twitter: twitter.com/JuanjoHierro

FI-WARE (European Future Internet Core Platform) Chief Architect

You can follow FI-WARE at:
  website:  http://www.fi-ware.eu
  facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242
  twitter:  http://twitter.com/FIware
  linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932


On 31/01/13 09:50, JOSE JIMENEZ DELGADO wrote:
Dear all

We received yesterday the attached mail from the EC. They have provided, based on some of our comments, a new version of the governance document. It is (partially) based on some proposals and also on EC ideas.

The changes proposed in this new version (attached to the mail) , as compared to the previous, can be summarized as follows


* Strategic decisions and direction of the program are borne by the EIB (therefore by the companies). The Program Chairman (PC) acting on behalf of the EIB, responsible for such decisions are implemented
* The EIB will consist of 15 large companies. It is unclear who decides which, although it appears that the EC will play a role in its composition.
* Interestingly, the Program Chairman (PC) is elected by the "FI-PPP partners" and not by the EIB
* The PCG (formerly SB)  does not make decisions that discusses how to coordinate the effective implementation of the decisions taken at the EIB. The PC controls (partly at least)  the PCG because it acts on behalf of the EIB.
* The chief architect of FI-WARE, chairman of AG (formerly AB) happens to have greater decision-making on technical aspects: "The chairman of the AG  decides in case of conflict."
* The Technical Advisor disappears
* The document make no reference to FI-WARE project as an example which has already provided its staff and resources to marketing issues. We need to clarify this, but it may be better not to make controversy now
* They add the description of the "responsibilities" of a Project Coordinator and he/she is explicitly under control of the EIB
* It strengthens the role of Business Manager (BM) when it previously said that would be decided later.


In general, we (Telefonica) think we can live with the new proposal, subject to the discussions on Monday and your comments

Best regards






De: fiware-pcc-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:fiware-pcc-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu> [mailto:fiware-pcc-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] En nombre de JOSE JIMENEZ DELGADO
Enviado el: miércoles, 30 de enero de 2013 11:09
Para: BISSON Pascal; JUAN JOSE HIERRO SUREDA
CC: SIEUX Corinne; fiware-pcc at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:fiware-pcc at lists.fi-ware.eu>
Asunto: Re: [Fiware-pcc] New proposed governance structure

Thank you for your comments Pascal. I think they are all right, even if they do not imply major modifications to the document



Therefore, the proposed changes so far are


  *   Drop the role of the Technical Advisor (alternative, this role will be decided by the SB in the first or second meeting)
  *   Copy the following text in the description of the Steering Board:

     *   The SB and the AB provide strong recommendations to projects according to a  defined decision process.  Projects coordinators have a mandate from their consortium to discuss and agree on recommendations of the SB and AB.

  *   Make sure that the text explains that the AB is formed by two technical representatives per project and nothing else is stated anywhere in the document
  *   Make it more explicit that the SB take decisions also based on consensus
  *   Drop any reference to limits in the number of members of the SB to avoid inconsistencies
Is my reading correct?


I would like to remind you of our coming AC tomorrow. The link to the predrafted minutes is
https://docs.google.com/document/d/10Zk_Vw0rKPpy2K6yiZeIyZuT-O_XKUvG__GFQAcH1ss/edit#


BR

De: BISSON Pascal [mailto:pascal.bisson at thalesgroup.com]
Enviado el: miércoles, 30 de enero de 2013 9:21
Para: JUAN JOSE HIERRO SUREDA; JOSE JIMENEZ DELGADO
CC: fiware-pcc at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:fiware-pcc at lists.fi-ware.eu>; SIEUX Corinne; BISSON Pascal
Asunto: RE: [Fiware-pcc] New proposed governance structure
Importancia: Alta

Dear José,
Dear Juanjo,
Dear PCC Colleagues,

Find attached to this email my review (incl. comments, suggested changes ) of the new proposed governance.

Best Regards,
Pascal







De : fiware-pcc-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:fiware-pcc-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu> [mailto:fiware-pcc-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] De la part de Juanjo Hierro
Envoyé : mercredi 30 janvier 2013 09:00
À : stefano de panfilis
Cc : fiware-pcc at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:fiware-pcc at lists.fi-ware.eu>
Objet : Re: [Fiware-pcc] New proposed governance structure

Hi all,

  So far, I have identified the following changes based on your input and following discussions:

  *   Drop the role of the Technical Advisor
  *   Copy the following text in the description of the Steering Board:

     *   The SB and the AB provide strong recommendations to projects according to a  defined decision process.  Projects coordinators have a mandate from their consortium to discuss and agree on recommendations of the SB and AB.

  *   Make sure that the text explains that the AB is formed by two technical representatives per project and nothing else is stated anywhere in the document
  *   Make it more explicit that the SB take decisions also based on consensus
  *   Drop any reference to limits in the number of members of the SB to avoid inconsistencies

  Any other changes ?   If no comment is raised, we will assume that introducing the above changes is generally agreed.

  There is an additional one I would like to propose.   There is a final section on "Expected changes to the Collaboration Agreement".   I believe that this section should only refer to changes required to accomodate to this new governance model.   Therefore, the point that refers to changes regarding IPRs should be dropped because don't have anything to do with the governance model.   The rest are consistent and describe changes that would actually be required to align the Collaboration Agreement with the new proposed governance structure.


  Your feedback is welcome.

  Best regards,

-- Juanjo

-------------

Product Development and Innovation (PDI) - Telefonica Digital

website: www.tid.es<http://www.tid.es>

email: jhierro at tid.es<mailto:jhierro at tid.es>

twitter: twitter.com/JuanjoHierro



FI-WARE (European Future Internet Core Platform) Chief Architect



You can follow FI-WARE at:

  website:  http://www.fi-ware.eu

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

  twitter:  http://twitter.com/FIware

  linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932


________________________________

Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más abajo.
This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at:
http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx

________________________________

Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más abajo.
This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at:
http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx

________________________________

Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más abajo.
This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at:
http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx



_______________________________________________
Fiware-pcc mailing list
Fiware-pcc at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:Fiware-pcc at lists.fi-ware.eu>
http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-pcc



________________________________

Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más abajo.
This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at:
http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-ga/attachments/20130131/320b66f5/attachment.html>