[Fiware-pcc] New proposed governance structure

[JOSE JIMENEZ DELGADO]

Hi all

Of course, I agree with Juanjo's comments, just some reinforcing issues:

We just cannot pretend to continue as today. We need to introduce some changes, otherwise the EC will say we do not want to improve.  So we need to propose things

Once said that, I agree

The idea of the TA is redundant. However, Thomas would do it well (we hope). If it is not Thomas, we would need to check... We need to insist that the TA is controlled by the SB and, particularly, by the AB and he/she is only consultative. We could propose it is dropped but he could help to represent the PPP at technical events

The idea of the Business Manager is strange. I do not know how anybody can do anything. However, it has not been approved yet, so we can propose the EIB connection at the SB. However, as Juanjo says, we need to accept something
I like Stefano's idea of linking to the EIB.

The chairman. In fact, I think the project coordinator of CONCORD should have this role. Representing the PPP is necessary and it cannot be done by Juanjo or me. So, provided decisions are not taken by him alone, I see not major problem. The only comment is that I do not understand why he/she has to be different from CONCORD coordinator (...essentially he/she could do both)



Br




De: fiware-pcc-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [mailto:fiware-pcc-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] En nombre de Juanjo Hierro
Enviado el: martes, 29 de enero de 2013 11:22
Para: stefano de panfilis
CC: fiware-pcc at lists.fi-ware.eu
Asunto: Re: [Fiware-pcc] New proposed governance structure

Hi all,

  Stefano has sent to me an email where he elaborated on his concerns and has allowed me to forward it to you so here you are with my comments on his comments.



On 29/01/13 10:38, stefano de panfilis wrote:

dear juanjo,



somehow you touched exactly my points:



1. the ta is clearly dangerous and with the new proposal absolutely redundant.

let me explain:

to the sb meeting you'll be permanently invited and as well to the ab

meetings the sb chair migth come and he will. so what is for the ta?

if he/she has to be "independent" can he/she work for any of the

fi-ppp? the rules say yes, but rationality says clearly not! he/she is

useless or even dangerous if he/sheis not coming from fi-ware, but

again where is his/her need this case? if it is this to have an ab

secretariat then this is completely different ....



can you imagine the mess if this person is not thomas? i think good

roles should be independent from the person!

  Regarding the Technical Advisor, I agree there is a risk if not the right person or someone we can trust.   I took the opportunity to check with Thomas whether he was aware about this role (since he is currently participating in discussions about negotiations of phase 2 as part of CONCORD) and whether it was matching the role he would play as CONCORD representative participating as facilitator of the AB.   He answered to me that he was not aware of this role and even didn't understand it very well.

  Given these facts, maybe it would be worth asking for dropping it out.







2. the buisness/impact manager.

from the experience from ict labs this person without a significant

team can only organise meetings of doubtfull utility (in the end look

at juan in fi-ware and he has a team!!!).

so, from where they come the resources to fund the work of this

person? where is the committment? how to measure the impcat? there

will be specific indication given to uc if their trial are of no

impact in real economy?

may be they have in mind a "friend of friends" they have to give a

role with nice business cards ....

i definitively suggest to drop this or to have a strong link with eit labs team.

  Despite I don't have a strong opinion, I see some advantages for this position:

  *   In general terms, the business/impact/exploitation WG is one WG where always things work better if there is someone 100% devoted to the task and s/he pushes.   Currently, the WG is made up of good and talent people but people that I'm afraid do not have their contribution to the WG as a main priority ...
  *   If the guy is a consultant that may actually help in writing stuff, not just sake hands, and be able to exchange nice business cards ... I would see the value ... maybe it's a matter of making this more explicit

  Besides this, you should also think the other way around: what if we drop this figure ?   Well, the result is that CONCORD would spend their money to other stuff (the same stuff they have spent their money on) ... wouldn't it be better that at least they spend the money to hire a guy that is devoted 100% to work for the business/exploitation/impact WG ?





3. the fi-ppp chairman

id he/she is a ceo must have power otherwise again good for being the

person providing nice interviews. please remeber that peter was not

able to drive towards any decision and he has the power of the ec

behind him. if projects they do not follow they simply do not follow

...

besides that the indicated person has no glue whatsoever what is the

fi-ppp. i firmly believe he/she must be elected/nominated within the

eib. than i t migth be he/she will have an impact....

  I rather believe, to be straight and transparent, that this position is for "being the person providing nice interviews" as you mention.   Besides, the chair of the SB (you need someone that moderates the discussions).    But, other thant that, If you read the text carefully, no power is given to him.   So indeed s/he is not a CEO (maybe we should drop that part of the text), just a chair.

  Again, it's  also a matter of thinking the other way around: what if we drop this figure ?   Well, the result is that CONCORD would spend their money to other stuff (the same stuff they have spent their money on) ... wouldn't it be better that at least they spend the money to hire a guy that is devoted 100% to chair the SB, act as public relations, etc ?


  Best regards,

-- Juanjo






you can forward this email to the rest of the pcc.



ciao,

stefano



2013/1/29 Juanjo Hierro <jhierro at tid.es><mailto:jhierro at tid.es>:


________________________________

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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-pcc/attachments/20130129/19cc011c/attachment.html>