On 29/01/13 11:51, JOSE JIMENEZ DELGADO wrote: 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 Let's drop it or keep it clearly linked to the facilitation activities for which CONCORD was asked to look for someone with enough technical skills/background. 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. No strong opinion here, just consider my comments as input to the discussion. Happy with any decision you take. 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) I agree that this was a role that should have been covered by CONCORD from the very beginning as you say, but I believe that there is a benefit in that this role is not carried out by the person playing the CONCORD coordinator role (i.e., Petra). If we just focus on the chairing and the public relationship roles, definitively we need someone with a different profile than Petra. Besides, it is preferable that someone in that role doesn't take care of some other standard project coordination activities I'm pretty sure that Petra is taking care of and are also specific of CONCORD (supervising deliverables, supervising some activities such as newsletter preparation, changes on the website, etc). Best regards, -- Juanjo Br 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 Juanjo Hierro Enviado el: martes, 29 de enero de 2013 11:22 Para: stefano de panfilis CC: fiware-pcc at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto: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/20130129/3cf450a9/attachment.html>
You can get more information about our cookies and privacy policies clicking on the following links: Privacy policy Cookies policy