This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
• Drivers:– Recognized need to improve/accelerate standards development– A burgeoning organizational structure– Responsiveness to volunteers/stakeholder/PIC concerns– Request to the Board to “do something”
• Initially leading to formation of the Organizational Review Committee (ORC)
– Established January 2004– Broad representation– Identified key issues and recommendations
• Robert Wood Johnson Foundation expressed interest to explore ways to accelerate the standards development process
– Discussions started early 2005– Yielded a unique opportunity to gain new perspective on organization and
• Optimize the effectiveness of our core resource: the volunteers– Maintain culture of volunteerism– Global participation– Document institutional process– Identify new sources of volunteers
Organization/GovernanceLeadership cadre is narrow, does not reflect all constituencies. Need to ensure balance, full spectrum of users as well as developers and to recruit new talent.
Revise P&P, Bylaws: open nomination process; Revise Board of Directors drawing from different constituencies
Insufficient professional management addressing strategic, product management
Hire CEO, CTO, ½ time marketing professional; integrate w/existing operations staff (AMG)
Tension between requirements of the organization as a whole, the affiliates and the US constituency
Promote a US Affiliate and adopt an international structure for HL7 as a whole
Too driven by technology, theory; lost connection to market, users
Define market, user requirements; initiate user conferences
• What you will see in the SIIP Draft:– The co-chairs of the Committees and SIG’s represent the primary labor
pool and will remain the core source of technical expertise and development within HL7. The Technical Steering Committee (TSC) is the primary voice and organization belonging to this core cadre of volunteers.
– It will be re-invigorated by providing self-elected leadership and a voice on the TD and the Board.
– ... In addition to these new powers, the TSC will adopt a new routine for meetings to facilitate communication and lessen the need for joint meetings.
• Summary:• Elects own co-chairs who sit on Board of Directors• Elects 3 reps to TD• Input to slate of nominations for open election to TD• Elects 2 representatives to the Board nomination committee• Introduce more flexible meeting schedule
• How is the Board responding to these recommendations?
• The Transitional Technical Task Force (T3F) is a forerunner of the Technical Directorate which will be brought in under the changes initiated within the 2005-2006 Strategic Initiative.
• The T3F will develop an approach that will be ratified by the Technical Directorate and endorsed by the Board of Directors.
• When fully defined, the Technical Directorate will ratify this approach, with the endorsement of the Board. At that time, they will address issues/questions such as, for example:– When to create a new specification and when to
constrain an existing specification?– When to use messaging and when to use a service
oriented architecture?– When to use a message and when to use a document?
• What you will see in the SIIP draft:– Nominations: 2 options – from membership or member-elected nominating committee– Composition
• 3 elected from TSC (co-chairs)• 1 from Advisory Council• 1 Emeritus (5-year term, elected)• 1 each from 3 geo groups of Affiliates• 1 from US Affiliate• 4 directors at large
– Officers: Chair, Secretary, elected by the Board
• Alternate from Governance Transition Team:– Nominations: no change– Composition: “Streamlined” Board of Directors
• 4 fewer Directors at large• 2 from Affiliates• Vice-chair replaces chair-elect• No HL7 Technical or vice-chair positions
• How will these issues be resolved?– With recommendations by the Transition Team– By the Board– In conjunction with the CEO– Ultimately reflected in changes to Bylaws and Policies & Procedures
• Member votes to adopt Bylaws• P&P is set by the Board
• What you’ll read in the SIIP Draft:– Affiliate or HL7 or joint membership– Financial obligations tbd– “The change will take place over a 3-year period ...”
• How is the Board addressing these points:– Under discussion:
• Affiliate or HL7 or joint membership• Financial obligations: developed in collaboration
with Affiliates• Transition timing recommended by Transition Team,
approved and adopted by Board in consultation with CEO
• HL7 will implement a product-oriented project management approach to ensure development of high-quality standards and associated products in a committed timeframe.
• All standards will undergo quality testing at key stages of the development process.
• HL7 has and will continue to increase the professional support to its volunteer workers:– Project Management Office √– Technical Editor (in progress)– Better web-site tools for balloting √– Better web-site tools for tele-conferences √– Better web-site for collaboration (Wiki)– Better V3 tooling (Manager & Collaborative √)
• Volunteer Recognition:– "Volunteer of the Year" √– Co-Chair recognition– Recognition of other functions: Facilitators, Editors,
TC/SIG "Secretaries", etc.
• Volunteer Recruitment:– Outline professional benefits of participation– Outline different “jobs” within HL7– Outline skills-enhancement of working in HL7