Organisational Assembly - Montreal

Organisational Assembly meeting - Plenary 10,  Montreal

Thursday 21 September 2017, 13:30-16:30 local time

Joint lunch with TAB - Usual Lunch Room  4th floor (Mont Royal I) - 13:30-14:30 (possibly joint TAB-OAB photo?)

Room Mansfield 6 - 14:30-16:30

Draft minutes

Chair: Amy Nurnberger, Integrated slidedeck

  1. Introduction to RDA Organisational Assembly OA -(in case there are non-members), Amy Nurnberger, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, RDA OA co-chair, 5’
    • N/A
  2. Introduction of new OA members (that have not been introduced before)- 5'
    • American Geophysical Union - Shelley Stall
      • AGU has received a grant in partnership with RDA to advance open and fair data standards in the earth and space sciences. The partnership also includes AGU and the Earth Science Information Partners, and has support from the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Nature, Science, AuScope, the Australian National Data Service repository, and the Center for Open Science. This effort will build on the work of The Coalition on Publishing Data in the Earth and Space Sciences (COPDESS.org), ESIP, RDA, the scientific journals, and domain repositories to ensure that well documented data, preserved in a repository with community agreed-upon metadata, and supporting persistent identifiers becomes part of the expected research products submitted in support of each publication.
      • AGU are also publishers in this area.
      • AGU is interested in the RDA outputs and recommendations and hope that they will find some pieces for their puzzles by their engagement in RDA.
  3. Updates from Secretary General, Council and TAB, 20'
    • Acting Secretary General, Ingrid Dillo, RDA Status presentation - see slides
      • The following comments were made:
        • There seems to be no RDA individual members from Russia. It was proposed that this is discussed initially at the Secretariat. Action secretariat: Discuss why Russia does not have any members in RDA.
        • Juan Bicarregui noted on slide 5 (domain representation) that computer and IT are taken out of the "Natural Sciences", then all other domains are equally represented (around 20%)( besides humanities and health which are underrepresented (~4%). It was then noted that medical people are keeping to themselves. They get a lot of funding, and there are big data problems to solve. The big challenge is restricted data. It would be good to identify champion, if we manage to get into their circles.
        • Challenges in reporting adoption. e.g., Core Data standard has issues with measuring and reporting acoption & KPIs. Kevin: An organisation submitting themselves to a standard is not currently counted as an adopter, but should be. There is a need to sell the stories there.
    • TAB update, Andrew Treloar
      • Main points from TAB:
        • The role of TAB in liaising with groups that need help with outputs and adoption. And how this complements with OA's role in helping with/encouraging adoption. TAB-OA interfacing:
          • OA has role to play in life-cycle at all stages. Need to focus on how to make this happen in a friction free way.
            • At the start an OA perspective is useful so that groups are guided to outputs that are more likely to be adopted.
            • While groups are running, OA can check in with group by going to sessions, providing direction & connection. Often at plenaries there are not enough TAB members to cover sessions. OA could possibly fill those gaps. TAB person & OA rep could double-team groups with issues.
            • Finally, ocntributing to the community comment phase for the ouputs. Assessing adoptability of outputs is working well. Could strengthen at commissioning phase & focused phase at plenaries
        • Comments- questions- discussion:
          • OA  membbers want to go to the groups of their interest at plenaries, not other ones. 
          • OA members could engage in 2 different ways: 1) as an org that has an interest in the work. 2) As a disinterested person in an advisory role (probably not so good).
          • Better not have an official OA liaison. But, TAB may identify groups that should have an OA perspective, and invite OA to their session. TAB would then inform group as to what was happening.
          • How many groups are in a focus situation/having issues? Andrew: at least 1-2 during each breakout session
          • Should OA agree with TAB? Andrew: Not necessarily. In fact should be different as focuses on fit-for-purpose and adoptability.
          • OA focus on who will be using the outputs.
          • Should TAB membership increase? Andrew: Doing that. Increasing from 12-15, step-wise by election, adding one each election.
          • Is the level of contribution & comments good enough during the review of case statements and outputs. Or would you ask for something more or different. Andrew: Difficult to say now. Haven't looket at enough to have a view.
          • Difficult to find which documents are under comment. Andrew: RFC box in the website page. But not optimal, I agree. Trying to improve.
    • Council update: RDA Strategy and current priorities.
      • Ross Wilkinson:
        1. From Australian perspective:
          • The RDA output on the 23 things around libraries for research data, has enabled the development of 1000 data librarians!
          • Moving from existing to trusted data repositories via the DSA/WDS joint RDA output is going to be incredibly important in the next phase.
          • If industry starts building on top of the European Commission ICT specifications to take competitive advantage, this would be very good. Impact at second level and need to think how to measure it.
        2. In the RDA Business meeting during the pleanry already gave a report, especially on Sec Gen & strategy.
          • Council is getting stronger and more active with Edit and Sandra.
          • TAB needs to grow bigger
          • Task force on gender balance is important. We need to pay attention to principles, both how & why we are doing things. Diversity is a strength of RDA. 
          • Main issues: 1. Growth management, 2. Sustainability, 3. Regional coordination.
        3. Secretary General recruitement
          • Good candidate previous round, but didn't work out. New round closed and have a reasonable set of candidates.
        4. One group where detection of consensus was an issue (was not reached)
          • One of the Bio groups was using RDA promoting its project outputs. 
        5. RDA Strategy towards the future:
          • RDA reached adolescence and now need to move to adult phase.So needs to change trajectory in order to find success in the next phase Aim is to have RDA high-quality and reliable from both funders and organisations. So how we get there and also what structures are needed. People need to know that there's a good ROI on people's efforts. Reliable services cost. We're looking at finding the funds to do so. 
      • Comments - questions - discussion:
        • Status of regional growth. e.g. in the southern hemisphere.
          • Ross: Yes, growth is more northern than southern. Botswana is a bet. But Mustapha’s point: RDA is an international organisation. It may be painful. But important. Quoting Fran: Successful growth if local funding and community engaged. Business development as one of the core competences of next SG.
          • Fran: New Council has a pragmatic approach. More pragmatic than we used to be. Cultivation results in engagement, but needs to see that RDA benefits local community, has good ROI, that RDA is a 'real' organisation. Regions and funders want to see that they get some impact and return. There are regions that are close to coming to this point.OA has complete insight into Council business through connection with OAB chairs. If you have any question about Council business, please ask. It is our organisation, jointly.
          • Kevin: It was difficult to find the mission-vision in the website! Action secretariat: Check this.
  4. Services that can be offered from OA members to other OA members - document, presentation
    • Short overview, Jason Haga - Raphael Ritz (see slides)
      • Raphael:
        • There's not a lot of first tier value in the OM value statements. This may be a reason why organisations don't join. They don't get solid returns, that you can put a dollar value on.So there's an idea that if you are a member you get services from other members. It strengthns organisational members and also foster adoption of RDA outcomes and adoptions.
        • Process/use case: First, identify goods/services/testbeds that can be made available to other members for free/at discount. Feedback welcome. See slides for other steps.Examples also on slides.Would be happy to provide access to handle service under certain terms. This could remove a barrier to trial. E.g. Data type registry. Who knows how to do that? It would be great if there were a place to trial that so that you don't have to invest your own resources to try it out.
      • Issues
        1. Does such an approach violate RDA principles such as “open to all” (i.e. only to Org members and not other members)?
        2. What are the incentives for providers? Helping may get to get help from others in the future (true in the open source community).
        3. In kind-contribution towards my membership fee? No. If yes, how to measure this? Have reservations for this.
        4. It may fly if we find a catchy name.
        5. Have some takers: MPCDF, ePIC (EU PID Consortium), RPID (open to all, but time limited)
      • Comments - Questions - Discussion
        • Amy: Is it something attractive as provider or user? If no violation in RDA principles, then great (free or discounted to OA members).
        • Stefan: Data curation network has an interesting business model: offering data curation services to others not having the expertise.
        • Jason: This does not violate principles. It gives items that people can point to as benefits for OMs.E.g. if you join RDA you get free handle service, discount from publishers, etc.
        • Wolfram: There are other examples from open repositories organisations (COAR), duraspace. Always in favour of such approaches as it is always difficult to get members. But if we start this we may loose the neutrality.
        • Irina: how this would work from contractual and legal point of view. It would be difficult to explain to our customers who have to pay for these services
        • Kevin: but for each provider to decide. Free, discount or with a fee.
        • Raphael: Not a professional service portfolio rather helping us out. E.g. testbeds. We can explicitly restrict it to that.
        • Mustapha: Don’t think that such incentives are meaninful.Feels like retro-fitting justifications to join RDA. More meaningful is the influence they can get in influencing devlopments. e,g. standards, industry practices.
        • Malcolm: There are some organisations that are more interested in some areas and others in other areas. Amy: yes, different drivers for different orgs.
      • Decision: There is clearly interest, but did not manage to reach consensus. Follow-up in the next meetings.
      • Action: Include the point of OM 2 OM services in the next meeting agenda.
  5. OAB report on recommendations adoptability, report from OAB sub-group: Andrew, Malcolm and Siddeswara - Initial document
    • See Initial document or part of slides in integrated slideset
      • Points of evaluation
        • How adoptable are recommendations in their existing form? And what is the basis for this assesment?
        • Were the recommendations tested against their intented use?
        • Do we have examples of adoption already or pilots?
        • How can the recommendations be improved for more adoptability?
        • How easy is it to implement the recommendations in a real-world scenarios?
        • How will adoption derive benefits for orgs?
      • Points that could be addressed in the communicaiton of the recommendation include:
        • From an operation perspective: Is there a cost benefit? Is there a productivity benefit (saves time)? Are there other reasons e.g. compliance, meet funders requirements? Timing: when is the right time to adopt?
        • If it has a strategic or tactical benefit, why is the adoption of the recommendation important to the organisation? I.e. why should the decision makers care right now?)
    • Comments-questions-discussion
      • Wolfgant: Is adoption the right term? Perhaps 'fitness for use' is a better term.
      • Raphael: Initially the term ok, because of the outputs focus on infrastructure level
      • Kevin: meant to differntiate from endorsement.
      • (Internal action: Fotis to bring the point of adoption term to the secretariat for discussion)
  6. Update on industrial engagement, OAB industry sub-group, Fabrizio et al
    • Fabrizio (Slides as part of integrated slideset):
      • RDA Europe 3 project has some EC funding on this and made possible to organise something in Barcelona.
      • Target is not big industry with the exception of publishers. It is more about SMEs.
      • Participate and organise industrial events such as the Barcelona one.
      • There is an Industry Advisory Board
      • ScienceBusiness Magazine also successful.
      • A little bit of resources until Feb 2018 (RDA EU 3).
      • Recommendations from serires of intereviews & dialogues:
        • Go through the outputs of RDA and see which are relevant. And also perform a gap analysis. Areas where there may be interest. Bring the results of this exercise openly in one next event, possibly in Berlin. Or possibly with Iberia. A report also. Possibly also some industrial members undergo feasibility studies/testing. This can be taken up by RDA iberia or the national node.
    • Comments-Questions-Discussion:
      • Ross: Any preliminiary results already from interviews? Fab: Not much interest. Besides the EU ICT specifications that can give them a market advantage.
      • Kevin: I feel that it is more relevant to RDA Global rather in EU. Fran: From a US perspective: Even more interested. These engagement with industry are important for sustainability. Josh from Sloan says that he sees us as a catalyst for all his other communities.
      • Stefan: Berlin has a big startup scene. Hans: We will be trying. Raphael: Yes, there is an organisation (V Stiftung in Berlin) we will try.
      • Kevin: Good to see that it is being planned so early!
  7. RDA Organisations targeted communications -template document, Amy
    • Amy: possibly circulate such communication at quarterly basis.
    • Juan: This can be filtered or augmented by OA members and forwarded internally in their organisations
    • Decision: Overall consensus that such a communications is a good idea.
  8. Status update on OAB report to Council on increasing OA member engagement with WG/IG activities - Document – Amy, Discussion/Feedback/Reality check
    • Amy (Slides as part of integrated slideset)
      • Items from OAB report to Council (for July meeting)
        • RDA Communicaitons targeted to organisations (Proposal)
        • Guidelines for delivering adoptable recommendations and outputs (proposal)
        • Privilidedged OA access to outputs/recommendations (in discussion)
        • OA hotlist of current challenges: what issues are we experiencing and where we may require solutions. Possibly also vote and rank them.(not yet started)
      • Kevin: Extention of TAB
  9. AoB
    • OA member newsletter spotlight, 5'
      • Action Secretariat Communications Team: UK DCC and DANS
      • Considerations on an RDA Code of Conduct: What recommendations would you make?
      • Next meeting: Around end of October
  10. Organisational Assembly Group Photo (already taken during business plenary)

 

 

Organisational Assembly meeting - Plenary 10,  Montreal

Thursday 21 September 2017, 13:30-16:30 local time

Joint lunch with TAB - Usual Lunch Room  4th floor (Mont Royal I) - 13:30-14:30 (possibly joint TAB-OAB photo?)

Room Mansfield 6 - 14:30-16:30

Original agenda

 

              For remote partcipationhttps://global.gotomeeting.com/join/739812821 (for dial-in option via phone please see at the end) 

 

Objectives of the meeting:

The Organisational Assembly (OA) is the main body through which organisations can influence the work of RDA.  The OA is composed of representatives of all RDA Member Organisations (Organisational and Affiliate Members). Organisational membership gives organisations a chance to introduce real problems in data interoperability and to call for those issues to be addressed.  OA membership gives organisations a chance for early access to RDA outcomes and a pre-publication opportunity to review outcomes and provide feedback on their utility. Although this session is primarily for the members of the Organisational Assembly, representatives of any organisation interested in RDA to explore organisational membership and to gain a sense of the important work accomplished by the OA can be allowed.  Please contact the co-Chairs and the RDA secretariat at enquiries@rd-alliance.org to join us to learn how your organisation can make a difference and can receive real value through associations with RDA. In this meeting major emphasis will be given on services that can be offered from one member to another, recommendations adoptability and industrial engagement, \followed by an open discussion.

Chair: Amy Nurnberger, Integrated slidedeck

  1. Introduction to RDA Organisational Assembly OA -(in case there are non-members), Amy Nurnberger, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, RDA OA co-chair, 5’
  2. Introduction of new OA members (that have not been introduced before)- 5'
    • American Geophysical Union - Shelley Stall
    • Others
  3. Updates from Secretary General, Council and TAB, 20'
    • Acting Secretary General, Ingrid Dillo, RDA Status presentation
    • TAB update, Andrew Treloar or Francoise Genova
    • Council update: RDA Strategy and current priorities.
  4. Services that can be offered from OA members to other OA members - document, presentation
    • Short overview, Jason Haga - Raphael Ritz
    • Developing of a pilot process for the handle service  to act as a model of how service provision might be accomplished,Raphael Ritz
    • Creating a list of potential services
    • Discount from publishers
    • Discussion
  5. OAB report on recommendations adoptability, report from OAB sub-group: Andrew, Malcolm and Siddeswara - Initial document
  6. Update on industrial engagement, OAB industry sub-group, Fabrizio et al
  7. RDA Organisations targeted communications -template document, Amy
  8. Status update on OAB report to Council on increasing OA member engagement with WG/IG activities - Document – Amy, Discussion/Feedback/Reality check
  9. AoB
    • OA member newsletter spotlight, 5'
    • Considerations on an RDA Code of Conduct: What recommendations would you make?
  10. Organisational Assembly Group Photo

RDA Organisational Assembly Montreal

Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone.
https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/739812821

You can also dial in using your phone.
Access Code: 739-812-821

Phone numbers
Australia: +61 2 9091 7603, Austria: +43 1 2530 22500, Belgium: +32 28 93 7002, Canada: +1 (647) 497-9380 Denmark: +45 32 72 03 69 Finland: +358 923 17 0556 France: +33 170 950 590 Germany: +49 692 5736 7300 Ireland: +353 15 360 756 Italy: +39 0 230 57 81 80 Netherlands: +31 207 941 375 New Zealand: +64 9 282 9510 Norway: +47 21 93 37 37 Spain: +34 932 75 1230 Sweden: +46 853 527 818 Switzerland: +41 225 4599 60 United Kingdom: +44 330 221 0097, United States: +1 (224) 501-3316

First GoToMeeting? Try a test session: http://link.gotomeeting.com/email-welcome