<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[council] FW: Motion to extend PPSC and OSC charters
- To: <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [council] FW: Motion to extend PPSC and OSC charters
- From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 08:45:28 -0500
- Cc: "Philip Sheppard" <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: AcuP0rqSd7P/D+5aTAOhVa4LDA6pKAAAOZWQACcLSKAACTe3UA==
- Thread-topic: Motion to extend PPSC and OSC charters
I am forwarding the following message from Philip Sheppard, OSC Chair,
regarding the status of the OSC and PPSC.
Chuck
-----Original Message-----
From: Philip Sheppard [mailto:philip.sheppard@xxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 4:35 AM
To: Gomes, Chuck
Cc: J. Scott Evans YAHOO
Subject: Motion to extend PPSC and OSC charters
Chuck,
I note there is discussion on Council about the role of the OSC and
PPSC.
As Chair of the OSC may I ask you to forward this to Council?
Philip
----------------------------
Council members,
when the OSC and PPSC structures were first developed and I was on
Council, I
spoke against the three tier approach:
1. work team (WT)
2. steering committee review (SC)
3. Council adoption.
I feared duplication and interference.
Now I am off Council and have worked in the middle layer I see merit in
it.
There is no duplication and there is burden sharing of the work.
The community-based work teams do the real work and thrash out
proposals.
The SC's then provide a second community-based oversight which is
intended to
ensure the WT proposals:
- met the objective / terms of reference of the group
- are fit for purpose
- are practical without being overly burdensome.
This oversight has often resulted in referring back proposals to the WTs
for
refinement before they get sent to Council.
This is intended to allow volunteer Council members to get on with
managing
policy.
The third step - Council adoption - should not be a rubber stamp but
insightful
review of the procedures by Council with a view to practicality.
Of course with some new procedures we don't know how they will work
(efficient
or burdensome) until they are tested.
At that point the current system is Council alerts the SCs "unfit for
purpose
because of xxx and yyy" and the SCs review and improve.
That seems a good system to me.
I urge therefore an extension of the mandates of both SCs to allow these
community members to improve the processes of Council while Council
focuses on
managing policy.
Philip Sheppard
Chair OSC
---------------------------
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|