

  All Discussions  |  

  Hello Post  |  

  Direct Messages  |   

  Categories  |  

  How-To(Forum)

Workstreams

DD

Hi All
to advance our goals (whatever we agree them to be) there will be some workstreams.

I believe that to address goals, we’ll need activity on:

Content Advancement
Building examples and references of use
Website
Social Media (LinkedIn, YouTube…)
Professional body outreach
Partner outreach
Exams
Events
Member management, donations
Operating meetings
Finance

Have I got that right - and who might be able to help what?

simon

We don’t have to have a unanimous view of a definitive set of goals or priorities to make progress; merely non-contradictory intentions to
progress topics of individual interest.

I think many of the above candidate workstream headings can be significantly progressed by conversation here amongst an active group of folk - Which serves all of the work streams with a content development theme

If we all as individuals post links elsewhere back to these conversations then we will draw people in and we will encourage the search engines to list us which will aid many more of the work streams.

I have already done a substantial amount of work on exams and there is a usable initial offering that is capable of substantial deepening broadening polishing - anyone who wishes to add credentials to their CV as instrumental in the maturing of the BIG Certification Scheme has only to stand forwards and invest some time and effort 🙂 - That might start with taking the exams themselves and then asking an @Admins to add them to the @ExamReviewers group Which has access rights to theExamReview threads

DD

Content Advancement

Building examples and references of use

Website

Social Media (LinkedIn, YouTube…)

Professional body outreach

Partner outreach

Exams

Events

Member management, donations

Operating meetings

Finance

I suggest
3 & 4 & 8 in the list above ~= A) Raising VisibilityEngagement/ OutReach Activities
1, 5, 6, 8 ~= B) Building the Knowledge BaseBOK & IP Development &Body of Knowledge (BoK)Related Topics in Business & Governances and Purpose & Conduct
9, 10 11 ~= C) Infrastructure Of Operations partlyBIG Purpose, Vision and Goals
6, 7, 8 , 9 ~= E) Potential Revenue Streams
2, 5, 6, 7 ~= F) Building the Value Case/ CollateralBIG Case Studies & References

The items A through F seem to cover: Having something to say, People to say it too & with, Having the means to say it

I’m also sure different thinking and refinement with added value is possible - Enough for now¿?

3¢

simon

One more thought

We’ve got a knowledge flow inwards as described above

We need the knowledge transfer outwards.

Exams demonstrate receipt of knowledge and ability to apply it but we have to transfer it from our body of knowledge into people’s daily working practises - the work of partners - But maybe we should say explicitly “available as an opportunity for others to exploit under licence”

ChrisB

My suggestion is that we can simplify the list of objectives/domains along the lines suggested by Simon (perhaps with some removal of duplications) and build a roadmap for the CIC based on these and the required actions so we can bring all these items together visually and get a clear picture of where we are and where we are going and how various activities relate to each other at any point.

Currently it is hard to pull together tons of information in emails and teaute tms and elsewhere and to see how various activities impact others. E.g. does an event contribute to A, B and E, or just A? Or is there a dependency between two ostensibly unrelated activities that all should be aware of and where are they on the timeline?

simon

ChrisB

ChrisB it is hard to pull together tons of information in emails and teaute tms and elsewhere and to see how various activities impact others

Precisely why I think we should be using this community space. To be explicit

recording to this forum creates a permanent, visible, shared, democratic/ public record
With appropriate tagging it allows grouping and recall of related objectives and activity

Personally I think for the structure of the forum anticipated and consolidated the work streams question and gives us a starting point from which to refine - that’s why I included the tags in the consolidating analysis above.

The only item not That is the what’s in it for me for partners.

Summary of the discussion I had with Dave is somewhat vague in my mind now but if I remember rightly ran along the lines of.

anybody can use BIG IP as an end consumer
If you want to be an intermediary selling products or service using BIG IP then you need a licence - an agreement to pay a fee to the CIC
The CIC will quality assure organisations and individuals comprehension of the IP. There is a challenge in that because big is advisory not prescriptive and it is a framework relying on pre-existing techniques tools and insight not a solution pretending to be complete (IE It isn’t SAFe! Or PMI !)
Should the CIC’s commercial structure be as transparent as its IP content? - I think probably yes

DD

Totally agree ChrisB
The simple picture used so far is this - https://1drv.ms/p/s!AscRj7Bfp6vQg_pxht6A62IxNM0uUQ?e=Afc1vS
I believe once we have a purpose and vision - the workloads - and how to group them, will follow.
I also agree with you that there is not a simple way to totally isolate the workstreams as self contained.
So our task in setting up terms of reference for workstreams will be to maps dependencies and provide integration.

DD

Hi simon

IMO The what’s in to for partners has to be up to partners to see for themselves. If they cannot see it for themselves - they will not exploit it.

That said - I cannot stress enough - BIG stuff will no nowhere fast if partners are not leveraging BIG.

So - I have, many times, offered to collaborate with partners to assist them in the process of working out how they can benefit - but frankly - some partners are not interested in that support.

Hence I believe it is important to have a Partner workstream to assist partners on boarding with the BIG opportunity, and I’ve encouraged partners to collaborate with each other e.g. go-big.net to be able to pitch beyond individual capabilities.
So - come on partners - get cracking :-)

WRT specific partner agreements - I’ve been around this loop before

anybody can use BIG IP as an end consumer - yes - subject to creative commons licence.
If you want to be an intermediary selling products or service using BIG IP then you need a licence - an agreement to pay a fee to the CIC - not quite. the CC4 licence means the content can be used as long as you reference it and allow others to use content you have developed with it on the same basis. If what a partner is doing requires something else - that can be negotiated - but the BIC CIC needs funding and that is a possible funding source.
The CIC will quality assure organisations and individuals comprehension of the IP. There is a challenge in that because big is advisory not prescriptive and it is a framework relying on pre-existing techniques tools and insight not a solution pretending to be complete (IE It isn’t SAFe! Or PMI !) - kind of - at the moment BIG CIC has created an exam which demonstrates someone has answered questions correctly - no assurance implied. We have a challenge to develop in this area - and that has to be with partners
Should the CIC’s commercial structure be as transparent as its IP content? - I think probably yes - Totally agree.

DD

I’ve processed to dos and the thinking Simon offered on the grouping, and here is my response

BOK (includes B) Building the Knowledge Base + F) Building the Value Case/ Collateral)
• Professional Body Outreach
• Partner Outreach
• Content Advancement
• Building examples and references of use
• Exam development
• Website Content

Publishing
• Website Management

Engagement, Publicity and Events
• Website Content
• Social Media (LinkedIn, YouTube…)
• Collaboration Platform use
• Member Management
• Partners
• Volunteers

Revenue Streams
• Donations
• Partner management and Sponsorship
• Exam operation
• Paid events?

Infrastructure Of Operations
• Vision Purpose and Goals
• Operating meetings
• Collaboration Platform Management
• Document Management
• Accounts

simon

DD
Agreed
I’d add to the infrastructure of operations

Roles & role holder (expected impacts and competencies? (& Rights privileges and rewards??))

DD

Following on from discussions today - a little refinement

BOK - Building the Value Case / Collateral
• Value Proposition
• BIG CIC for the public, members, partners and professional bodies
• BIG for stakeholder groups
BOK - Building the Knowledge Base
• Content Advancement
• Building examples and references of use for the BoK
• Integration / alignment with bodies of knowledge
• Exam development
• (website content)

Website Management

Engagement
• Professional Body Outreach
• Identification
• Alignment
• Value Proposition
• Activity
• Partner Outreach
• Identification
• Alignment
• Value Proposition
• Activity
• Stories and evidence capture
• Testimonials / examples
• Problem profiles
• Data about integrated governance status
• Data bot pain points and outcomes
• Member and Volunteer Management

Publicity and Events
• Stakeholder blogs / events
• Social Media (LinkedIn, YouTube…)
• Collaboration Platform use

Revenue Streams
• Donations
• Partner Management and Sponsorship
• Exam operation
• Paid events?

Operations
• Vision Purpose and Goals
• Operating meetings
• Collaboration Platform Management
• Document Management
• Accounts

I would propose to float these groups and recruit playmates to develop / progress them

Natalia_Jobson

DD thank you for this, David. Do I understand correctly that we now pick which group(s) to participate in?
If so , I’d choose Engagement, and/or Events, and/or Revenue streams.
Happy to get involved in either of them.

Thank you.
Natalia



  All Discussions  |  

  Hello Post  |  

  Direct Messages  |   

  Categories  |  

  How-To(Forum)