Minutes of Project Management Board meeting, 25th October 2012

Present: Simon Lambert, William Kilbride, Maurizio Lunghi, Veronika Praendl-Zika.

Review of actions from previous meeting

The only reasonable chance for the PMB to have an extended meeting together in Frascati is on the evening of Wednesday 7th November.

Introducing WP monitoring

After discussion it was agreed to institute monthly reports from WP leaders to stream leaders, briefly summarising (~ 1 page) progress (at task level), risks and dissemination activities. The incentive for WP leaders is that these reports will be easily reusable to produce the yearly periodic reports.

Effort reporting will not be part of this; rather the coordinator will obtain information for quarterly effort reports. This proposal will be put to the GA for support. Details such as whether the monthly reports should be prepared on the wiki or as separate documents will be worked out later.

Preparing for the All Hands Meeting

In email discussions there was a disagreement over the principal focus of the Stream 1 + 4 session. After discussion it was agreed that the session should mainly focus on analysis in terms of stakeholders of Stream 1/4 outputs as they contribute to the VCoE (training, events, standards, testing environments, formal qualifications, ...), thus providing input to the VCoE development. Veronika wants to focus particularly on the communication activities from the stakeholder point of view. Veronika and William will discuss how to implement this at the meeting.

Revision of the DoW

There was discussion of the best way of implementing the requested shifts of effort between WPs. A master table was prepared at the meeting in June; however it seems quicker and more reliable to have each individual partner enter their own requests on the large table on the wiki (http://aparsen.digitalpreservation.eu/bin/view/Main/ApanYear2PlusPlanResourceTransfer)

Stakeholder strategy and possible stakeholder database

Veronika and Gerald Jäschke have discussed the possibility of a stakeholder database. Veronika made a stakeholder analysis by WP. If there is interest in a large-scale stakeholder database it would require a substantial investment of effort, going beyond the interactive map. The risk is that it will become a very large job and very difficult to maintain over a period of years. Specially targetted lists of stakeholders seems to be a better approach.

It was therefore agreed to adopt a pragnmatic approach, that GLOBIT will run the interactive map during the life of the project and hand over to the VCoE at the end.

Any other issues

Maurizio reported on the EUDAT conference he attended in Barcelona earlier in the week. There are promising opportunities for cooperation, particularly in dissemination and training.

-- SimonLambert - 2012-10-25

Topic revision: r1 - 2012-10-25 - SimonLambert
 
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Powered by PerlCopyright © 2008-2019 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? Send feedback