20121024 TSC Risk Assessment call

TSC Risk Assessment Task Force Agenda/Minutes

HL7 TSC Meeting Minutes Location: call 770-657-9270 using code 985371# GoToMeeting ID: 998-903-490		Date: 2012-10-24 Time: 9:00 AM U.S. Eastern
Facilitator: Austin Kreisler		Note taker(s): Lynn Laakso

Quorum n/a
Facilitators		ArB		Members		Members
x	Austin Kreisler	resigned	Charlie Mead	x	Calvin Beebe	regrets	Pat van Dyke
x	Jane Curry	regrets	Ron Parker	x	Ed Tripp

Agenda

• Review definitions of categories in updated Risk Management Document.
• Review risk identification from other areas.
  • Austin on TSC P&P - updated document;
  • Ed on SI;
  • Jane on the harmonization process.
  • Pat: GOM and balloting;
  • Ron on org process of GOM;

Supporting Documents

• See http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/project/tsc/docman/Architecture/Risk_Assessment/

Minutes

Minutes/Conclusions Reached:
Austin convenes at 9:01 AM.

• Roll call - Austin notes that Charlie has resigned from this and the Datatypes task forces
• Agenda review - Categorization of risk and then review Austin and Jane's new documents
• Categorization of risk from updated Risk Management Document.
  • Technology was not used as a category in the TSC P&P risks.
  • Need to define the mitigating strategies against that category of risk, e.g. requirements
  • Jane identified quality as a risk, of inadequate or inferior quality products. AK notes that quality can be impacted by any of these categories. Should there be allowed to be overlap, as with a Venn diagram? Calvin notes we need a definition to identify if a risk is in-or-out but we would want to identify primary components to risks that overlap. AK asks if there are multiple categories identified does that mean we have not achieved the level of granularity needed. Ed suggests we evaluate cross-category risks to break it into multiple risks. Do the categories imply types of mitigation strategies? They need to be useful in determining the governance points. Jane adds she considered them in terms of actions to mitigate risks. Quality, for example, was mitigated by many of these categories. How do we manage against lack of coherence in harmonization, for example. Calvin would like to see the whole list and review categories after it. Is quality a category of risk or a result of risk not managed…
• Several categories discussed, in quality, capacity and capability among resource category, social-political definition modified for internal and external
• Harmonization risks reviewed. Some existing mitigation strategies already at work, and we don't want to break what's working. Inadequate review by co-chairs of applied changes discussed.
• TSC Policy risks reviewed. Austin admits that numbers were pulled from thin air, and for those items already being mitigated in the project scope statement he assumed that their original likelihood was present and gave them 100%.
• ACTION ITEM: Calvin will come up with a different name for Social-political for next week
• Calvin suggests that WGH unhealthy WG identification is current 0% likelihood.
• Calvin further notes that there is a risk of people not participating on ballots. It's not part of Work Group Health. Austin suggests that might be part of the GOM risks with participant mix and quorum levels on ballots and we'll wait to see what Pat's document suggests.

Austin notes at some point we'll review these all by line item to determine if we agree.

Adjourned 10:01 AM EDT

Next Steps

Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date) Calvin will come up with a different name for Social-political risk category for next week.

Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items Review risk identification from other areas. Pat: GOM and balloting; Ron on org process of GOM;

© 2012 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved.