Difference between revisions of "20121212 TSC Risk Assessment call"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
|colspan="2"|Facilitators ||colspan="2"|ArB ||colspan="2"|Members||colspan="2"|Members | |colspan="2"|Facilitators ||colspan="2"|ArB ||colspan="2"|Members||colspan="2"|Members | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | | ||Austin Kreisler|| || Calvin Beebe || || Pat van Dyke | + | | x||Austin Kreisler||x || Calvin Beebe || regrets|| Pat van Dyke |
|- | |- | ||
| − | | ||Jane Curry || ||Ed Tripp || || || | + | | ||Jane Curry ||x ||Ed Tripp || || || |
|} | |} | ||
===Agenda=== | ===Agenda=== | ||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
*Action items review: | *Action items review: | ||
*Risk vs. Issue and granularity of likelyhood discussion | *Risk vs. Issue and granularity of likelyhood discussion | ||
| − | *Review of new risk items from GOM (see | + | *Review of new risk items from GOM (see [http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/docmanfileversion/7115/9935/GOM-section-17-RiskAssessment_20121211.xls GOM Section 17 risks]) |
*Continue Review [http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/docmanfileversion/7113/9931/ConsolidatedRiskAssessment20121205.xlsx Consolidated risk assessment spreadsheet] | *Continue Review [http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/docmanfileversion/7113/9931/ConsolidatedRiskAssessment20121205.xlsx Consolidated risk assessment spreadsheet] | ||
| Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
*Roll call | *Roll call | ||
*Agenda Review | *Agenda Review | ||
| + | *Action items review: | ||
| + | *Risk vs. Issue and granularity of likelihood discussion | ||
| + | **Austin describes distinction of risk versus issue. Risk is in future, not currently happening, where issue is something you're dealing with now. Issue is in effect a risk that has current likelihood of 100%. Active mitigation strategies are in place to put out fires for issues. Risks have strategies for avoiding it from happening. Need to evaluate this distinction for the purposes of developing governance. | ||
| + | **Overengineering likelihood from beyond low/medium/high granularity is to be avoided. Austin cites an example of a matrix on likelihood and criticality where you're looking for high likelihood and high degree of criticality. | ||
| + | **Flag 100% current likelihood as issues and address with TSC. | ||
| + | *Review of new risk items from GOM | ||
| + | **[http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/docmanfileversion/7116/9936/GOM-section-9-RiskAssessment_20121211.xls Section 9 risks] | ||
| + | ***09.01.07 endorsing tools – have one coming from EHR and SDWG on Monday and no process available. | ||
| + | ***09.02.04 WG co-chairs not available for WGM sessions; SDWG and RCRIM or other government-represented cochairs may not have travel permission or may be otherwise scheduled with Board duties to attend WG meetings. | ||
| + | **[http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/docmanfileversion/7115/9935/GOM-section-17-RiskAssessment_20121211.xls GOM Section 17 risks]) | ||
| + | ***17.02 changes to GOM not communicated effectively to membership/cochairs. | ||
| + | **Plan to move these into the consolidated spreadsheet | ||
| + | *Continue Review [http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/docmanfileversion/7113/9931/ConsolidatedRiskAssessment20121205.xlsx Consolidated risk assessment spreadsheet] | ||
| + | **Left off on SWOT risk with facilitators. Not having enough facilitators plus needing facilitators for each WG, plus having multiple facilitator roles for 40+ Work Groups balloting on average 2x/year. | ||
| + | **Discussion on FHIR example reducing requirement for modeling facilitator. However, direction of creating FHIR liaisons is essentially creating a FHIR facilitator. Risk is that there are not enough facilitators to satisfy demand leading to delayed or lower quality projects. Black market for facilitators operating informally (payment in beer). TSC needs to brainstorm some alternative strategies. Austin plans for Saturday meeting to review with TSC the critical risks and issues. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Being out of time, the group adjourned at 9:45 AM ET | ||
| Line 51: | Line 68: | ||
|colspan="4" |'''Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items'''<br/> | |colspan="4" |'''Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items'''<br/> | ||
*[[20121219 TSC Risk Assessment call]]. | *[[20121219 TSC Risk Assessment call]]. | ||
| − | + | *[http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/docmanfileversion/7118/9938/ConsolidatedRiskAssessment20121212.xlsx Updated Consolidated Risk Assessment] | |
Latest revision as of 15:00, 12 December 2012
TSC Risk Assessment Task Force Agenda/Minutes
| HL7 TSC Meeting Minutes Location: call 770-657-9270 using code 985371# |
Date: 2012-12-12 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 | x | Calvin Beebe | regrets | Pat van Dyke | ||
| Jane Curry | x | Ed Tripp | |||||
Agenda
- Roll call
- Agenda Review
- Action items review:
- Risk vs. Issue and granularity of likelyhood discussion
- Review of new risk items from GOM (see GOM Section 17 risks)
- Continue Review Consolidated risk assessment spreadsheet
Supporting Documents
Minutes
- Roll call
- Agenda Review
- Action items review:
- Risk vs. Issue and granularity of likelihood discussion
- Austin describes distinction of risk versus issue. Risk is in future, not currently happening, where issue is something you're dealing with now. Issue is in effect a risk that has current likelihood of 100%. Active mitigation strategies are in place to put out fires for issues. Risks have strategies for avoiding it from happening. Need to evaluate this distinction for the purposes of developing governance.
- Overengineering likelihood from beyond low/medium/high granularity is to be avoided. Austin cites an example of a matrix on likelihood and criticality where you're looking for high likelihood and high degree of criticality.
- Flag 100% current likelihood as issues and address with TSC.
- Review of new risk items from GOM
- Section 9 risks
- 09.01.07 endorsing tools – have one coming from EHR and SDWG on Monday and no process available.
- 09.02.04 WG co-chairs not available for WGM sessions; SDWG and RCRIM or other government-represented cochairs may not have travel permission or may be otherwise scheduled with Board duties to attend WG meetings.
- GOM Section 17 risks)
- 17.02 changes to GOM not communicated effectively to membership/cochairs.
- Plan to move these into the consolidated spreadsheet
- Section 9 risks
- Continue Review Consolidated risk assessment spreadsheet
- Left off on SWOT risk with facilitators. Not having enough facilitators plus needing facilitators for each WG, plus having multiple facilitator roles for 40+ Work Groups balloting on average 2x/year.
- Discussion on FHIR example reducing requirement for modeling facilitator. However, direction of creating FHIR liaisons is essentially creating a FHIR facilitator. Risk is that there are not enough facilitators to satisfy demand leading to delayed or lower quality projects. Black market for facilitators operating informally (payment in beer). TSC needs to brainstorm some alternative strategies. Austin plans for Saturday meeting to review with TSC the critical risks and issues.
Being out of time, the group adjourned at 9:45 AM ET
Next Steps
| Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date) | |||
| Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items
|
back to TSC Risk Assessment
© 2012 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved.
