T3F Deliverables and success criteria
Work items / deliverables
- three areas
- 6 step plan
- TD composition and terms of reference
Background
email thread from 9th March
all I agree that we need to schedule some concall time (15 mins max) to take a step back and check what our deliverables and success criteria are, and how we are doing against the timelines that we have set ourselves. all the best Charlie
From: Case, James T. [1] Sent: 09 March 2007 23:25 To: Buitendijk, Hans (MED US); George W Beeler; Bernd Blobel; Charlie McCay; Virginia Lorenzi; craigparkermd@gmail.com Subject: RE: T3F Topic of Discussion
Hans,
There won’t be a call Tuesday due to harmonization, but I am in full agreement that the team so far has been focusing not only on the charter issues, but the downstream related issues that will impact or will be impacted by the organizational structure of the TD. We have been surprised by unspoken expectations from the board and the3 transitional tema in the past. It is clear that we get everyone on the same page ASAP.
Jim
James T. Case MS, DVM, PhD
Professor, Clinical Diagnostic Informatics
California Animal Health and Food Safety Laboratory
School of Veterinary Medicine
University of California
P.O. Box 1770
Davis, CA 95617-1770
530-752-4408
jtcase@ucdavis.edu
From: Buitendijk, Hans (MED US) [2] Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 3:01 PM To: George W Beeler; Case, James T.; Bernd Blobel; Charlie McCay; Virginia Lorenzi; craigparkermd@gmail.com Subject: T3F Topic of Discussion
During the Transition Governance meeting today, Liora Alshuler and Chuck Meyer expressed some concern that we are spending more time on defining CTO pre-requisites then the main focus of what they believe the T3F charter is would suggest. This sense was destilled from the status reports and e-mails exchanged to date.
Both Ed Hammond and I clarified that the CTO discussion is only part of the discussion, but that it is important to have this understood and that we do need to provide feedback on this in light of the T3F charter. Liora has a focus on Architecture that appears almost at the exclusion of the other topics we need to cover as well, Organization and Process (as identified in the misson/charter), otherwise the TD to which the T3F is a transitional forum can't operate. I'm not convinced that consequently we're all on the same page. "We" meaning various board members and T3F. I believe "we" (as in the T3F members) are completely in sync and on the right page. To that end I've asked who and when we should have a conversation with Transition Governance team members to enable us to go beyond the status reports and address some of the questions that may exist. I've provided them with the link to the wiki as well (assuming there is no extra security access required) so they have an opportunity to see what we are working on.
Providing some insight why we are going the topics in the sequence and depth that we are going through them may help alleviate some of the concerns that are being raised.
We should talk further about this on Tuesday in terms of when a good time would be to provide a more in-depth review.
Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Inc.
Hans J. Buitendijk
51 Valley Stream Parkway,
Malvern, PA 19355-1406
Phone: 610 219 2087
Mobile: 484 354 6474
Fax: 610 219 3054
E-Mail: hans.buitendijk@siemens.com
This message and any included attachments are from Siemens Medical Solutions and are intended only for the addressee(s). The information contained herein may include trade secrets or privileged or otherwise confidential information. Unauthorized review, forwarding, printing, copying, distributing, or using such information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you received this message in error, or have reason to believe you are not authorized to receive it, please promptly delete this message and notify the sender by e-mail with a copy to Central.SecurityOffice@siemens.com
Thank you
