2017-01-16 TSC WGM Agenda

Back to TSC_Minutes_and_Agendas

Day	Date	'	Time	Icon	Event	Chair	Scribe	Room
Monday	2017 January 16	AM	Q1
			Q2
		PM	Q3
			Q4
			Q5		TSC Monday Co-Chairs Dinner/Meeting	Ken McCaslin	Anne Wizauer
			- - -		Collect food/drink from buffet
						TSC Co-chair Dinner
			17:45 - 18:00		Welcome and TSC Chair Report	Ken McCaslin, TSC Chair
			18:00 - 18:15		CTO Report	Wayne Kubick
			18:15 - 18:25		Leadership Development Committee Update	Stan Huff
			18:25 – 18:30		PMO Update	Dave Hamill, PMO
			19:00 - 20:00		Steering Division Meetings Domain Experts - Blanco Foundation and Technology - Regency East #1 Structure and Semantic Design - Regency East #2 Technical and Support Services - Regency East #3

Minutes

Meeting Information

HL7 Co-chairs dinner/meeting Location: Regency Ballroom West		Date: 2017-01-16 Time: 17:15-21:00pm
Facilitator	Ken McCaslin	Note taker(s)	Anne Wizauer
Quorum Requirements Met: n/a
Attendees:

Agenda

1. Welcome and TSC Report - Ken McCaslin, TSC Chair
2. CTO Report - Wayne Kubick
3. Leadership Development Committee Update - Stan Huff
4. PMO Update - Dave Hamill

Links to other reports:

1. Harmonization Report - Ted Klein
2. Ballot Report - Lynn Laakso

Q&A

1. For Ken McCaslin:
   • Q: Patrick Lloyd - TSC transition: in the past when we reorganized, we brought the problem to this group. Not sure what the problem is or who is involved. Concern over lack of transparancy.
   • A: Ken - On Saturday, we started a process to figure out what the issues are and what we need to address. Wayne will cover more in his presentation. We've been hearing that people don't know how to get engaged at HL7. The other thing we were hearing was that people were shopping PSSes to figure out where they fit in. So many WGs doing slightly different things, and external orgs were struggling to figure out how to get their project engaged. We're not trying to do a dramatic change. We're trying to handle it using essentialism and simplification. Trying to keep people engaged and have people come here and feel useful. Change is necessary in order to remain a viable organization, and it may be time to challenge what we're doing.
   • Q: AMS - We're not opposed to change, it's just that there wasn't an appearance of openness.
   • A: Wayne - states that he will address further in a few minutes.
2. For Wayne Kubick:
   • None
3. For Stan Huff
   • Comment from Virginia Lorenzi: I feel much more comfortable with what was presented today than last time.
   • Would people have to self nominate under one of the categories? What if the person has an idea that doesn't fit?
   • A: They have to pick one of the categories, but they could write in their intentions.
   • Q: Concern about having more than one candidate from LDC per category. How will we know who the LDC recommends for the position?
   • Q: How is the LDC comprised and what are its objectives?
   • A: The LDC is chaired by the immediate past Board chair. The remaining members are nominated and we would solicit your help to do so. The LDC would be handling all of the political underpinnings of the organization, finding mentors, assisting people who want to be more involved in leadership, leadership training, and finally comprising the ballot.
   • Q: Anyone who is a member in good standing should be able to participate in LDC whether or not they choose to run for the board. If you have a majority of HL7 members who have gone through LDC, then making LDC a requirement for the board becomes a no-brainer. This would create an environment where the change come from the bottom up rather than top down.
   • A: The LDC itself is the committee that's charged with executing the program. The training program is open to everyone.
   • Q: How does this foster change? The LDC is made up of the same folks who are currently in that position. How are we breaking out of the box? We are perpetuating more of the same.
   • A: The thought is that we're quite a homogeneous group of people. We don't have as many people who are experts in finance or other things. The thought is that the LDC will seek out some people who aren't like the people who aren't just like us. It's not about who your friends are, it's about how can we best address the issues coming to the board. By focusing on skills rather than friendships we think we'll have different people on the ballot than we have now. If we don't have someone who can handle fundraising, we can recruit outside the group. Mary Kay asks why people have to be a member of HL7. Stan replies that we have appointees who come from outside HL7, but they are members by the time they reach the board. Mary Kay states we are limiting ourselves by not electing people from the outside. Stan: The board can be sued for malfeasance if they aren't members; there has to be a legal way of obligating them. That's a question we should ask the board, if we can elect people who aren't members.
   • Q: Ken Rubin - When you get several steps removed, it looks like handpicking. We should have elected and appointed positions.
   • A: I would support that as well.
   • Q: Have the categories been thought out?
   • A: No, that is part of the next steps. That is on the schedule for March/April
   • Q: In terms of the mentoring/training - is there a curriculum?
   • A: Yes, we would engage an outside organization who are experts in leadership training. For the teaching about HL7, we would do it as a tutorial open to everyone.
4. For Dave Hamill
   • None