26th CEOS Plenary | Bengaluru, India| 24-27 October 2012 Discussion of CEOS Decision-Making Processes CEOS Self-Study (CSS) Implementation Agenda Item

26th CEOS Plenary | Bengaluru, India| 24-27 October 2012

Discussion of CEOS Decision-Making ProcessesCEOS Self-Study (CSS) Implementation

Agenda Item 7C

Steven Hosford, CNESTimothy Stryker, CEO


Overview

• Objective: CEOS adoption of a systematic and useable corporate decision-making process – Adoption of new proposals and initiatives– Ongoing review for continuation/conclusion of CEOS initiatives

• Topics to be Addressed– Team Membership– Anticipated Schedule/Milestones– Initial findings on CEOS decision-making processes– Derived Ideas under Consideration within the Team


Team Membership• Takao Akutsu, JAXA• Marie- Josée Bourassa, CSA• Richard Eckman, NASA• Laura Frulla, CONAE• Steven Hosford, CNES (co-chair)• Jean Parcher, USGS• Ivan Petiteville, ESA• Brent Smith, NOAA• Greg Stensaas, WGCV• Tim Stryker (co-chair) A good cross-section of CEOS, through additional geographic

representation, is welcome!


Anticipated Schedule/Milestones

• Presentation of early/initial ideas and confirmation of next steps (Bangalore Plenary, Oct 2012)

• Dissemination of follow-up material to Team members outlining ideas (Nov-Dec 2012)

• Review/refinement of ideas into recommendations (Jan – Feb 2013)• Presentation and discussion of recommendations (SIT-28, Mar 2013)• Provision of final draft recommendations to CEOS SIT Writing Team on

Principles, Priorities, and Governance (Apr 2013)• Further Development/Coordination of SIT Writing Team’s paper across the

CEOS community (May-Sept 2013)– Includes sharing of paper and its recommendations for CEOS community review and

comment in advance of CEOS Plenary• Submit final SIT recommendations for CEOS Plenary approval (Oct 2013)

– Principles and Priorities– Governance (including decision-making processes)


Initial Findings on CEOS Decision- Making Processes

CSS Report• CEOS should maintain its ability to meeting its existing

commitments • Current ad hoc decision-making approach no longer suffices for

CEOS • A clear, fair, systematic and reliable mechanism is required to

assist CEOS in determining which new initiatives/projects should be undertaken (and continued)

CEOS Decision-Making Team• Formal SIT/Plenary review/approval process not applicable to

self-initiated “ground level” activities initiated by CEOS WGs, VCs, and SBA Teams, that are not major CEOS initiatives


Derived Ideas Under Consideration

• Strategic importance of Accepting/Rejecting Requests– Alignment with CEOS priorities and capacity

• CEOS Decision-Making Must Be Dynamic and Inclusive– Priorities should not become static and unresponsive to new internal or external

developments– Open and systematic review/decision-making required– Clear criteria for acceptance/rejection of proposals

• Many Shapes and Sizes of “CEOS Support”– Major, multi-agency initiatives and smaller-scale projects– Internally- and externally-generated requests

• Possible Review Team for Proposed Major New Initiatives– Initial review criteria discussed (see Backup Slides)– VC application process a possible model– Avoid “analysis paralysis”

• Appropriate Feedback/Approval Mechanisms – SEC, SIT, and Plenary levels


With Better Decision-Making, CEOS Will Soar to New Heights!

(Without it, well…..)


Backup Slides


Possible Criteria for Review and Decision-Making on Proposals for CEOS Support

• Is the proposed activity appropriate for CEOS, rather than for another existing coordination group or private sector organization/association?

• Is the proposed activity closely aligned with CEOS priorities, as stated CEOS’s governing documents (Strategic Guidance Document, Principles of Operation, Work Plan)?

• Is the proposed activity well-aligned with a sufficient number of individual CEOS Agencies’ Earth Observation priorities?

• What impact (positive/negative) will the proposed activity have on existing, ongoing CEOS activities?


Possible Criteria (cont’d)

• Can a sufficient number of CEOS Agencies successfully respond based on their existing technical and financial resources? (Note: A “sufficient number” of CEOS Agencies could vary widely, based on the size and scope of the proposed activity) – Data Provision– Data Processing Capacity

• If Agencies have sufficient resources, technical capacity and interest, are there additional policy considerations that would encourage or discourage their involvement – e.g., overarching data policies or prevailing public/private partnerships?

• If initiative is adopted, what will constitute its success and completion (or continuation)?

Documents

26th CEOS Plenary | Bengaluru, India| 24-27 October 2012 Discussion of CEOS Decision-Making Processes CEOS Self-Study (CSS) Implementation Agenda Item