201109 Marketing Meetings

This is the agenda of the meetings of the Marketing Council in San Diego (September 2011).

Tuesday Q1 (hosted by Education)

• Joint meeting (hosted by Education) - education plan, and the education part of the marketing plan.

Tuesday Q2

1. Attendance: Grant W, Karen vH, Charlie B, Martin E, Rene S., Mark S.
2. Report from the joint meeting with IMC Edu Q1. All topics were relevant to Marketing. See minutes of education WG for details.
   • Request from Education to have 2 joint quarters in San Antonio (Jan 2012), preferrably quarters on 2 different days, e.g. Tuesday and Thursday. WG agrees to have 2 joint quarters.
     • ACTION Grant to talk to Education to pick 2 quarters.
   • Link to followup from ambassador presentation to tutorials and other resources. I.e. ambassador presentation is a 'hook' which is meant to lead to futher activities. Need to identify and promote relevant tutorials in ambassador presentation.
3. Approval for marketing to be a co-sponsor of the "Maximizing the value of your HL7-involvement"-project of the International Marketing Committee. MOTION, approved.
4. Ambassador web page design
   • Presentation of the actual webpage is deferred to a teleconference.
   • It's basically a web page for various stakeholder categories to get information about (past) ambassador presentations. Discussion ensued about recorded webinars. Charlie: how about affiliate webinars? Affiliates have their own ambassadors. Material/webinar doesn't have to come back to HL7. Grant: at least want to do tracking. Ambassador material is mostly adopted, 'mashed up' with other material at the country level. Rene: current rules on use of ambassador presentations are too strict. We probably need to 'relax' the rules on re-use of the ambassador presentations.
5. Issue list for the potential new marketing firm (Gora/Rene/Martin)
   • See the version of this wiki page as it was on the day of this meeting:[1] - the issues were discussed, none were added.
6. Strategic Marketing Plan
   • Actions/challenges in the marketing plan should follow directly from the Strategic Initiatives, plus any specific additional issues (identified by the board) outside of the scope of the SI
     • ACTION: Send request to the board that (at least the co-chairs) have access to draft versions of the SI and the Business Plan.
   • Need to clarify that the 'marketing view' of our products in the standards-category, and why this is a probably different one from the 'standard creator view' on our products - we need to document the context of our view, and the question we're trying to answer. In other words "to better define what a product "should be" in our environment". Also see Appendix A below.
     • ACTION: create wording that clarifies the 'marketing view' of our products in the standards-category, and why this is a probably different one from the 'standard creator view' on our products.
   • Next steps in development of the marketing plan:
     • Better syncing with Business Plan and the SI.
     • Marketing Firm is likely to be present/communicate with the marketing council during the May 2012 meeting.
7. Next WGM planning (San Antonio)
   • 2 quarters joint with Education (hosted by Education).
   • If the marketing firm isn't appointment by the end of this year, discuss in San Antonio what the planning should be.
   • Discuss on teleconference: have an ambassador lunch? Marketing Lunch? Questionaire ?
   • 1 quarter (non joint)
8. Meeting Adjourned

Wednesday Lunch (12:30-13:45)

1. Meeting Cancelled

Thursday Q3

1. Meeting Cancelled

Appendix A: TSC Minutes Sept.10th

1. From the TSC minutes: [2]
   • Product Strategy Project (Project Insight # 413) – web site development underway for presentation layer to product briefs according to architecture defined in the document circulated a month ago. Ed notes that the disconnect in our product strategy is an inability to select something specific out of V3 to be able to purchase it. He doesn’t have a solution for that but it’s a packaging issue on interdependencies in the technical packaging. CDA managed to break out, and ICSR was trying to, for separate packaging.
   • The organization is focused on developing things, not selling things. The domain perspective was necessary for scoping development in an area but packaging all the dependencies needed to implement just a domain or functional/business viewpoints is not available. Woody notes that Fresh Look is a consequence of those issues. Should the product list be reviewed with an eye for those areas that have broad applicability and where are they narrowly focused? Do we need a better product strategy, or do we need to better define what a product “should be” in our environment, versus trying to define the products we have. Ron notes that SAIF tried to define traceability from a set of requirements. This is in theory but not yet in play and is not available to define a product perspective. Woody notes the idea to set requirements for an EHR is too large to create an entire top down product strategy. Ron notes that the architecture is a frame from within you can define some bottom up packages.
   • TSC still needs to ask the board to consider a product strategy. Woody also notes we collectively need to look at the products already held out as products, and determine those that have a position where they can exist independent of other products, or as part of a formal product we have not yet recognized.