This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "20130903 FGB concall"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
|colspan="2"|Chair/CTO ||colspan="2"|Members ||colspan="2"|Members | |colspan="2"|Chair/CTO ||colspan="2"|Members ||colspan="2"|Members | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | | ||Ron Parker|| maybe||George (Woody) Beeler||regrets ||Ewout Kramer | + | |x ||Ron Parker|| maybe||George (Woody) Beeler||regrets ||Ewout Kramer |
|- | |- | ||
| ||John Quinn || ||Grahame Grieve | | ||John Quinn || ||Grahame Grieve | ||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
|regrets ||Austin Kreisler | |regrets ||Austin Kreisler | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | |||Lynn Laakso, scribe | + | |x||Lynn Laakso, scribe |
|- | |- | ||
| − | | || | + | | x||Brian Pech |
|} | |} | ||
| Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
==Minutes== | ==Minutes== | ||
| − | + | *Discussion held without quorum. | |
| + | *Reviewed action items | ||
| + | **FGB elevator pitch, communications of what it is, and its intended timelines. | ||
| + | **FHIR use of ISO datatypes - methodology issue; need to discuss with Grahame. Need to reach out to him from FGB for statement of conformance and framework to policy for use of ISO datatypes. Grahame's participation on governance board discussed. Need Woody, Grahame, Ron, and Austin/John to be on a call - Ron will schedule. | ||
| + | **Will get back to precepts and risks. | ||
| + | **Ron needs to discuss with John on how to make the FGB a part of the organization to organization relationships on FHIR. Ron will follow up with John to establish such a protocol. | ||
| + | *Precept definition should include conformity assessments, along with other processes such as appeal processes. Remove these standing items from agenda - add to action item. Escalation responsibility is on the group and not to the appellant. Need to start evolving policy. FMG seems to be establishing policy on the fly, where they should be establishing process. What's in, what's out, etc are execution of governance policy. Set agenda on Friday meeting at WGM to tease out the policy statements behind the execution decisions. Escalation of awareness of decisions made on the fly by FMG for review by FGB discussed. Policy statements and premises for action as next steps after balloting also need discussion. Brian adds that the FMG status as 'working group' needs to be resolved. BAM work has started to build a home but needs better structure - need a BAM-lite to document something and create that framework. Ron will bring this to ArB. SDWG corollary would make a good example to tease out governance, management, and methodology activities. | ||
| + | *FGB communication with FMG should mine the last FMG minutes for relevant decision items on which policy statements need to be derived. Perhaps Thursdays Ron and Lynn can review and add to FGB agendas. | ||
| + | *FGB membership - quorum difficulties. Consider including broader perspectives with industry concerns. Good governance gives stakeholders confidence that the processes are conducted with balance to the community. | ||
| + | *Precept for FGB on the composition and criteria of the FMG. | ||
| − | + | Disconnected at 8:40 AM. | |
===Next Steps=== | ===Next Steps=== | ||
| Line 59: | Line 68: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|colspan="4" |'''Actions''' ''(Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)''<br/> | |colspan="4" |'''Actions''' ''(Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)''<br/> | ||
| − | * | + | |
| + | *FGB should put something together for elevator pitch and John puts it into his CTO report to the Board | ||
| + | *Ron will schedule Woody, Grahame, Ron, and Austin/John to be on a call to evaluate policy assertions with conformity to ISO Datatypes | ||
| + | *Ron develop precepts from the risks (conformity assessments, appeal processes, composition of FMG) | ||
| + | *Lynn schedule weekly review with Ron to 'mine' FMG minutes for decisions needing underlying policy statements | ||
| + | *Ron will address immediate need for "BAM-lite" with ArB. | ||
| + | *Ron will follow up with John to establish a protocol for FGB chair representation in external stakeholder relationships wrt FHIR. | ||
| + | |||
|- | |- | ||
|colspan="4" |'''Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items'''<br/> | |colspan="4" |'''Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items'''<br/> | ||
| − | *[[ | + | *[[20130910 FGB concall]] |
|} | |} | ||
Latest revision as of 12:48, 3 September 2013
| HL7 TSC FGB Meeting Minutes Location: call 770-657-9270 using code 985371# |
Date: 2013-09-03 Time: 8:00 AM U.S. Eastern | |
| Facilitator: Ron Parker | Note taker(s): Lynn Laakso | |
| Quorum = Chair plus 2 | yes/no | ||||
| Chair/CTO | Members | Members | |||
| x | Ron Parker | maybe | George (Woody) Beeler | regrets | Ewout Kramer |
| John Quinn | Grahame Grieve | ||||
| observers/guests | regrets | Austin Kreisler | |||
| x | Lynn Laakso, scribe | ||||
| x | Brian Pech | ||||
Agenda
- Roll call -
- Agenda Review
- Approve minutes of 20130827 FGB concall
- Action Item review:
- FGB should put something together for elevator pitch and John puts it into his CTO report to the Board
- review and develop assertions with conformity to ISO Datatypes
- Ron develop precepts from the risks
- FMG update -
- nominations
- Methodology update-
- Next steps: Define and Resource other Governance processes.
- Conformity Assessment
- Appeal Process / Escalation
- What is the appeal process for resources not chosen for inclusion in the ballot?
- What is the appeal / escalation process for Management decisions?
- What is the appeal / escalation process for Governance decisions? Responsibilities for resources (education, conformity process, appeal process)
Minutes
- Discussion held without quorum.
- Reviewed action items
- FGB elevator pitch, communications of what it is, and its intended timelines.
- FHIR use of ISO datatypes - methodology issue; need to discuss with Grahame. Need to reach out to him from FGB for statement of conformance and framework to policy for use of ISO datatypes. Grahame's participation on governance board discussed. Need Woody, Grahame, Ron, and Austin/John to be on a call - Ron will schedule.
- Will get back to precepts and risks.
- Ron needs to discuss with John on how to make the FGB a part of the organization to organization relationships on FHIR. Ron will follow up with John to establish such a protocol.
- Precept definition should include conformity assessments, along with other processes such as appeal processes. Remove these standing items from agenda - add to action item. Escalation responsibility is on the group and not to the appellant. Need to start evolving policy. FMG seems to be establishing policy on the fly, where they should be establishing process. What's in, what's out, etc are execution of governance policy. Set agenda on Friday meeting at WGM to tease out the policy statements behind the execution decisions. Escalation of awareness of decisions made on the fly by FMG for review by FGB discussed. Policy statements and premises for action as next steps after balloting also need discussion. Brian adds that the FMG status as 'working group' needs to be resolved. BAM work has started to build a home but needs better structure - need a BAM-lite to document something and create that framework. Ron will bring this to ArB. SDWG corollary would make a good example to tease out governance, management, and methodology activities.
- FGB communication with FMG should mine the last FMG minutes for relevant decision items on which policy statements need to be derived. Perhaps Thursdays Ron and Lynn can review and add to FGB agendas.
- FGB membership - quorum difficulties. Consider including broader perspectives with industry concerns. Good governance gives stakeholders confidence that the processes are conducted with balance to the community.
- Precept for FGB on the composition and criteria of the FMG.
Disconnected at 8:40 AM.
Next Steps
Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)
| |||
| Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items |
Back to FHIR_Governance_Board
© 2013 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved.
