SUO: RE: SUO Procedures
Dear Jon,
I do not mean a purpose for SUO, but for the procedures document
itself. The purpose gives you a basis against which to check the
content to see that it meets the purpose (or else of course you
can change the purpose to match the document). Similarly, the
Target Audience (SUO members I guess) means that you can establish
some (if any) common context which should impact the language.
Matthew West
Principal Consultant
Shell Information Technology International Limited
Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom
Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Other Tel: +44 7796 336538
Email: matthew.west@shell.com
Internet: http://www.shell.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jon Awbrey [mailto:jawbrey@att.net]
> Sent: 12 November 2003 22:11
> To: West, Matthew R SITI-ITPSIE
> Cc: SUO
> Subject: Re: SUO Procedures
>
>
> o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
>
> Matthew,
>
> We already have a Scope and Purpose Document,
> worked out after many grueling months of BST&T,
> and each time I read it I like it more and more --
> I learned in Psych somewhere that this effect is
> a prediction of Cognitive Dissonance Theory, given
> the fact that I got no remuneration for the BST&T.
>
> So I think that what we need is a Procedures Guideline.
> And I suggest that we start in stepwise refinement mode,
> beginning with the broadest principles that all members
> of the working group would rationally adopt as maxims
> for their conduct, only when settlement is achieved
> on these grander scores, descending a step closer
> toward the brass tacks.
>
> Jon Awbrey
>
> P.S. Insert your own joke about Hegemony Cricket here.
>
> o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
>
> West, Matthew R SITI-ITPSIE wrote:
> >
> > Dear Colleagues,
> >
> > Well I am back refreshed from a holiday in South Africa
> > following my son who was also there with his school on a
> > cricket tour. I have even overcome the mountain of e-mail
> > that awaited my return.
> >
> > We need to start work on the procedures document. The
> > process I intend to apply is one we use in the part of
> > Shell that I am in:
> >
> > 1. I will define a purpose and target audience for the
> > document, together with a table of contents.
> >
> > 2. These are reviewed and amended, informally if we can
> > make that work, but more formally (raising formal issues)
> > if we run into problems.
> >
> > 3. I (and possibly others) will fill in the blanks. It
> > may not be appropriate to attempt a full draft before a
> > first review because of dependencies, but we will see.
> >
> > 4. Review draft document and amend, informally where
> > possible, formally when that doesn't work.
> >
> > 5. Repeat 3 & 4 until we have reached consensus, or a
> > point where a vote is necessary to resolve any issues.
> >
> > 6. I will propose a motion for acceptance of the document.
> >
> > 7. The document becomes subject to its own provisions
> > for revision and improvement.
> >
> > Any comments? (silence is taken as consent).
> >
> > Matthew West
> > Principal Consultant
> > Shell Information Technology International Limited
> > Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom
> >
> > Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Other Tel: +44 7796 336538
> > Email: matthew.west@shell.com
> > Internet: http://www.shell.com
>
> o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
>
>