SUO: Re: Procedures
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
[Reposting after 2 hours]
Matthew,
Fair enough, but I should have thought
that "more perfect co-product" would
just about cover it. The Quod to be
Demonstrated is that there is a clear
relationshio between the Purpose set
and the Procedures to be developed.
Jon Awbrey
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
West, Matthew R SITI-ITPSIE wrote:
>
> 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
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o