The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007 Organisational & Governance Study Robin G. Arak Archway Computer Associates Ltd Bratislava 27 April 2007.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Delivery of industrial-strength Grid middleware: Establishing an effective European approach Professor Yike Guo Imperial College London, UK & InforSense.
Advertisements

Alan Edwards European Commission 5 th GEO Project Workshop London, UK 8-9 February 2011 * The views expressed in these slides may not in any circumstances.
What is Sport Governance? Ensuring legal obligations are met and appropriate policies are in place Putting an organisation in a position to control and.
Slide 1 ASPIRE STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOP Brussels Thursday 13 September Michael Nowlan Consultant THE.
NEREUS General Assembly December NEREUS Strategy Consultation Management Board announced Strategy Review; Granada General Assembly; April 2010.
A Proposal for TEIN Organization (draft v2.0) 22 nd Jan 2007 Dr. ByungKyu Kim TEIN Org Task Force TEIN2 Technical Committee.
Why and how we became a mutual Graham Barnes MyCSP Ltd.
Connect. Communicate. Collaborate TNC Bruges, 22 May 2008 GÉANT2: The Good the Bad and the Ugly - What worked and what didn’t work? Robin G. Arak.
Dale Robertson, DANTE PR Manager 18 March 2005, UNI-C, Lyngby, Denmark GÉANT User Survey Objectives, Methodology, Experience.
1 RENATER National Network for Technology, Education and Research in France.
Report back from Parallel Group 1 Shirley Wood UKERNA and TERENA Executive.
Presentation Why we are considering Trust Status.
Session V: Programme Roles and Responsibilities
Technical Review Group (TRG)Agenda 27/04/06 TRG Remit Membership Operation ICT Strategy ICT Roadmap.
Copyright JNT Association 20051Optional Copyright JNT Association Joining the UK Access Management Federation 4th April.
Benchmarking as a management tool for continuous improvement in public services u Presentation to Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation u Peter.
Viewpoint Consulting – Committed to your success.
23 June Strategy Proposal Heinz Stockinger on behalf of the Executive Board SwiNG Assembly Meeting Berne, 23 June 2008.
Access and Benefit Sharing and the Nagoya Protocol Nashina Shariff Manager Environmental Stewardship Branch November 2014.
Cross-border Empowerment of Next Generation Access National Networks MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND COMMUNICATIONS REPUBLIC OF BULGARIA.
WP5 Strategy Domenico Giardini SED ETHZ. WP5 Objectives Harmonize national implementation Integrate the European scientific community Establish Centres.
A Task for NRENs: Application Support and Services UbuntuNet-Connect 2008, Lilongwe, Malawi 11th November 2008 Gerti Foest, DFN-Verein.
Connect communicate collaborate Campus Best Practices Gunnar Bøe, Section Manager, Campus Networks and Systems, UNINETT Skopje, 15 Sept
TTBIZLINK PROJECT MINISTRY OF TRADE, INDUSTRY, INVESTMENT & COMMUNICATIONS.
Access to Clinical Expertise Steve Bain David Powell Jemma Hughes Paula Jeffries.
Collaborating with the Quality Code Christopher J Cox Head of Collaborative Partnerships, Nottingham Trent University.
GEO Work Plan Symposium 2012 ID-05 Resource Mobilization for Capacity Building (individual, institutional & infrastructure)
ConnectMe Authority Strategic Plan May Broadband Strategy – Healthcare For the healthcare industry: The Authority will work with decision makers.
Euei1. 2 Facilitation Workshop and Policy Dialogue Maputo April 2005 Enrico Strampelli European Commission DG Development.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION UPDATE JANUARY THE VISION AND MISSION THE VISION: ENRICHING LIVES AND CREATING SUCCESSFUL FUTURES. THE MISSION: EDUCATION EXCELLENCE.
Connect. Communicate. Collaborate VPNs in GÉANT2 Otto Kreiter, DANTE UKERNA Networkshop 34 4th - 6th April 2006.
Towards the definition of an eIRGRoma, 10 December An e-Infrastructure in Europe: a strategy and policy driven approach for a policy eIRG A pink.
Connect. Communicate. Collaborate GÉANT2 and University Connectivity to NRENs Michael Nowlan, DANTE (with thanks to Cathrin Stöver) UBUNTUNET-CONNECT 2008.
Valentino Cavalli TNC2005, Poznan, 6-9 June (GN2) NA4 Support for Research and Education Networking in Less Advanced Countries Valentino Cavalli.
Grundtvig Learning Partnership Project TeachingFlex.
Name Position Organisation Date. What is data integration? Dataset A Dataset B Integrated dataset Education data + EMPLOYMENT data = understanding education.
JOINING UP GOVERNMENTS EUROPEAN COMMISSION Establishing a European Union Location Framework.
1 Self-Regulation in the EU Advertising Sector: A Best practice model.
The EARNEST Foresight Study Organisational & Governance Study Robin G. Arak Archway Computer Associates Ltd Amsterdam 8 May 2007.
This document produced by Members of the Helix Nebula Partners and Consortium is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. Permissions.
European Commission - DG Research - Directorate B – “Structuring the European Research Area” Jean-David MALO – Bucharest, February 12-13, NOT LEGALLY.
0 Networking: Directions 1. Global end-to-end connectivity is a key issue. Universally deploy interoperable protocols, formalize a human network to exchange.
LOGO Personnel satisfaction survey and strategic direction of personnel capacity building in state statistics bodies of the Republic of Belarus National.
ETUC and European Framework Agreements (EFAs) Wolfgang Kowalsky.
TERENA update Karel Vietsch TERENA CEO Internet2 Fall Meeting, Atlanta 30 October 2000.
Valentino Cavalli SEEREN Inauguration, Thessaloniki, 09/01/ Digital Divide and Policy Issues for NRENs in South East Europe Valentino Cavalli TERENA.
Connect. Communicate. Collaborate Click to edit Master title style PERT OPERATIONS.
Kyriakos Baxevanidis European Commission, DG INFSO eInfrastructures (9-10 December 2003, Rome) Session 5: Organisation.
EGEE is a project funded by the European Union under contract IST Network Resources Provision Jean-Paul Gautier SA2 manager Cork meeting,
The DEER The Distributed European Electronic Resource.
MICS Data Processing Workshop Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys Data Processing Workshop Overview of the MICS Process.
Implications of LEA involvement and implementation on effective classroom practice: Pathfinder evaluation Don Passey Senior Research Fellow, Department.
The Data Sharing Working Group 24 th meeting of the GEO Executive Committee Geneva, Switzerland March 2012 Report of the Data Sharing Working Group.
G É ANT2 Development Support Activity and the Republic of Moldova 1st RENAM User Conference Chisinau, Republic of Moldova 14-May-2007 Valentino Cavalli.
Connect communicate collaborate GÉANT Cost Sharing …and GN3+ John Chevers Chief Business Development Officer DANTE TF-MSP Utrecht 8th February 2013.
NREN Trust and Identity Strategy Ann Harding, SWITCH Cambridge July 2014.
Networks ∙ Services ∙ People Valentino Cavalli General Assembly Meeting GÉANT Community Programme Luxembourg, November 2015.
Networks ∙ Services ∙ People Marina Adomeit FIM4R meeting Virtual Organisation Platform as a Service VOPaaS Nov 30, 2015, Austria Task Leader,
A look into current and future trends in national policies for eHealth and Innovation in the WHO European Region Clayton Hamilton, eHealth and Innovation.
European Life Sciences Infrastructure for Biological Information ELIXIR Collaboration Agreement Template ELIXIR/2014/10 Vera Herkommer.
12 th Meeting of the GBIF Participant Nodes Committee 6-7 October 2013, Berlin, Germany Towards a generic work programme for a Node Olaf Bánki Senior Programme.
Making the future happen Some remarks from the perspective of the Reykjavik-Group Chair full report:
Work Plan Work Plan Management (Document 21)
WP6 – Inter-operability with e-Infrastructures Sergio Andreozzi - WP6 Task Leader Strategy and Policy Manager, EGI.eu Helix Nebula - 1st Year Review 1.
Networks ∙ Services ∙ People Di4R Network. Services. People. GÉANT 28 th September, Krakow.
An introduction to ACSA
Internet Interconnection
Institutional changes The role of Bilateral Oversight Boards
Art. 17 EGTC Indicators 13th Meeting of the Expert Group on Delegated and Implementing Acts for the ESI Funds 4th July 2013.
Project DIRECT Final Summary
Presentation transcript:

The EARNEST Foresight Study Organisational & Governance Study Robin G. Arak Archway Computer Associates Ltd Bratislava 27 April 2007

The EARNEST Foresight Study Aims of the Study To investigate what issues need to be addressed in the organisation and governance domain and to suggest ways in which the organisation and governance models for European research and education networking can be developed so that the service aspirations of the entire research and education communities in Europe and beyond can be met. –Move away from just “best efforts” services –Effective delivery of end to end services across multiple domains –Automatic end user provisioning of end to end services

The EARNEST Foresight Study Aims of the Study The funding and charging models and funding levels used by the different organisations in the chain of delivery of network services The level of autonomy that the various individual network organisations (NREN organisations, regional network operators, universities, colleges and research institutions) wish to maintain in deciding on the standards that they will adopt and the methods used to implement and support their network services. The variability of network support and service availability in different network domains. The variability of network performance in different network domains and the methods by which performance issues can be and are addressed.

The EARNEST Foresight Study Aims of the Study The variability of the policies in situ for the provisioning of services that can support end-to-end services. e.g. VPN The differing attitudes of NREN organisations and user groups to the self-provisioning of networking, not following current models. e.g. use of cross border fibre The way in which NREN organisations support projects that need "special" facilities or arrangements when projects are: Within their own NREN domain Span multiple NRENs The arrangements that NREN organisations have for communicating with their user base, particularly with those users that may require specialised services, some of which may rely on guaranteed end-to-end services.

The EARNEST Foresight Study Questionnaire Sent out to 45 NRENs or emerging NRENs Responses received from 31 –Responses very variable –Not all questions answered –Good sample of different NRENs Small & large From different parts of Europe & beyond

The EARNEST Foresight Study Questionnaire Results Examples of results Q12 Future funding for GÉANT a) Like now through 50% DG-INFSO (18 responses) d) Through 50% E.C. Infrastructure funding (2 responses) a+d – (2 responses) Suggestion that dependency on E.C. funding should be reduced?

The EARNEST Foresight Study Questionnaire Results Q13 How is your NREN governed? Very different models but 3 most common models: –Legal entity controlled by stakeholder committee 11 –Part of a government department with stakeholder committee 6 –Not a government department but controlled by government department 5

The EARNEST Foresight Study Questionnaire Results – Representation Q14 Type of institutionYESNONone 14a Universities a Research institutions a Tertiary/professional a Primary/secondary schools a Government departments a Health service a Commercial organisations with links to R&E a Commercial organisations with no links to R&E a Other2425

The EARNEST Foresight Study Questionnaire Results Q15 Policy development & agreement a) Developed and agreed by NREN organisation management team (11) b)Developed and agreed by the NREN organisation management team and the management committee of the NREN’s organisation legal entity e.g. the “board” of the legal entity. (9) c)Developed by NREN management team and the management committee of the NREN’s organisation legal entity and agreed by a committee representing universities and research institutions (9) d)Developed and agreed by a committee representing universities and research institutions (2) e)Developed and agreed by the government department of education or research f)None of the above (3)

The EARNEST Foresight Study Questionnaire Results Q16 Technical policy development & agreement a)Developed and agreed by NREN management team (20) b)Developed by NREN management team and agreed by a committee representing universities and research institutions (10) c)Developed and agreed by a committee representing universities and research institutions (1) d)Developed and agreed by the government department of education or research

The EARNEST Foresight Study Questionnaire Results Q17 & Q18 Decision to connect new user types (20 Yes 11 No) a)The NREN senior management team can make the decision 7 (6) b)The NREN governing body e.g. the legal entity governing body or committee 2 (8) c)The NREN has to seek approval from the government to make the decision 0 (6) d)The NREN has to seek approval from its existing education and research user base to make the decision by consulting with a representative committee 0 (0) e)The NREN has to seek approval from all the organisations that currently provide funding to the NREN to provide the network and the network services 0 (1) f)The decision process could be made quickly 1 (7) g)The decision process will take a long time because of a long consultation process 0 (2) h)The decision process will take a long time because the body that has the power to take the decision generally is slow at taking decisions 1 (2) i)The national telecommunications regulator has to be involved in the decision to connect new types of user institution outside those involving education and research. 0 (1)

The EARNEST Foresight Study Questionnaire Results Q19 Delivery to SLA? a)YES 5 b)NO there is no defined service levels at all. 3 c)NO there is no formal service level agreement but “best efforts” are made to deliver a reliable service. 23 –by the organisations providing funding for the network 0 –by negotiations with the connected institutions or a group representing the connected institutions and their end users 3 –by none of the above 2 (i)NREN management team with user guidance (ii)technical standards obtained from basic components

The EARNEST Foresight Study Questionnaire Results Q20 NREN liaison with pan-European Networking a)The NREN fully participates in the development and setting of policies at a European level and implements the agreed and recommended policies. 6 b)The NREN participates in the development and setting of policies at a European level and implements the agreed and recommended policies only when these policies are in-line with the existing or future policies of the NREN or government. 9 c)The NREN participates in the development and setting of policies at a European level and implements the agreed and recommended policies only when these policies are in-line with the existing NREN or government policies. 1 d)The NREN monitors European policy setting and does generally not implement European policies unless they have a direct relevance to networking services in existing use on the NREN.) 7

The EARNEST Foresight Study Questionnaire Results Q24 Responsibility for end-to-end service set up a)NREN staff 11 b)Outsourced to a commercial company 3 c)Combination of both NREN staff and outsourced 2 d)Provided by institution staff from universities and research establishments 3 e)Combination of NREN staff and institution staff from universities and research establishments. 14 f)Provided by a lead institution(s) responsible for supporting the NREN g)Totally automated under the control of the NREN organisation h)Totally automated with devolution of control to end institutions within a policy framework set by the NREN organisation i)Totally automated with devolution of control to nominated end users within institutions within a policy framework set by the NREN organisation

The EARNEST Foresight Study Questionnaire Results Q25 Self Provisioning Plans (VPN) a)Technical staff responsible for the network in a university/college/research institution 9 b)General information technology support staff of the university/college/research establishment 0 c)Trained end users 2 d)Any end users 2 e)No plans 18 f)Already doing it 1

The EARNEST Foresight Study Questionnaire Results Q26 Self Provisioning Plans (QoS) a)Technical staff responsible for the network in a university/college/research institution 5 b)General information technology support staff of the university/college/research establishment 0 c)Trained end users 1 d)Any end users 2 e)No plans 22 f)Already doing it

The EARNEST Foresight Study Questionnaire Results Q27 Funding for special projects a)When an NREN organisation is not funded to support a special project the organisations running the special project should be allowed to acquire and run their own networking services. 17 b)When an NREN organisation could be funded to support and is technically able to support networking services required for special projects the NREN should always be offered the option to do so. 22 c)Using alternative arrangements to the use of GEANT when developing pan-European collaboration projects or links to other countries NRENs when more cost effective. 14 d)Using alternative arrangements to the use of GEANT when developing pan-European collaboration projects or links to other countries NRENs when costs of the alternative arrangements are similar to those for using GEANT. 7 e)Using alternative arrangements to the use of GEANT when developing pan-European collaboration projects or links to other countries NRENs when costs of the alternative arrangements are higher than those for using GEANT. 5

The EARNEST Foresight Study Questionnaire Results Q28 Technical support for special projects in the NREN 28 YES 3 NO a)A project team with NREN staff and the user community staff is set up to manage the project 15 b)Informal dialogue with the user community staff takes place. 15 c)Other arrangements are put in place 6

The EARNEST Foresight Study Questionnaire Results Q28b Funding for special projects within the NREN a)The user community who benefits by the project pays 8 b)The NREN and user community (benefiting by the project) pay 8 c)The NREN pays 8 d)All participants pay their own expenses 7 e)None of the above

The EARNEST Foresight Study Questionnaire Results Q29 Technical support for special projects (multiple NRENs) 25 YES 6 NO a)A project team with NREN staff and the user community staff is set up to manage the project 8 b)Informal dialogue with the user community staff takes place. 5 c)Other arrangements are put in place 11

The EARNEST Foresight Study Questionnaire Results Q29b Funding for special projects with multiple NRENs a)The user community who benefits by the project pays 9 b)The NREN and user community (benefiting by the project) pay 6 c)The NREN pays 6 d)All participants pay their own expenses 3 e)None of the above

The EARNEST Foresight Study Questionnaire Results Q30 Support for Wider strategic developments 31 YES 0 NO Examples: –Grid, identity management, middleware, high performance computing, mobility, advanced applications, VoIP, video conferencing, e-Libraries, dynamic lightpath provisioning, information services for R&E

The EARNEST Foresight Study Questionnaire Results Conclusions so far a)All NRENs are involved in wider strategic developments b)The majority of NRENs who expressed an opinion want GEANT to be funded using the current 50:50 model with the E.C. c)The most common governance model is a legal entity with stakeholder committees (35%) or part of a government department (19%) or controlled by a government department (16%) d)Most common method of developing and agreeing policy is by the NREN management team alone (35%) or ratified by the “board” of the legal entity.(29%) Others ratify policy through stakeholder committees. (29%) e)Most common method of developing and agreeing technical policy is by the NREN management team alone (65%) or in agreement with a stakeholder committee (32%) f)Most common method of deciding to connect new users is by the NREN management team with stakeholders (50%) or with the “board” and stakeholders (30%) g)NRENs are involved in many projects other than just delivering “standard” network services. h)Very few NRENs deliver to an agreed SLA. (16%)

The EARNEST Foresight Study Key Questions How can organisational arrangements and governance be improved so that end-to-end services can be effectively delivered across Europe & beyond? –What two things would you do? Which governance model is likely to be most effective?

The EARNEST Foresight Study Organisational & Governance Study Thanks to those who filled in questionnaires Please send any further ideas and suggestions to: