26th CEOS Plenary | Bengaluru, India| October 2012 Discussion of CEOS Decision-Making Processes CEOS Self-Study (CSS) Implementation Agenda Item 7C Steven Hosford, CNES Timothy Stryker, CEO

26th CEOS Plenary | Bengaluru, India| October 2012 Overview Objective: CEOS adoption of a systematic and useable corporate decision-making process –Adoption of new proposals and initiatives –Ongoing review for continuation/conclusion of CEOS initiatives Topics to be Addressed –Team Membership –Anticipated Schedule/Milestones –Initial findings on CEOS decision-making processes –Derived Ideas under Consideration within the Team

26th CEOS Plenary | Bengaluru, India| October 2012 Team Membership Takao Akutsu, JAXA Marie- Josée Bourassa, CSA Richard Eckman, NASA Laura Frulla, CONAE Steven Hosford, CNES (co-chair) Jean Parcher, USGS Ivan Petiteville, ESA Brent Smith, NOAA Greg Stensaas, WGCV Tim Stryker (co-chair)  A good cross-section of CEOS, through additional geographic representation, is welcome!

26th CEOS Plenary | Bengaluru, India| October 2012 Anticipated Schedule/Milestones Presentation of early/initial ideas and confirmation of next steps (Bangalore Plenary, Oct 2012) Dissemination of follow-up material to Team members outlining ideas (Nov-Dec 2012) Review/refinement of ideas into recommendations (Jan – Feb 2013) Presentation and discussion of recommendations (SIT-28, Mar 2013) Provision of final draft recommendations to CEOS SIT Writing Team on Principles, Priorities, and Governance (Apr 2013) Further Development/Coordination of SIT Writing Team’s paper across the CEOS community (May-Sept 2013) –Includes sharing of paper and its recommendations for CEOS community review and comment in advance of CEOS Plenary Submit final SIT recommendations for CEOS Plenary approval (Oct 2013) –Principles and Priorities –Governance (including decision-making processes)

26th CEOS Plenary | Bengaluru, India| October 2012 Initial Findings on CEOS Decision- Making Processes CSS Report CEOS should maintain its ability to meeting its existing commitments Current ad hoc decision-making approach no longer suffices for CEOS A clear, fair, systematic and reliable mechanism is required to assist CEOS in determining which new initiatives/projects should be undertaken (and continued) CEOS Decision-Making Team Formal SIT/Plenary review/approval process not applicable to self-initiated “ground level” activities initiated by CEOS WGs, VCs, and SBA Teams, that are not major CEOS initiatives

26th CEOS Plenary | Bengaluru, India| October 2012 Derived Ideas Under Consideration Strategic importance of Accepting/Rejecting Requests –Alignment with CEOS priorities and capacity CEOS Decision-Making Must Be Dynamic and Inclusive –Priorities should not become static and unresponsive to new internal or external developments –Open and systematic review/decision-making required –Clear criteria for acceptance/rejection of proposals Many Shapes and Sizes of “CEOS Support” –Major, multi-agency initiatives and smaller-scale projects –Internally- and externally-generated requests Possible Review Team for Proposed Major New Initiatives –Initial review criteria discussed (see Backup Slides) –VC application process a possible model –Avoid “analysis paralysis” Appropriate Feedback/Approval Mechanisms –SEC, SIT, and Plenary levels

26th CEOS Plenary | Bengaluru, India| October 2012 With Better Decision-Making, CEOS Will Soar to New Heights! (Without it, well…..)

26th CEOS Plenary | Bengaluru, India| October 2012 Backup Slides

26th CEOS Plenary | Bengaluru, India| October 2012 Possible Criteria for Review and Decision- Making on Proposals for CEOS Support Is the proposed activity appropriate for CEOS, rather than for another existing coordination group or private sector organization/association? Is the proposed activity closely aligned with CEOS priorities, as stated CEOS’s governing documents (Strategic Guidance Document, Principles of Operation, Work Plan)? Is the proposed activity well-aligned with a sufficient number of individual CEOS Agencies’ Earth Observation priorities? What impact (positive/negative) will the proposed activity have on existing, ongoing CEOS activities?

26th CEOS Plenary | Bengaluru, India| October 2012 Possible Criteria (cont’d) Can a sufficient number of CEOS Agencies successfully respond based on their existing technical and financial resources? (Note: A “sufficient number” of CEOS Agencies could vary widely, based on the size and scope of the proposed activity) –Data Provision –Data Processing Capacity If Agencies have sufficient resources, technical capacity and interest, are there additional policy considerations that would encourage or discourage their involvement – e.g., overarching data policies or prevailing public/private partnerships? If initiative is adopted, what will constitute its success and completion (or continuation)?