1. Motions Internal for LMSC 1st Vice Chair (And supporting slides)
May 19March, 2004
Motions Internal for LMSC 1st Vice Chair (And supporting slides)
Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems

2. May 19March, 2004
EC Motion
To approve payment of IEEE SA invoice in the amount of $16,129 for completed LMSC P&P support.
Moved: M. Sherman
For:
Against:
2nd:
Abstain:
Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems

3. Motions to Approve P&P Revisions
May 19March, 2004
Motions to Approve P&P Revisions
Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems

4. Month 2000
doc.: IEEE /xxx
May 19March, 2004
EC Motion
To approve the proposed P&P revision titled “WG Membership and Meetings” as described in the document titled:
802.0-WG_Membership_&_Meetings_-_Proposed_Resolutions_051117_r0.pdf
Note concern of membership loss taking effect before November force division
The Term Limit document breaks out one paragraph from the original change to accommodate Bob Grow’s concern that it be voted separate (in case the entire fails.
Moved: M. Sherman
For:
Against:
2nd:
Abstain:
Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems
John Doe, His Company

5. Month 2000
doc.: IEEE /xxx
May 19March, 2004
EC Motion
To approve the proposed P&P revision titled “LMSC Organization” as described in the document titled:
802.0-WG_LMSC_Organization_-_Proposed_Resolutions_051113_r1.pdf
Bob O’hara wrote:
My additional comments on 7.2 have not been addressed. This clause now reads that the EC might hold some "veto" power after approval of a PAR by IEEE-SA SB. Delete "When determined appropriate by the EC".
Moved: M. Sherman
For:
Against:
2nd:
Abstain:
Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems
John Doe, His Company

6. Motions to Approve Balloting of P&P Revisions
May 19March, 2004
Motions to Approve Balloting of P&P Revisions
Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems

7. Month 2000
doc.: IEEE /xxx
May 19March, 2004
EC Motion
To approve for distribution and executive committee ballot the P&P Revision titled “WG Plenary” as described in the document titled:
802.0-WG_Plenary_-_Proposed_ballot_051118_r0.pdf
Recommended changes from SA based on comments deferred to later time on last ballots
Mention chair and VC - What about everyone else?
Does all officers have to belong to SA?
What WG Charter?
Use WG/TAG rather than WG
Disbanding a WG/TAG that never produced a document
Moved: M. Sherman
For:
2nd:
Against:
Abstain:
Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems
John Doe, His Company

8. Month 2000
doc.: IEEE /xxx
May 19March, 2004
EC Motion
To approve for distribution and executive committee ballot the P&P Revision titled “Editorial” as described in the document titled:
802.0-Editorial_-_Proposed_ballot_051118_r0.pdf
From SA. Announce teleconferences same as WG
Moved: M. Sherman
For:
2nd:
Against:
Abstain:
Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems
John Doe, His Company

9. Review of ‘802 Process Improvement’ Meeing
May 19March, 2004
Review of ‘802 Process Improvement’ Meeing
Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems

10. Background Wanted to solicit inputs from Membership
May 19March, 2004
Background
Wanted to solicit inputs from Membership
How to improve IEEE 802 Process?
Held in tutorial slot since available
Very lightly attended
About 25 participants
Mostly 802 leadership and SA staff
The following slides summarize outcome
Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems

11. Influences Outside the Process
May 19March, 2004
Influences Outside the Process
Teams form outside 802 process
If people want to prevent progress, can’t stop
A small organization can block progress
When people stop talking tech and make personal head down hill fast
Sometimes only reason a group is present is to prevent progress
Companies with large markets want slow change
IEEE802 not the only place to do a standard
Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems

12. Key Issues Identified Size of groups Don’t always have necessary tools
May 19March, 2004
Key Issues Identified
Size of groups
Don’t always have necessary tools
Automation of Attendance, documents, ballots, etc
Barcode reader or RFID
Process drives to two hard line positions
Limits opportunities for compromises
Three stable states
Converging, Deadlock, Giveup
Want to get to one of three as soon as possible
Distinction between interim and plenary slows process
No ‘acquisition’ process – only consensus
No impartial judge
Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems

13. Suggested Solutions Same rules for interims as plenarys Chair training
May 19March, 2004
Suggested Solutions
Same rules for interims as plenarys
Chair training
Entity balloting
Electronic tools for
Attendance, Document control, electronic balloting, Calendar, Event tracking.
Simplified attendance
Pay fee, register, show up – Receive credit
Revenue based voting
Matthew Sherman, BAE Systems