1. 2004-05-30 Draft 1 by JWM1 IEEE CS Strategic Plan and Possible Future Role of SAB June 2004 Jim Moore, Gary Robinson, Jack Cole

2. 2004-05-30 Draft 1 by JWM 2 Chair’s Challenges for SAB u Challenge: Declining relevance of de jure standardization in IT profession, contrasted with an increasing need for professional norms. u Challenge: Simplify standardization for small producers. u Challenge: Broadening international impact of CS IT standardization efforts.

3. 2004-05-30 Draft 1 by JWM 3 Chair’s Strategies u Challenge: Declining relevance of de jure standardization in IT profession, contrasted with an increasing need for professional norms. u Strategy: Move to a broader view of “standardization” to encompass a variety of processes and products - some very light-weight. u Challenge: Simplify standardization for small producers. u Strategy: Simplify P&P. Provide sponsor assistance.

4. 2004-05-30 Draft 1 by JWM 4 Future SAB Suggestions u At September 2003 SAB meeting, Chair offered some suggestions on the future of the SAB. u Action Item Nov03.02 requests the expansion of suggestion 1: u Jim Moore u Gary Robinson u Jack Cole u The remainder of this presentation provides the requested expansion.

5. 2004-05-30 Draft 1 by JWM 5 Moore’s Original Suggestion u “The CS SAB should remove itself from an OPERATIONAL role in IEEE standardization and should redirect its energies to the PROMOTION and EXPLOITATION of IT standards and standardization.” “The premise of this position is that CS standards sponsors currently have two reporting paths in the operational chain. They have to keep SA happy and they have to keep CS happy. For example, their procedures have to conform with the Operations Manual of the SA and also have to conform to the P&P of the CS SAB—two documents that are not necessarily well-synchronized. (Many of them resolve this conflict by more-or-less ignoring CS.) The hypothesized change would take CS SAB out of the operational path; in all operational matters, sponsors would report directly to the SA SB.”

6. 2004-05-30 Draft 1 by JWM 6 Possible Specific Plans u Short Term u Separate SAB P&P from sponsor P&P. Use IEEE-SA model sponsor P&P. u Sponsors meeting IEEE criteria for financial reporting would report to IEEE-SA rather than IEEE-CS. u SAB would no longer review PARs, but would continue commissioning, decommissioning, and defining scope of CS sponsors. u SAB would no longer handle appeals, but would help sponsors staff appeal boards. u Provide an “incubator” for standardization in new areas. Nominate members of SCCs when no other home seems appropriate. u Try to bring technical resources from Technical Committees and Technical Councils to bear on technical problems that sponsors are encountering. u Encourage sponsors to promote their products via books, publications, workshops, conferences and other vehicles provided by the CS.

7. 2004-05-30 Draft 1 by JWM 7 Possible Specific Plans u Long Term u Sponsors would be realigned into “technical communities.” (see IEEE CS Strategic Plan SP-05) u Technical Communities would be encouraged to view standardization as one method of codifying generally accepted knowledge and engineering practices. u SAB would offer alternative consensus methods for codification: u Conventional standardization u Workshop agreements for agility in fast-moving short-lived areas u Body of Knowledge documents for mature and maturing areas u SAB would offer consulting to technical communities in using the standards “channel”.