nsf earthcube charrette june 12-14, 2012

NSF EarthCube CharretteJune 12-14, 2012

GOVERNANCE ROADMAP

Research Framework Project Sponsors

Portals / CyberInfrastructures

Communities of Interest / Communities of Practice

Science Advisory - Research Priorities/Allocation- Use Cases Selection- Interoperability Incubator

Digital Government

NSF

Technical Advisory

Layered Architecture

Earth System Models

Workflow

Brokering

REST/Web services

Data Discovery, Mining, & Access

Semantics & Ontologies

EarthCube System of Systems – some parts we need, some parts we have

Standards Development

W3C ISO WMO OGC …

ESIP

IEEE

DOE

NOAAUSGS

…DOD

TeraGrid/XSEDE

EU INSPIRE

GEOSS Digital Libraries …

Communities of Interest / Communities of Practice

Oceans

Geology

Atmosphere Cryosphere

Biology

Hydrology

ClimateEcosystems Software

Education and Workforce

- Academia- Government- Industry- NGOs, Societies- International Groups

“Long tail” sciences

Data Citation/Publishing

Model Citation/Publishing

EarthCube Enterprise Support-Collaboration support(calendar, mail lists, webcast, wiki)-Registries-Life Cycle tools and mgmt

OGC …ESIP

OGC

OGC …ESIP

…

NCEASUnidata

NASA

OGC… ESIP

NEON EarthScope DataONE

CUAHSI IEDA iPlant

Collaboration Support

Org2Org1

OOI

Who makes the decisionsWho sets the standards?Who allocates resources?

Strategic and tactical oversight?Coordination for the enterprise?Ensure community needs met?

Current model

EarthCube Office

Centralized governance

“The Internet has no centralized governance in either technological implementation or policies for access and usage; each constituent network sets its own standards”

Decentralizedgovernance

• EarthCube is a governable community • We have an actionable plan and timeline for

the development of a governance framework• We recommend:

– Putting Governance framework in place first– Forming an interim governance committee ASAP– Making the governance framework operational by

December 2012– Continued and enhanced community engagement

CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

Governance refers to the processes, structure and organizational elements that determine, within an organization or system of organizations, how power is exercised, how stakeholders have

their say, how decisions are made, and how decision makers are held

accountable.

OUR DEFINITION OF GOVERNANCE

WHO MAKES DECISIONS?

Benevolent Dictatorship Benevolent dictator

EarthCube Monarchy A group of leaders. Could include advisory committees and boards; by-laws

Science and IT Monarchies Individuals or groups of domain scientists or IT experts

Federal Equivalent of the central and state governments working together

Duopoly Interactions between any two system elements

Feudal Each “fiefdom”

Anarchy Individual, user-driven

GOVERNANCE MODELS

Character-istics/ Archetype

Science Drivers & Use Cases

Systems Engineering & Integration

Standards & Policies

Technology drivers & Innovation

Outreach and engagement

Resource availability & allocation

Coordination, Communication, evaluation

Benevolent Dictator

Science monarchy

Tech monarchy

Duopoly      

Federal        

Feudal          

Anarchy          

Weill & Ross, 2004

GOVERNANCE AS A SYSTEM

How Enterprises Govern

DECISION

GOVERNANCE ARCHETYPE

IT Principles IT Architecture IT Infrastructure Strategies

Business Application Needs IT Investment

Input Decision Input Decision Input Decision Input Decision Input Decision

Business Monarchy 0 27 0 6 0 7 1 12 1 30

IT Monarchy 1 18 20 73 10 59 0 8 0 9

Feudal 0 3 0 0 1 2 1 18 0 3Federal 83 14 46 4 59 6 81 30 93 27Duopoly 15 36 34 15 30 23 17 27 6 30Anarchy 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 1

No Data or Don't Know 1 2 0 1 0 2 0 2 0 0

Most common input pattern for all enterprises.

Most common decision patterns for all enterprises.

The numbers in each cell are percentages of the 256 enterprises studied in twenty-three countries. The columns add to 100 percent.

Case studies - 255 organizations - IT governance

• Determine scope of responsibilities and authorities of Governance Framework for EarthCube

• TIME: begin with Charrette, complete by 15 August

• DELIVERABLE: Document reporting findings and decisions leading to scope of work for Initial Governance Framework

MILESTONES AND TASKS: STEP 1

• Identify interim governance committee in collaboration with stakeholder community

• TIME: begin with Charrette, complete by 15 August

• DELIVERABLE: Document reporting findings and decisions, identifying who is involved

MILESTONES AND TASKS: STEP 2

• Determine the initial Governance Framework and charter

• TIME: Begin 15 Aug complete by 15 Nov

• DELIVERABLE: Initial charter for EarthCube Governance Framework

MILESTONES AND TASKS: STEP 3

• Implement the initial EarthCube Governance Framework

• TIME: Begin 1 Jan 2013• DELIVERABLE: Document reporting

decisions; workshop series

MILESTONES AND TASKS: STEP 4

Scope of Work for Initial Governance Framework

Research Report, Findings, and Decisions on Community

Implementation of the Roadmap; creating Terms of Reference

Solicitation of Terms of Reference

Implementation of the Terms of Reference (end date TBD)

6/12/12 8/1/12 9/20/12 11/9/12 12/29/12 2/17/13 4/8/13 5/28/13

FIGURE 1: GANTT CHART FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF EARTHCUBE GOVERNANCE MILESTONES AND TASKS.

Scope of Work for EC Gov Framework

Identify interim governance committee

Determine the initial Governance Framework

Implement the initial EarthCube Governance Framework

Implement the EarthCube Governance Charter

Community Engagement Process

• Interim Governance Committee– Implement Governance Roadmap– Goals:

• Evaluate governance models ranging from:– current status (NSF funds each piece separately)– centralized body – Decentralized approach  

GOVERNANCE ROADMAP RECOMMENDATIONS

• Interim governance committee needs to identify:– Current components of cyberinfrastructure

(data and service providers) – Your organizational paradigms & governance

needs– Interactions among CI components them and

between them – Interactions with systems outside of EarthCube,

and the needs of EarthCube consumers • Including 'long tail' of scientists

GOVERNANCE ROADMAP IMPLEMENTATION

• Be flexible to accommodate a range of governance archetypes that meet the needs of each of the sub-discipline communities and achieve the goals of NSF

• Have the ability to address foreseen and unforeseen challenges

• Be able to adequately address requirements identified by the community constituents

EARTHCUBE GOVERNANCE REQUIREMENTS

• Self-selected or Closely-Held leadership

• Levels of participation

• Types of organizations

CHALLENGES

• Decision-making processes• Incorporate best practices and lessons

learned• Reduce barriers to participation• Collaboration, communication, community• Culture• Form should follow function• Education and outreach• Evolution

GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORK CHALLENGES

(Edwards et al. 2007)

DARPA

• Evaluation• Goals and objectives• Governance as a system / multiple levels

of governance• Integration• Interoperability• Leadership • Legal issues• Metrics

GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORK CHALLENGES

• Managerial/Operational Governance• Scientific and Technical governance• Sustainability• Risk Mitigation• Scale• Temporal Aspects• Trust• Vision

GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORK CHALLENGES

• Conflicting visions of EarthCube goals• Timely implementation of governance

framework• Sufficient funding and NSF commitment• Community buy-in and commitment• Isolated from other infrastructure

activities • Bridging governance archetypes and

communities

RISKS

QUESTIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE

QUESTIONS TO THE AUDIENCE

• What attributes/activities do you need EarthCube to do?

• What do you need from EarthCube governance?

• Do you agree that governance framework should be put in place at the start?

• If that doesn’t happen until early 2013, how would that impact your timeline?

QUESTIONS TO THE AUDIENCE

Character-istics/ Archetype

Science Drivers & Use Cases

Systems Engineering & Integration

Standards & Policies

Technology drivers & Innovation

Outreach and engagement

Resource availability & allocation

Coordination, Communication, evaluation

Benevolent Dictator

Science monarchy

Tech monarchy

Duopoly      

Federal        

Feudal          

Anarchy          

Governance as a System

Weill & Ross, 2004

Character-istics/ Archetype

Science Drivers & Use Cases

Systems Engineering & Integration

Standards & Policies

Technology drivers & Innovation

Outreach and engagement

Resource availability & allocation

Coordination, Communication, evaluation

Benevolent Dictator

Science monarchy

X     X    

Tech monarchy

X  X X    

Duopoly   X X    

Federal  X      

Feudal      X    

Anarchy          

Governance as a System

Weill & Ross, 2004

Who decides on the Governance framework?

How do we choose members of the Interim Governance Committee?

Additional Slides

FIGURE 9:THE U.S. ELECTRIC GRID OVERLAPPING AND INTERLEAVED MANAGEMENT AND GOVERNANCE SYSTEMS, WITH ANNOTATIONS FROM THIS STUDY. BASE DIAGRAM FROM WIKIPEDIA, DE:DATEI:STROMVERSORGUNG.PNG

Long-Term Governance of EarthCube??