In April, Talkstandards.com hosted an open forum on the topic of formal review/ranking of Standard Setting Organisations (SSO). Contributors were asked to discuss whether such review/ranking of SSOs would foster or impede efficient standardization?

Ajit Jaokar argued that any “standards for standards” effort risked the creation of a “class system between consortia” based on an arbitrary set of criteria and will only be more difficult to apply as new innovation becomes increasingly cross-domain (e-health, Mobile health, etc).

Helen Disney, arguing that the priority of an SSO should be promotion of both competition and innovation, identified the criticism that formal review creates more bureaucracy within the standard setting organisations and as such may slow change in dynamic markets such as the IT sector.
Read More…

In late 2008, IBM published a new corporate policy, which set guidelines for the company’s behavior in different standards setting organizations. While initially well received, such an attempt to standardize the process of standardization may prove to have negative effects on innovation as no single consensus-view on openness currently exists.

The initiative strives to ultimately increase the level of openness throughout the whole process of standards development and was the result of a six-week discussion in 2008, in which 70 independent experts debated whether modern SSOs manage to keep up with reality (commercial, legal, social etc.). Interestingly, the discussion was not open.
Read More…

Rankings can usefully contribute to inform users/consumers in a large variety of areas about the options that are available to them. They can also help them to make a well informed choice. To be useful, rankings need to be objective and informative, and rely on sound methodology and data. The methodology and data used to rank people, companies, institutions, countries, etc will often be criticized. Ranking of academic institutions are for instance highly controversial. Besides the fact they are not necessarily accurate, they may also induce universities to focus on issues that will improve their ranking rather than those that may ameliorate the welfare of their students and professors. There are therefore pros and cons about rankings.
Read More…

“Government is in danger of becoming irrelevant.”

That is one of the key conclusions of the World Economic Forum Global Agenda Council on the Future of Government on which I serve. Agree or disagree, one thing is clear: Government has to change to keep pace with the 21st Century.
Read More…

In an exclusive interview with Talkstandards, Professor David Ingram of openEHR, one of the most innovative players in the eHealth field, outlines some of his expectations for the future of ICT in the health care sector. This transcript has been prepared from notes taken during a telephone interview on February 22nd.

Part III: Openness, implementation and governance
Read More…

The benefits from diversity and the risks of government intervention were at the center of the discussion during TalkStandards’ open forum on the issue of SSO Governance on January 28, 2010.

Oliver Bell (Reforming the Reformist Agenda) highlighted the benefits associated with a range of diversified SSOs.
Read More…

This interview with Peter Brown, Chairman of the OASIS Board, was conducted by email for the Talkstandards.com open forum on SSO Governance.

Peter Brown gives a valuable insight into the governance of OASIS and some of the rationale behind it. Also, Peter Brown offers his general view of governance issues such openness, governmental interference and much more.

Read More…

Recently, Google posted a much publicised memo called the Meaning of Open in which Jonathan Rosenberg, Senior Vice President, Product Management attempted to define Open. Attempting to define ‘Open’ is a complex task with many contradictions, and it is good that Jonathan has attempted this.
Read More…

The EU Commission´s long expected White Paper on ICT standardization has finally been published. The proposal (“Modernizing ICT Standardization in the EU- The Way Forward”) suggests an update of Council Decision 87/95/EEC which lays down the current EU standardization policy in the field of ICT.
Read More…

On 2 June 2006, the Danish parliament (the Folketing) unanimously adopted Parliamentary Resolution B103 on the use of open standards for software in the public sector. The Resolution instructs the Government to ensure that the public sector’s use of information technology, including the use of software, should be based on open standards.
Read More…