-- BruceBannerman - 27 Nov 2009

SWOT Analysis of CCIP Concept

This is a SWOT Analysis of the Climate Challenge Integration Plugfest concept based on experiences from CCIP-2009.

Please feel free to contribute to this.

Bruce

Strengths

  • We have built the beginnings of a good International Community.
  • - Representatives from many countries around the world including in no specific order (Germany, UK, Canada, USA, Australia, Portugal, France ...).
  • - People with skills in IT, Spatial, Policy and Open Standards.
  • - People with a Climate science background and from Academia.
  • - Vendors, both Proprietary and Open Source.
  • CCIP-2009 achieved the initial objective of proving that Climate data was like any other type of spatial data and could be communicated via Open Standards.
  • An excellent video was produced showing the results of the work, see: CCIP Executive Summary.
  • A number of very good solutions were demonstrated.
  • The CCIP-2009 email list allowed for open and frank discussions.
  • The Climate 'industry' is often seen as 'recession proof', given the strong interest globally in climate issues.
  • 'Climate' is also seen as a growth industry.
  • Organisations involved in (i.e. volunteering and donating time towards) 'climate' issues will be seen as fulfilling a social responsibility.

Weaknesses

  • Communications channels within the community could have been substantially improved.
  • Organisation of the community and events could have been improved. An example is conference deadlines influencing CCIP schedule
  • Leadership was lacking in many cases. Being a new process and community, people hung back to see what would happen and waited for guidance.
  • Clear goals weren't defined at the beginning.
  • The events at FOSS4G-2009 did not allow Participants to adequately demonstrate their work. A one day dedicated CCIP stream is required with at least one session being allocated to each Participant to allow them to explore their contribution in depth. This should be followed with a round table discussion on what did and didn't work as well as a planning session for the following year's event.
  • The burden of Leadership, Management and Planning of the event cannot be left to the OGC alone to carry. A steering committee with adequate science and industry representation needs to assist the OGC.
  • The event lacked Climate Science buy-in. However, this is not a major issue, as the success of the event will allow the CCIP Project to achieve that buy-in in 2010.
  • There was a lack of marketing payback for participants, though this has been overcome to a large extent after OGC donated a substantial part of their time and produced a professional video. See CCIP Executive Summary.
  • CCIP-2009 was achieved with an inadequate budget.
  • The structure of CCIP did not allow for adequate participation by Open Source communities. This needs to be addressed for future events.

Opportunities

  • A number of potential sponsors have come forward at FOSS4G-2009.
  • Several influential people, including a person with marketing experience have expressed interest in becoming involved in FOSS4G-2010.
  • Lorenzo Becchi, Chair of FOSS4G-2010 has publicly declared that he would consider it an honour to have CCIP at FOSS4G-2010. He also considers CCIP-2010 a strategic event for FOSS4G-2010.
  • There has also been interest in holding CCIP-2010 at GSDI-12.
  • There was considerable interest in Professor Andy Pitman's call at FOSS4G-2009 for Climate Models to be made Open Source. Perhaps the CCIP events will be a good way to start getting the spatial and climate science communities to start working together towards this longer term goal.
  • 'Climate' is a growth industry. Governments need to make their data accessible in a free and open manner to support a wide range of climate related initiatives.
  • A Memorandum of Understanding has recently been signed between the OGC and the World Meteorological Organisation. This should make it easier to get WMO buy-in for CCIP-2010.
  • There is an opportunity to get at least one Internationally recognised Climate Scientist on the Steering Committee of CCIP. We could utilise this guidance to help define a broad multi-year strategy for CCIP, with actual targets revised each year, based on the results of the previous year.
  • Perhaps it is time to move from a Plugfest type of event to a Testbed type of event? A Testbed would allow the community to actually define standards as well if required. This would mean that we'd be looking at running Climate Challenge Integration Testbed 2010 (CCIT-2010).

Threats

  • Some members of the Open Source spatial community were upset that the structure of the CCIP-2009 did not really allow for their participation.
  • With the weaknesses of CCIP-2009, will there be sufficient interest to run CCIT-2010?
Topic revision: r2 - 01 Dec 2009, JodyGarnett
 

This site is powered by FoswikiThe information you supply is used for OGC purposes only. We will never pass your contact details to any third party without your prior consent.
If you enter content here you are agreeing to the OGC privacy policy.

Copyright © by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding OGC Public Wiki? Send feedback