11

STANDARDSTANDARDSS

TUTORIALTUTORIALChris KreilerChris KreilerJerry SmithJerry Smith

Vico EquenseVico Equense28 Feb 0628 Feb 06

22

IntroductioIntroductionn• BackgroundBackground

• Standards ActivitiesStandards Activities• Types of StandardsTypes of Standards• ISO Organization and ProceduresISO Organization and Procedures• TC184/SC4 Organization and Standing TC184/SC4 Organization and Standing

DocumentsDocuments• Managing StandardsManaging Standards

• Standards Development PrinciplesStandards Development Principles• ISO LiveLinkISO LiveLink• SC4ONLINESC4ONLINE

33

STANDARDSSTANDARDSTUTORIALTUTORIAL

Part IX – Part IX – Standards Standards

Management Management PrinciplesPrinciples

44

Why Have Standards?Why Have Standards?

Standards Technology

Time

Too much GAP is costly

Promotes innovation & Creativity

Optimal GAP

Too small of a GAP is Restrictive

The GAP between Standards & Technology is the link that associates the two.

55

Standardization OptionsStandardization Options

• Which Standard Medium Best Serves the Which Standard Medium Best Serves the RequirementRequirement

– Non-Government StandardsNon-Government Standards•InternationalInternational•NationalNational

– Commercial Item DescriptionCommercial Item Description– Federal Specification/StandardFederal Specification/Standard– Military Specification/StandardMilitary Specification/Standard

Source Priority

Lowest

Highest

66

Standards Development Process Standards Development Process OverviewOverview

Technology Assessment

Business Case

Analysis

Action Plan & Development

Validation & Certification

PublicationUpdates

77

Generic Process SummaryGeneric Process Summary

INITIATE PARTICIPATION

Development & Testing

General Requirements

User Service Description

Assess Voluntary Standards

Develop MIL-STD

Participate in ON-Going

Work

Develop Modification,

Enhancement, Profile

USE AS IS

Mili

tary

Uni

que

Em

ergi

ng

Inad

equa

te

AS

IS

Adequate AS IS

MAINTIAIN MIL-STD

MAINTAIN STANDARD,

PROFILE

CONTINUE PARTICIPATION

Requirements Analysis

Configuration Management and

MaintenanceTEST

ADOPT/

APPROVE

TEST

TEST

88

Standards Principles Standards Principles DiscussionDiscussion• Standards vs. TechnologyStandards vs. Technology• Replicate Proven PracticesReplicate Proven Practices• Performance vs. ProcessPerformance vs. Process• Market Place SupportMarket Place Support• Avoid Government Unique StandardsAvoid Government Unique Standards• Management of IT Standards ActivitiesManagement of IT Standards Activities• ““OPEN” Standards and SpecificationsOPEN” Standards and Specifications• Government RoleGovernment Role• Strategic StandardizationStrategic Standardization

99

Standards vs. Technology Standards vs. Technology

• Need to keep pace with technology evolution Need to keep pace with technology evolution

• Natural tension between standards setting and Natural tension between standards setting and technology evolution technology evolution

• Timing is critical Timing is critical

• Standards set too early Standards set too early – stifle innovation and creativity (the fuel of stifle innovation and creativity (the fuel of

technology evolution) technology evolution)

• Standards set too late Standards set too late – engenders social and economic costs (e.g., Beta vs. engenders social and economic costs (e.g., Beta vs.

VHS) VHS)

1010

Replicate Proven Practices Replicate Proven Practices

• Replicate good, proven engineering Replicate good, proven engineering and business practices and business practices

• Good practices manifested in open Good practices manifested in open solutions from recognized authorities solutions from recognized authorities (authentic SDO/SSO) (authentic SDO/SSO)

1111

Performance vs. Process Performance vs. Process • Successful standards specify performance and Successful standards specify performance and

interface requirements interface requirements

• Telling a vendor how to build a product Telling a vendor how to build a product (process specific standards) is a poor example (process specific standards) is a poor example of how to establish effective standards of how to establish effective standards

• Interested in the final product - not the process Interested in the final product - not the process used to get there used to get there

• Beware of "management" standards Beware of "management" standards

• Certain "best practice" guides and Certain "best practice" guides and specifications such as "configuration specifications such as "configuration management" are generally OKmanagement" are generally OK

1212

Market Place Support Market Place Support

• The market place - not a Standards Committee The market place - not a Standards Committee - determines which standards are the winners! - determines which standards are the winners!

• Need good, desirable, useful, workable, and Need good, desirable, useful, workable, and effective standards that:effective standards that:– realistically solve user problems realistically solve user problems – possess genuine utilitypossess genuine utility– supported in the market place supported in the market place – else, they become ‘shelf ware’ else, they become ‘shelf ware’

• Need vendors to build COTS that employ open Need vendors to build COTS that employ open standards standards

1313

Avoid Government Unique Avoid Government Unique Standards Standards

• Government unique (vs. de jure or Government unique (vs. de jure or ‘commercial’) standards are ‘commercial’) standards are – expensive expensive – usually counterproductive usually counterproductive

•Do not achieve a cost effective solution Do not achieve a cost effective solution •Are usually not interoperable Are usually not interoperable

– ditto proprietary solutions. Use MIL-ditto proprietary solutions. Use MIL-STDS and specifications only when STDS and specifications only when nothing else is availablenothing else is available

1414

Management of  IT Management of  IT Standards Activities Standards Activities • Governing concept needs to separate the management Governing concept needs to separate the management

of standardization activities from the technical work of standardization activities from the technical work – standards manager owns the process standards manager owns the process – sponsors and stakeholders own the specific substantive sponsors and stakeholders own the specific substantive

content content 

• Manage IT standards activities by employing a lifecycle Manage IT standards activities by employing a lifecycle portfolioportfolio

• Decisions based upon Decisions based upon – mission goals mission goals – architecturearchitecture– risk risk – performanceperformance– expected return on investment (ROI) expected return on investment (ROI)

1515

Management of  IT Standards Management of  IT Standards Activities Activities

• Ensuring stakeholder involvement is Ensuring stakeholder involvement is criticalcritical– make it easy for them to participate via make it easy for them to participate via

a low-drag administrative process a low-drag administrative process

• Very important to make standards Very important to make standards visible, understandable and readily visible, understandable and readily availableavailable

1616

““OPEN” Standards and OPEN” Standards and Specifications Specifications • Policy to specify as ‘mandated’ only ‘open’ Policy to specify as ‘mandated’ only ‘open’

standards and specifications are rooted in cost and standards and specifications are rooted in cost and legal considerationslegal considerations

• Two examples: Two examples: – (1) Placing proprietary standards (not ‘open’) specification (1) Placing proprietary standards (not ‘open’) specification

that belongs to Vendor ‘A’ or to Consortia ‘B’, may place the that belongs to Vendor ‘A’ or to Consortia ‘B’, may place the government organization in a position of non-competitively government organization in a position of non-competitively “favoring” that entity at the expense of others and thus “favoring” that entity at the expense of others and thus subject to being sued accordingly subject to being sued accordingly

– (2) If a party in a consortia provides certain intellectual (2) If a party in a consortia provides certain intellectual property that is incorporated into the organization’s (non-property that is incorporated into the organization’s (non-open) standard or specification and the government open) standard or specification and the government organization places this particular specification into an organization places this particular specification into an official registry of mandated standards, the government official registry of mandated standards, the government organization may be open to liability for royalty payments organization may be open to liability for royalty payments for employing that intellectual propertyfor employing that intellectual property

1717

Government Role Government Role • U.S. believes strongly in private enterprise U.S. believes strongly in private enterprise

leadership of voluntary standards setting leadership of voluntary standards setting activities activities

• Sharp contrast to the rest of the world Sharp contrast to the rest of the world – Foreign governments generally have a central, Foreign governments generally have a central,

and oftimes strong, role in standards setting and oftimes strong, role in standards setting and funding of standards activitiesand funding of standards activities

1818

Strategic Standardization Strategic Standardization • Strategic standardization is important to a nation’s Strategic standardization is important to a nation’s

economyeconomy– effective management tool for gaining a leading edge on effective management tool for gaining a leading edge on

competitioncompetition– for protecting a competitive position for protecting a competitive position

• Trade relation issues are not only global or regional Trade relation issues are not only global or regional but increasingly impact domestic as well as but increasingly impact domestic as well as worldwide markets worldwide markets

• Understanding how a particular company, or industry Understanding how a particular company, or industry sector, or region, or nation must compete globally is sector, or region, or nation must compete globally is necessary for future economic growth and health necessary for future economic growth and health

• Gaining insight and understanding of the role of Gaining insight and understanding of the role of standards in crafting competitive management standards in crafting competitive management strategies is key to future success strategies is key to future success

• IT standards are a key enabler to achieving and IT standards are a key enabler to achieving and maintaining global competitiveness maintaining global competitiveness

1919

STANDARDSSTANDARDSTUTORIALTUTORIAL

Part X – Some Part X – Some ObservationsObservations

2020

Observations of Cultural DifferencesWith Respect to Standards Compliance

U.S.

Country Requirement Compliance Rules

Germany

Russia

Italy

Permitted

Prohibited

Prohibited

Permitted

EXCEPTEXCEPT

EXCEPTEXCEPT

EVEN

EVEN

Prohibited

Permitted

Permitted

PROHIBITED!

2121

Experience/ObservationsExperience/Observations

• GoodGood

• BadBad

• Lessons to be learnedLessons to be learned

2222

INDUSTRY EXPERIENCEINDUSTRY EXPERIENCE

• Success AttributesSuccess Attributes

• Failure CharacteristicsFailure Characteristics

• ConclusionConclusion

2323

Success Attributes [1]Success Attributes [1]

• Participants: expect long-term Participants: expect long-term involvement (years) involvement (years)

• Schedule: don’t get rushed - don’t Schedule: don’t get rushed - don’t get late!get late!

• New technology: be conservativeNew technology: be conservative

• Scope: obstinately stick to it!Scope: obstinately stick to it!

2424

Success Attributes [2]Success Attributes [2]

• Conformance:Conformance:– need to measure itneed to measure it– should have working definition ASAPshould have working definition ASAP

• Target audience: commercial Target audience: commercial systems and userssystems and users

• Quality: fix bugs immediately!Quality: fix bugs immediately!• Process: have faith in consensus Process: have faith in consensus

process -- it works!process -- it works!

2525

Failure Attributes [1]Failure Attributes [1]

• Incorporate new/untried technologyIncorporate new/untried technology– Why waste committee time?Why waste committee time?

• Ignore commercial interestsIgnore commercial interests– Who will implement the standard?Who will implement the standard?

• Ignore public commentsIgnore public comments– Who will buy standardized products?Who will buy standardized products?

• Creeping featurismCreeping featurism– The schedule killer!The schedule killer!

Failures: only recognized years Failures: only recognized years laterlater

2626

Failure Attributes [2]Failure Attributes [2]

• Poor time estimatesPoor time estimates– Progress is made over quarters, not weeksProgress is made over quarters, not weeks

• Leave bugs to laterLeave bugs to later– Expensive to fix later, like softwareExpensive to fix later, like software

• Weak tests of conformanceWeak tests of conformance– Standard-conforming, but lacks Standard-conforming, but lacks

interoperabilityinteroperability• Too much implementation-defined Too much implementation-defined

behaviorbehavior– dittoditto

Failures: only recognized years Failures: only recognized years laterlater

2727

Some ExamplesSome Examples• IEEE networking standards:IEEE networking standards:

– Success: widely acceptedSuccess: widely accepted• Supercomputing/parallelism features:Supercomputing/parallelism features:

– Failure: new technology, changing conceptual modelFailure: new technology, changing conceptual model– No problems standardizing small features, but big No problems standardizing small features, but big

picture wasn’t rightpicture wasn’t right– Hindsight: lack of big picture, technology hadn’t Hindsight: lack of big picture, technology hadn’t

matured, wasn’t asking right questionsmatured, wasn’t asking right questions• C++ standardization process:C++ standardization process:

– Failure: years late, creeping featurism, no scope Failure: years late, creeping featurism, no scope control, no rationale, no complete implementations control, no rationale, no complete implementations during development, many inconsistencies (while during development, many inconsistencies (while close to publishing standard)close to publishing standard)

– Expect many defect reports, poor conformance testsExpect many defect reports, poor conformance tests– Result: creation of JavaResult: creation of Java

2828

CONCLUSIONS [1]CONCLUSIONS [1]

• Characteristics of Good technical Characteristics of Good technical work: work: – clear scopeclear scope– ““do-able”do-able”– support by vendorssupport by vendors– support by users support by users – well-defined conformance testswell-defined conformance tests

Basis: Basis: [experience][experience]

2929

CONCLUSIONS [2]CONCLUSIONS [2]

• Standards participation is long-term Standards participation is long-term commitment, but has high valuecommitment, but has high value

• Collaboration and liaising help reduce Collaboration and liaising help reduce duplicated effortsduplicated efforts

• Good technical standards take a Good technical standards take a while to “bake”while to “bake”

3030

CONCLUSIONS [3]CONCLUSIONS [3]

• Knowledge of the standards process can Knowledge of the standards process can be very helpful for internal projects:be very helpful for internal projects:– Specification development and consensus-Specification development and consensus-

building techniques are widely usefulbuilding techniques are widely useful– Quality is recognized at the end with few Quality is recognized at the end with few

defect reports and consistent spec defect reports and consistent spec interpretationinterpretation

– Standards process is a “best practice” to Standards process is a “best practice” to develop high quality specs within a develop high quality specs within a reasonable technical horizonreasonable technical horizon

3131

OUR EXPERIENCEOUR EXPERIENCE

• De jure vs Consortia Process:De jure vs Consortia Process:

• Organizations don’t actually compete - Organizations don’t actually compete - each has a role, scope, and purposeeach has a role, scope, and purpose– Consortia best rapid for technology Consortia best rapid for technology

developmentdevelopment– Formal de jure process best for consensus-Formal de jure process best for consensus-

buildingbuilding– but not vice versabut not vice versa– Best of Both Worlds ExamplesBest of Both Worlds Examples

3232

Success in Becoming an Accredited International Standard (IS)

Technical EditorTechnical Editor

WorkingGroup 3

WorkingGroup 3

SC34

SC34

JTC1JTC1

ISOISO

National Body Technical ExpertsNational Body Technical Experts

PDMLExample National Body Technical ExpertsNational Body Technical Experts

Technical EditorTechnical Editor

WorkingGroup 11

WorkingGroup 11

SC4

SC4

TC 184TC 184

COLLABORATIONCOLLABORATION

COLLABORATIONCOLLABORATION

3333

TechnicalEditors

TechnicalEditors

SC24

SC24

JTC1JTC1

ISOISO

WORLD WIDE WEB (W3C) CONSORTIUMWORLD WIDE WEB (W3C) CONSORTIUM

PNGExample

Success in Becoming anAccredited InternationalStandard (IS)

Recom

men

dR

ecom

men

ded

ed

Pra

cti

ce

Pra

cti

ce

3434

Some Advice For New Some Advice For New ProjectsProjects• Be certain of commitment to the project Be certain of commitment to the project

(WGs) and Scope(WGs) and Scope• WG infant mortality ==> poor managementWG infant mortality ==> poor management• Consider commercial implicationsConsider commercial implications• Include relevant stakeholdersInclude relevant stakeholders• Find liaisons, don’t “reinvent the wheel”Find liaisons, don’t “reinvent the wheel”• Be patient, use realistic timelineBe patient, use realistic timeline• Consumers expect much from specs ==> Consumers expect much from specs ==>

“quality” over “schedule” within reason“quality” over “schedule” within reason

3535

SCHEDULE ADVICE

Never commit to complete a project within six months of the fiscal year . . .

Augustine's Law Number XXXVI

. . . In either direction!. . . In either direction!

3636

STANDARDS STANDARDS GROWTHGROWTH

Number of Standards Produced Number of Standards Produced AnnuallyAnnually

STANDARDS STANDARDS GROWTHGROWTH

Number of Standards Produced Number of Standards Produced AnnuallyAnnually

Source: Augustine's Laws

Correlation of Correlation of Growth of Growth of SpecificationsSpecificationsandand

CommonCommonWeeds!

3737

PREMO ExamplePREMO Example

•New TechnologyNew Technology

•Market Place NeedMarket Place Need

•Vendor SupportVendor Support

•Broad Active SupportBroad Active Support

•Schedule SlipSchedule Slip

BUT LOST THE BUBBLE!BUT LOST THE BUBBLE!BUT LOST THE BUBBLE!BUT LOST THE BUBBLE!

BACKFIRE!BACKFIRE!

3838

VRML ExampleVRML Example

•New TechnologyNew Technology

•Market Place NeedMarket Place Need

•Vendor SupportVendor Support

•Broad Active SupportBroad Active Support

•Fast ProcessFast Process

WIN - WIN - WIN!WIN - WIN - WIN!WIN - WIN - WIN!WIN - WIN - WIN!

3939

EDIT

ENDEND

ENDEND

JUMP-START KEY PROJECTSJUMP-START KEY PROJECTS

TIMETIME

…. …. …. …. …. …. ….

4040

0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000

U.S.

France

India

Japan

Italy

Spain

Source: ANSI

The U.S., by sheer numbers, has more standards available for application than most other nations -- but, a significant portion of these document obsolescent technology, are redundant, or are overlapping.

The U.S., by sheer numbers, has more standards available for application than most other nations -- but, a significant portion of these document obsolescent technology, are redundant, or are overlapping.

Source: National Center for Manufacturing Sciences

STANDARDS OUTPUTSTANDARDS OUTPUT

4141

PARETO STRIKES AGAIN!

80% of the orders for individual standards are for only 15% to 20% of the total number published. Source: ANSI

CONCLUSION: Most PublishedMost PublishedStandards are Seldom Used!Standards are Seldom Used!

4242

PLAYERSPLAYERSPLAYERSPLAYERS

UsersUsers SDOsSDOs ConsortiaConsortia VendorsVendors Test OrganizationsTest Organizations

UsersUsers SDOsSDOs ConsortiaConsortia VendorsVendors Test OrganizationsTest OrganizationsPOSIPOSIPOSIPOSI

ISOFNC

ISSS

4343

ISO

OAG

Some of the Many of Players:Some of the Many of Players:

4444

PROBLEMPROBLEMPROBLEMPROBLEM

Too Many Players!Too Many Players!Too Many Standards!Too Many Standards!

How do we leverage ourlimited resources and protect our interests?

4545

X12

TC154

UN/ECE

ELECTRONIC ELECTRONIC COMMERCECOMMERCESTANDARDSSTANDARDS

X9

SC 34

SC 24

SC 30

HL7

CEFACT

ISSB

4646

COMING DATA COMING DATA AVALANCHE!AVALANCHE! By 2000 AD

• Information doubles 1 time every 3 years

• Data will double > 20 times in only 6 years

Thus, in 6 years -- Data 125,000 > Information!

e.g., "Documents" now include • Digitized Text • Photographs• Graphics • Audio• Color Animation• Video

SoURCE: George Gilder , "Life After Television"

DA

TA

INFORMATION

Next 6 Years

4747

INTERNATIONAL….INTERNATIONAL….

• Global ScopeGlobal Scope

• Technology RelevanceTechnology Relevance

• Accredited/ Professional RecognitionAccredited/ Professional Recognition

• Significant to Stakeholder InterestsSignificant to Stakeholder Interests

• Marketplace SupportMarketplace Support

4848

Standards Support for aStandards Support for aWinning StrategyWinning Strategy

• TECHNOLOGY - Help Co-Opt TECHNOLOGY - Help Co-Opt Promising New TechnologyPromising New Technology

• PROCESS - Articulate Proven ‘Best PROCESS - Articulate Proven ‘Best Practices’Practices’

• PEOPLE - Inform, Help Change PEOPLE - Inform, Help Change Attitudes, Get InvolvedAttitudes, Get Involved

4949

Being a World Class Enterprisemeans compliance with Global Standards

Or you let others write the standards for you:

Good - cost avoidance for

immediate profit improvement

Bad - others determine your product destiny

World Class ApproachWorld Class Approach

You either influence the standards:

Good - you control/influence

product destinyBad - short-term costs with weak

traceability on long-termreturn

5050

World Class ApproachWorld Class Approach

Being a World Class Enterprise

Means Compliance With

Global Standards

5151

World Class ApproachWorld Class Approach

Fork in the Road

Or you let others build them:

Good - Cost avoidance for immediate improve- ment

Sad - Others determine your destiny

You either influence the standards:

Good - You control/influence destiny

Sad - Short term costs with weak traceability on long term return

5252

What Does A What Does A GoodGoodIT StandardsIT StandardsStrategy Look Strategy Look Like?Like?

5353

InsanityInsanity

Doing something the Doing something the same way as always same way as always and expecting to get and expecting to get

a different resulta different result

5454

““You cannot You cannot solve problems at solve problems at the same level of the same level of thinking that thinking that created them.”created them.”

Albert Einstein

5555

NEED A NEW PARADIGMNEED A NEW PARADIGM

• Direct User InvolvementDirect User Involvement– Requirements DrivenRequirements Driven– Includes small and medium business Includes small and medium business

enterprises (S&MBEs)enterprises (S&MBEs)• ResponsiveResponsive

– Keep Pace With TechnologyKeep Pace With Technology– Manage Development as a ProjectManage Development as a Project

• International PerspectiveInternational Perspective– Foster Global CommerceFoster Global Commerce– Open Solutions Available in MarketplaceOpen Solutions Available in Marketplace

New Paradigm For Standards Process:New Paradigm For Standards Process:

5656