[OSGeo-Discuss] Ouch ! : Re: OSGeo strategy and marketing : Call for ideas on osgeo activities
Marc VLOEMANS
marcvloemans1 at gmail.com
Thu Apr 28 06:38:06 PDT 2016
Gents,
I bow out of this discussion, with still a semblance of grace.
Marc
Kind regards,
Marc Vloemans
Mobile +31(0)651 844262
LinkedIn: http://nl.linkedin.com/in/marcvloemans
Twitter: http://twitter.com/marcvloemans
http://www.slideshare.net/marcvloemans
2016-04-28 15:21 GMT+02:00 Massimiliano Cannata <
massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch>:
> Cameron and all,
> Personally (and not speaking in the name of he board) i will be super
> happy and in super favor of having a marketing plan to be probably one part
> of theOSGeo strategy.
>
> I just don't see that we should restart from scratch what has been done so
> far for this year.
>
> in my opinion, we should go on and make treasure of results (positive or
> negative) and improve the process for the future.
>
> Maxi
>
>
>
>
> Il 28/Apr/2016 14:31, "Cameron Shorter" <cameron.shorter at gmail.com> ha
> scritto:
>
>> Hi Maxi, board,
>>
>> It has been good of you to take the lead in putting together an OSGeo
>> Priorities survey.
>> Pushing an idea forward such as has been done has created a talking
>> point, leading to marketing conversations, although possibly not in the
>> direction originally planned, but constructive non-the-less.
>>
>> The positives I see from the board identification of a need (for
>> marketing), is that some really great marketing ideas are starting to flow
>> onto our email lists, from the likes of Marc and others. We have some
>> really experienced business development, marketing, and strategy people
>> within the OSGeo community. You might want to check out some of the OSGeo
>> Advocate profiles at https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Advocate
>>
>> The conversations are hopefully leading to a revitalization of the OSGeo
>> Marketing committee, which should in turn help free up the board to tackle
>> other initiatives. I suspect that you'd agree that to be able to tap into
>> this marketing expertise will be of value to the board?
>>
>> With regards to the specific conversation about delineating between
>> marketing and strategy, I've regularly seen marketing consultants being
>> included in company strategy planning sessions, and I see there being many
>> synergies between the two.
>>
>> A few encouraging words from the board, offering to support personal
>> initiatives to drive OSGeo marketing forward would likely be valuable at
>> this point. (I've had a couple of private emails questioning whether
>> marketing initiatives would be welcomed by the board.)
>>
>> Warm regards, Cameron
>>
>> On 28/04/2016 9:23 pm, Marc Vloemans wrote:
>>
>> Ouch...once more picking up the towel from the ring....I have to disagree
>> with the spin/suggestiveness/angle as below.....it throws the whole
>> discussion back to its early beginnings ......it disregards what
>> individuals have contributed until now from their experience and insights
>> ......
>> I realise that anything I write/offer further can be construed as too
>> critical, too negative, too this, that and other. However, we are IMHO
>> assembled at a too critical junction for OSGeo.
>>
>> I flatly refuse to go down a wrong path, only execute isolated subjective
>> tasks on behalf of whoever tells me to do so, while seeing the proverbial
>> ice-berg (irrelevance) on the radar (and the band keeps playing). That is
>> not in the spirit of OS communities. I am quite willing to work (and
>> starting to do so) on pressing present issues like: can we salvage our
>> presence at FOSS4GNA next week (no banners, CD's etc to be found), what
>> about actual funding requests.... But it would be nice if offers of help,
>> actual advice, contributions etc are not so easily dismissed, disregarded
>> or kept for later usage.
>>
>> Actual terminology as "strategy is not a matter of marketing", "I
>> suggest you to work..." , comparing us to governments and reminding me
>> that 'the board has been elected', make me wonder if our community strategy
>> is still to be a bottom-up process and what type of signal this gives to
>> the members/volunteers. And if 'Father knows best what's good for me' ....
>> Well, that only works if one holds power over me or if there is a
>> successful track record to show for. Right now it feels plain wrong to me.
>>
>> My contribution (and that of other commentators for who I have
>> professional respect for their particular expertise) should be seen as a
>> compliment and addition to what the Board has started.
>> If the questionnaire, Boards' strategic objectives and member'
>> participation/response all leave something to be desired....then that is
>> totally OK with me....as long as all involved learn from it, take
>> additional expertise on board, adapt, redesign and - anew - go for it.
>>
>> By the way;
>> If the Board requires more mandate than they feel they have right now, in
>> order to strategise properly (and not wait till 2017, while already our
>> Foss4gNA-presentation is in jeopardy and the all-important Bonn-OSGeo
>> strategy-presentation coming up), then they have my backing!
>>
>>
>>
>> Vriendelijke groet,
>> Marc Vloemans
>>
>>
>> Op 28 apr. 2016 om 08:09 heeft Massimiliano Cannata <
>> <massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch>massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch> het
>> volgende geschreven:
>>
>>
>> > Dears
>> > I personally don't believe that strategy is a matter of marketing.
>> >
>> > It is a matter of governance: identify what is useful and think of how
>> implement it. All over the word governments do this.
>> >
>> > Marketing is about how sell / market your product to clients which is
>> only one part of the strategy.
>> >
>> > That's why this elected board decided to take action. The process is
>> certainly far from being optimal and the contribution of all the members of
>> this community is desired. But i want to underline that this is at least a
>> great starting point you should credit this board.
>> >
>> > The call for ideas of action is beacause the board would like the
>> understand what the community think is the more important and appropriate
>> way of operate and spend money towards the selected objectives.
>> >
>> > Good or not, one page or five, perfectible or trashable this is a
>> starting point.
>> >
>> > Questions could have been easier and we could have been more answers
>> but we wanted well tought and feasible and verifiable actions, not just
>> "Let's go to the moon" ideas.
>> >
>> > The next step of the board is the evaluate and prioritize answers and
>> try to make them happen in 2016.
>> >
>> > I suggest you to work for the 2017 strategy supporting the board with
>> market analysis and ideas so that wiser decision can be taken.
>> >
>> > Ant the end GIS is all about information to support decision making :-)
>> >
>> > Maxi
>> >
>> > Il 27/Apr/2016 16:20, "Marc Vloemans" < <marcvloemans1 at gmail.com>
>> marcvloemans1 at gmail.com> ha scritto:
>> >>
>> >> Steven, Gert Jan et al
>> >>
>> >> Please feel free to add, comment, fill in blanks and disagree with my
>> discussion piece in wiki Marketing Committee Discussion tab!
>> >>
>> >> My intention was to gather insights etc from others, while still
>> framing the discussions on our strategy, stakeholders, questionnaire etc.
>> >> As well as finding common semantics (eg Eco-system vs community,
>> marketing vs promotion).
>> >>
>> >> This way we can provide those less familiar with strategy-making
>> processes and marketing decisions/activities with some blue print and back
>> ground. (Like more tech-savvy colleagues explained software architecture to
>> me in the past ;-)
>> >>
>> >> Vriendelijke groet,
>> >> Marc Vloemans
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > Op 27 apr. 2016 om 13:20 heeft Gert-Jan van der Weijden - Stichting
>> OSGeo.nl <http://osgeo.nl> < <gert-jan at osgeo.nl>gert-jan at osgeo.nl> het
>> volgende geschreven:
>> >> >
>> >> > Steven, Maxi
>> >> >
>> >> > @Steven: Thanks for writing down for what is also my personal
>> experience.
>> >> > Even though I followed the process of setting up these strategic
>> outcomes from a rather nearby position,
>> >> > it's hard to feel engaged with the questionnaire.
>> >> >
>> >> > Let's try to analyse:
>> >> > The Board has as first steps (re-)written down a Vision, a Mission
>> and Core Values.
>> >> > The next two steps ("identification of ecosystems" and
>> "identification of 4 strategic objectives" have also been done by the Board
>> solely).
>> >> >
>> >> > So now, in the 4th step, the Charter Members are asked for the first
>> time for their input.
>> >> > But in fact you have already lost me in defining the ecosystem:
>> what's the role of the 8 identified parties in this ecosystem? And how come
>> OSGeo.org <http://osgeo.org> itself not part of the ecosystem?
>> >> >
>> >> > And a few suggestions:
>> >> > 1. I think the Google Form would be easier to understand if it
>> contained one page for every of the 4 Strategic Objectives (so 5 pages in
>> total).
>> >> > 2. The last question ("ecosystems involved") has two components: the
>> "who is the main beneficiary", but also "who is the main actor".
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > regards,
>> >> >
>> >> > Gert-Jan
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>> >> > Van: Discuss [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] Namens Steven
>> Feldman
>> >> > Verzonden: dinsdag 26 april 2016 21:35
>> >> > Aan: Marc Vloemans
>> >> > CC: discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>> >> > Onderwerp: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Call for ideas on osgeo activities
>> >> >
>> >> > I just tried to complete the questionnaire. I found it very
>> difficult to understand. It seemed to be pushing me down a line of
>> commenting on a web site redesign
>> >> >
>> >> > It didn't give me enough context of why the strategic outcomes were
>> strategic and it didn't allow me to suggest any alternatives. The mandatory
>> questions force a choice from a predetermined list with no option to
>> suggest 'other' or 'none of the above'
>> >> >
>> >> > If we want to poll the Charter members, I think we need to provide
>> more explanation and perhaps consider a two stage process where the first
>> stage is more open ended and then at a late stage we ask for responses to
>> specific questions arising from the first stage
>> >> >
>> >> > Steven
>> >> >
>> >> >> On 26 Apr 2016, at 17:00, Marc Vloemans <marcvloemans1 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Alternatively....
>> >> >>
>> >> >> What is going to happen to the outcome?
>> >> >> Some extra communication on that may enlist more entries.....
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Vriendelijke groet,
>> >> >> Marc Vloemans
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> Op 26 apr. 2016 om 00:41 heeft Dirk Frigne <
>> dirk.frigne at geosparc.com> het volgende geschreven:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> We can try to discuss the first results on BOF on FOSS4G-NA, GWF
>> and
>> >> >>> other activities going on... Discussing Face2f can help in getting
>> feedback.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> I will put this on the agenda during the workshop about OSGeo
>> Europe
>> >> >>> on the GWF OSGeo day on May 24, 2016 in Rotterdam.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> just my 2c
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Dirk
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>> On 26-04-16 00:07, Massimiliano Cannata wrote:
>> >> >>>> we didn't set any end-date for the survey.
>> >> >>>> Nevertheless few answers have today been received, any action to
>> >> >>>> better involve members is more then welcome.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Maxi
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> 2016-04-25 23:33 GMT+02:00 Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com
>> >> >>>> <mailto: <jody.garnett at gmail.com>jody.garnett at gmail.com>>:
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> What is the timeframe here Maxi? You may also consider writing an
>> >> >>>> news post, or as project leads to pass this opportunity on to the
>> >> >>>> developer lists.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> --
>> >> >>>> Jody Garnett
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> On 24 April 2016 at 03:12, Massimiliano Cannata
>> >> >>>> <massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch
>> >> >>>> <mailto: <massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch>
>> massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch>> wrote:
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Dear members
>> >> >>>> The survey to collect your actions proposal is still open
>> >> >>>> waiting for your contribution.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Maxi
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> ---------- Messaggio inoltrato ----------
>> >> >>>> Da: "Massimiliano Cannata" <massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch
>> >> >>>> <mailto: <massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch>
>> massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch>>
>> >> >>>> Data: 12/Apr/2016 18:41
>> >> >>>> Oggetto: 2016 OSGeo's actions - Survey
>> >> >>>> A: "OSGeo Discussions" < <discuss at lists.osgeo.org>
>> discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>> >> >>>> <mailto: <discuss at lists.osgeo.org>discuss at lists.osgeo.org>>
>> >> >>>> Cc:
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Dear OSGeo Community member,
>> >> >>>> during the Face to Face board meeting held in February in
>> Eide
>> >> >>>> (Holland) a new 2026 OSGeo strategy has been formulated. We
>> are
>> >> >>>> now in a phase of community engagement to define the tactics
>> to
>> >> >>>> be implemented in the 2016 so that we can advance toward our
>> goals.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> For this reason, the board kindly ask you to participate in
>> the
>> >> >>>> survey by filling (as many time as your ideas are) the form
>> at
>> >> >>>> this url: <http://goo.gl/forms/HTGTlKv7SB>
>> http://goo.gl/forms/HTGTlKv7SB [1]
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Details on the process and on the strategy are available
>> >> >>>> at http://www.slideshare.net/cannata/osgeo-2026-strategy
>> [2] and
>> >> >>>> are described in the preamble of the survey.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> In the name of the Board of Directors,
>> >> >>>> Thanks and Best regards,
>> >> >>>> Maxi
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> [1] <http://goo.gl/forms/HTGTlKv7SB>
>> http://goo.gl/forms/HTGTlKv7SB
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> [2] <http://www.slideshare.net/cannata/osgeo-2026-strategy>
>> http://www.slideshare.net/cannata/osgeo-2026-strategy
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> --
>> >> >>>> *Massimiliano Cannata*
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Professore SUPSI in ingegneria Geomatica
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Responsabile settore Geomatica
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Istituto scienze della Terra
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Dipartimento ambiente costruzione e design
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Scuola universitaria professionale della Svizzera italiana
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Campus Trevano, CH - 6952 Canobbio
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Tel. +41 (0)58 666 62 14
>> >> >>>> <tel:%2B41%20%280%2958%20666%2062%2014
>> <%2B41%20%280%2958%20666%2062%2014>>____
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Fax +41 (0)58 666 62 09
>> >> >>>> <tel:%2B41%20%280%2958%20666%2062%2009
>> <%2B41%20%280%2958%20666%2062%2009>>____
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch
>> >> >>>> <mailto: <massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch>
>> massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> _www.supsi.ch/ist < <http://www.supsi.ch/ist>
>> http://www.supsi.ch/ist>_
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> _______________________________________________
>> >> >>>> Discuss mailing list
>> >> >>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Discuss at lists.osgeo.org>
>> >> >>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> --
>> >> >>>> *Massimiliano Cannata*
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Professore SUPSI in ingegneria Geomatica
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Responsabile settore Geomatica
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Istituto scienze della Terra
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Dipartimento ambiente costruzione e design
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Scuola universitaria professionale della Svizzera italiana
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Campus Trevano, CH - 6952 Canobbio
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Tel. +41 (0)58 666 62 14____
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Fax +41 (0)58 666 62 09____
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch <mailto:
>> massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> _www.supsi.ch/ist < <http://www.supsi.ch/ist>
>> http://www.supsi.ch/ist>_
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> _______________________________________________
>> >> >>>> Discuss mailing list
>> >> >>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>> >> >>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> --
>> >> >>> Yours sincerely,
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> ir. Dirk Frigne
>> >> >>> CEO @geosparc
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Geosparc n.v.
>> >> >>> Brugsesteenweg 587
>> >> >>> B-9030 Ghent
>> >> >>> Tel: +32 9 236 60 18
>> >> >>> GSM: +32 495 508 799
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> http://www.geomajas.org
>> >> >>> http://www.geosparc.com
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> @DFrigne
>> >> >>> be.linkedin.com/in/frigne
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >> >>> Discuss mailing list
>> >> >>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>> >> >>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > Discuss mailing list
>> >> > Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>> >> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> >> >
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > Discuss mailing list
>> >> > Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>> >> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing listDiscuss at lists.osgeo.orghttp://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cameron Shorter,
>> Software and Data Solutions Manager
>> LISAsoft
>> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
>> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
>>
>> P +61 2 9009 5000, W www.lisasoft.com, F +61 2 9009 5099
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20160428/dcb9008d/attachment-0002.html>
More information about the Discuss
mailing list