[OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo-EU toward a new OSGeo scenario?

Marc Vloemans marcvloemans1 at gmail.com
Sun May 8 03:29:16 PDT 2016

Thanks Till
For adding&pointing out the bottom line; even in a globalised world most European entities preferably deal with European entities. Especially if it concerns public policy and commercial matters. So let locals scratch local itches (imagine a European knocking on the door of the White House ;-)
And let's get downto business (sorry, for the pun).

By the way, when organisations grow and mature, they usually differentiate their activities and adapt organisational structure to accommodate the wider/growing  variety of members/stakeholders/customers. This way no one feels  left out and there is always something for someone to benefit from. For OSGeo this is the next step/phase in its evolution.
Whether, it will lead to uncontrollable fragmentation, chaos and unwanted split offs is principally a managerial problem. Something for Board, officers, Chartermembers etc to deal with in a sensible, professional and rational manner.

So....question.....who feel(s) this particular itch the most....????

Vriendelijke groet,
Marc Vloemans

> Op 8 mei 2016 om 08:53 heeft till.adams at fossgis.de het volgende geschreven:
> Dear all,
> after editing on an email for some days now, I noticed after all that most of the words, I'd like to contribute to this duscussion have already been written down by Marc.
> So I agree with Marc on most of his points but like to put the focus more on the business side of view: Please keep in mind, that in order to get at leat a tiny bit of influence in Brussels and EU-related organisations requires a European Organisation. No matter that this is related to a global, US-resident organisation.
> Regards, Till
> Am 2016-05-03 23:35, schrieb Marc VLOEMANS:
>> Dear Maxi et al
>> Great to continue another part of our strategy-in-the-making! My
>> reasons why I feel we need a regional EU chapter and its consequences
>> below.
>> As with many international organisations I am a supporter of the
>> strategy-adagio ; plan global, act local.
>> This enables local flavours to an overall
>> vision-mission-strategy-story. (Even Coca Cola encourages local
>> initiatives under a global brand and growth strategy.) Which addresses
>> the fact that, for example the GeoServer project, has many
>> region/country specific implementations and add-ons. Just think of the
>> specific European INSPIRE directive, with special plugins for
>> metadata etc.
>> Furthermore, outreach and lobby (see the Concept Marketing discussion
>> in the Wiki) have to deal with a host of different cultures and
>> political entities in Europe. Unlike a relatively homogenous US
>> marketplace. Most notably we have a influential/powerful centralised
>> EU government in Brussels as a pan-national stakeholder.
>> Now, local chapters could be invited to localise our overall strategic
>> roadmap (I happily take my analogy from software). But they are either
>> not set up or not equipped to deal with this matter (compare our
>> similar efforts on .org level). And they are certainly not able to
>> influence European/Brussels policy from their relative distance.
>> If a European OSGeo.eu can be the collaborative entity to work towards
>> further open spatial dissemination, on this side of the
>> Atlantic, then I am all for this. It could also facilitate FOSS4GEU
>> in stead of having a local chapter carry the weight.  It is a
>> European itch, so lets scratch it ourselves.
>> And if Africa and Asia and Middle-East have
>> other dissemination needs than power to them.
>> From an OSGeo-organisational point of view, we will certainly have to
>> look into the overall governance. In my opinion we are in a phase in
>> which we step up our game, professionalise, re-group and re-organise
>> where required. However, splitting would be disastrous. 
>> A simple solution is that board representation is based on certain
>> roles and representatives:
>> Chair, Secretary and Treasurer: General roles, therefor voted by all
>> chapter members
>> For marketing, sponsoring (single/grouped) etc; also individuals
>> voted by all
>> Representative EU: voted by EU chapter members
>> Representative Asia: voted by Asian chapter 
>> These last two roles could be combined with other specific roles if
>> needed.
>> Regional Chapters to be voted on by the local chapters in the area.
>> Or such like.
>> Yes, a little more of a Christmas tree, but that can be solved. It
>> reflects a need for required change.
>> The overall issue is that we grow in depth, width and length and
>> therefore we need to revisit/rethink how the organisation is managed
>> for future growth and relevance.
>> And managing large internationally distributed organisations is an
>> art, a craft and a profession. Especially if the organisation consists
>> of critical, vocal and engaged volunteers.
>> That can be daunting for those involved, but working in open source
>> throws us much larger daunting challenges on a daily basis.
>> My two (Euro)cents
>> Cheers Marc
>> Op dinsdag 3 mei 2016 heeft Massimiliano Cannata
>> <massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch [6]> het volgende geschreven:
>>> Dear Dirk and all,
>>> I came across the eu at list.osgeo.org which I didnt know the
>>> existence before of your last message. The archive [1] is showing
>>> very low traffic (2 thread, one of 2015 and one of 2016) with few
>>> contributors to the discussions (3 people). 
>>> In my opinion times are very immature for creating an OSGeo-EU; it
>>> seems to me that the discussion just started.
>>> Apart from visions and perspective which could be different, im
>>> concerned about the creation of an European OSGeo chapter and maybe
>>> in the next future of an Asian one.
>>> To my point of View, this may be the start of a disruption process
>>> which could lead to to the creation of  multiple regional
>>> foundations.
>>> I have to say that I was already reluctant on the formation of North
>>> American chapter for the same reason.
>>> This structure is one option, but then I see the "international
>>> OSGeo" (now OSGeo only) to be totally redesigned in the case. 
>>> Probably each continent should then elect one/two representatives
>>> for the "international OSGeo" and each "continental chapter" will
>>> have their members and their rules that scale down to "national
>>> local chapters" that have their own rules and members and elects
>>> representatives for the continental chapter.
>>> Also each "continental" will have its annual conference and the
>>> International could happen once every two years.
>>> Said that, I have no recipe and while understanding the motivation
>>> behind this disruption process I have some fear of splitting
>>> communities. This may lead in the future to different incubation
>>> processes, visions strategies etc...
>>> If this is the selected "option" I which that the process of
>>> de-localization could be run in a more democratic way - doocracy is
>>> good but when important matters involves several people democracy is
>>> far way better as it explicitly involve everyone, not only those who
>>> " tends to favor the more vocal people, leaving the "general
>>> opinion" largely unknown."
>>> So my question (with no prejudices) is, are we going toward and do
>>> we seek for a different OSGeo scenario?
>>> Maxi
>>> [1]
>> http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/European-Union-Chapter-f5250537.html
>>> [5]
>>> Sorry if I garbled my understanding of the initial email, I did ask
>>> for clarification :P
>>> --
>>> Jody Garnett
>>> On 2 May 2016 at 12:23, Massimiliano Cannata
>>> <massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch> wrote:
>>>> Dear Board Members,
>>>> while I understand the call for presentation for the OSGeo vision,
>>>> regarding FOSS4G Europe, i see different visions within the
>>>> community.
>>>> One things is the EU local chapter, another is the FOSS4G local
>>>> event which has a different vision in my understanding and my
>>>> opinion.
>>>> What is your opinion?
>>>> Maxi
>>>> 2016-05-02 17:56 GMT+02:00 Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com>:
>>>>> Thanks Till:
>>>>> I see that the presentation covering our mission/vision/goals
>>>>> has been accepted [1] - perhaps that can take some pressure of
>>>>> keynotes? I would appreciate company if Maxi (who has been doing
>>>>> so much planning work) was willing.
>>>>> To clarify point two - are you considering a european foss4g
>>>>> event? Or a vision for how OSGeo can be effective in Europe.
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jody Garnett
>>>>>> On 2 May 2016 at 11:19, <till.adams at fossgis.de> wrote:
>>>>>> Dear OSGeo board,
>>>>>> I come to you in sight of OSGeo presence @FOSS4G 2016 in
>>>>>> Bonn. After sending out the accteptance-emails for the
>>>>>> proposals for the regular track we now also care heavily about
>>>>>> all the other programme related issues.
>>>>>> One thing we want to finalize ASAP are the plenary
>>>>>> talks/sessions we will have.
>>>>>> We would be very pleased, if we could have two presentations
>>>>>> from OSGeo within the limits of our plenary sessions:
>>>>>> 1. Traditionally the OSGeo president should run the Sol Katz
>>>>>> Award session as well as the student awardings - both together
>>>>>> in the closing session.  So we would be happy if Venka would
>>>>>> agree in adopting that. This would be  on friday afternoon,
>>>>>> the detailed time schedule will come soon.
>>>>>> 2. In order to have both, a presentation of OSGeos new
>>>>>> "Vision and Mission" but also to present the "Vision of an
>>>>>> European FOSS4G" I would like to ask kindly whether
>>>>>> Vice-President Dirk Frigne wants to talk about this in a
>>>>>> keynote on wednesday noon. I think especially on an european
>>>>>> FOSS4G with a lot of european organisations being advocated,
>>>>>> showing the vision of a worldwide, but also of an european
>>>>>> FOSS4G makes a lot of sense. Dirk as a Vice-President is the
>>>>>> perfect person to combine both talks into one.
>>>>>> Please also consider organizing the OSGeo booth, for
>>>>>> questions just contact me.
>>>>>> Till
>>>> --
>>>> 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 [2]
>>>> Fax +41 (0)58 666 62 09 [3]
>>>> massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch
>>>> www.supsi.ch/ist [4]
>> --
>> Kind regards,
>> Marc Vloemans
>> Mobile +31(0)651 844262
>> LinkedIn: http://nl.linkedin.com/in/marcvloemans [7]
>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/marcvloemans [8]
>> http://www.slideshare.net/marcvloemans [9]
>> Links:
>> ------
>> [1] http://2016.foss4g.org/talks.html#306
>> [2] http://www.fossgis.de/tel:%2B41%20%280%2958%20666%2062%2014
>> [3] http://www.fossgis.de/tel:%2B41%20%280%2958%20666%2062%2009
>> [4] http://www.supsi.ch/ist
>> [5] http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/European-Union-Chapter-f5250537.html
>> [6] mailto:massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch
>> [7] http://nl.linkedin.com/in/marcvloemans
>> [8] http://twitter.com/marcvloemans
>> [9] http://www.slideshare.net/marcvloemans

More information about the Discuss mailing list