[Marketing] Motion on choice of agency GetInteractive for Rebrand & Website Project

Sat Mar 11 12:53:42 PST 2017

+1 Peter

Sorry I haven't had time recently to be directly engaged in this, but
thanks to all of you who have been for pushing this ahead.

On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Thank you Jeff, Jody and Marc for explaining the rigour you have followed.
>
> My vote is +1, which is in line with my trust in the people involved and
> their prior track record, the process set up, and description of how it was
> followed.
> Cameron
>
>
> On 9/3/17 12:36 pm, Jody Garnett wrote:
>
> We may want a seperate thread for this one Cameron; should we take your
> response as a +0 :)
>
> +1 - Get Interactive - treated us (and this project) with respect,
> handling their communication seriously demonstrating a great work ethic in
> both their EOI and RFP responses. They were not the most visually
> impressive response; but they more than made up for this with communication
> and consideration.
>
> It has been a bit of whirlwind so I am trying to remember what I did:
>
> - Took part in the EOI creation, rewriting some sections around how
> projects are presented (to make it less confusing between osgeo projects,
> community projects and incubation)
>
> - Reviewed the EOI responses and attended some discussion meetings; as
> part of this meeting I made some notes capturing the pros and cons of the
> responses, and voted for the four short-listed organizations.
>
> - Helped craft the "EOI response" letters sent out to short listed firms,
> using the notes above to both encourage respondents and to highlight areas
> where the committee wanted more information
>
> - Quickly reviewed the proposals with Helena (at a local GIS conference).
> This review formed the core of a comparison between proposals ("EOI/RFP
> Comments and Feedback" document), that was added to be Antia, Jeffrey, Marc
> and others on both the marketing and board lists.
>
> - Tried to make a "Comparison RFP" spreadsheet of the responses (wanted to
> double check the proposals for any variances - such as cutting scope from
> their financials and not noting it as a variance). This did not prove super
> useful; but the high level comparison of costs helped me at least.
>
> - Attended a meeting to select a firm, the "EOI/RFP Comments and
> Feedback" document was updated over the course of the meeting to help guide
> negotiations. Specifically we captured for each firm
> a) what would be need from the firm? *example demonstrate an
> understanding of scope*
> b) what would be needed internally from OSGeo? *example volunteers in the
> same timezone*
> c) what questions do we have for negotiation? example: *Content migration
> appears unrealistic - can you explain your approach.*
>
> - Helped "proposal response letters"  to the two firms selected for Q&A
> interview - questions composed from the above document.
>
> - I was only able to attend on of the Q&A interviews; I was quite
> impressed by the selected firms questions for OSGeo, and work ethic they
> displayed in their EOI and RFP. I also appreciated Jeffrey and Marc's
> representation of OSGeo and our interests.
>
> - I was able to talk to Marc about the second meeting, while he got
> answers to the above questions (thanks Marc). The firm in question did not
> match Get Interactive for being prepared.
>
> Over the course of the above I did my best to keep osgeo board in the
> loop; sending the above notes and documents osgeo-priv, and highlighting
> the correspondence as they were saved into dropbox. I think I also managed
> to email discuss at osgeo.org and ask for more volunteers to take part :)
>
> If anyone on the marketing committee (or osgeo board) needs a copy of the
> notes referenced above give me a shout. Doing this commercial-in-confidence
> stuff really conflicts with our "open all the things" mantra at OSGeo.
>
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
> On 8 March 2017 at 15:46, Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Thank you to all who have put in a significant effort in pushing through
>> on this website re-branding activity.
>> For transparency, and to demonstrate the rigour that has been applied to
>> this process, could I please ask each person who has been involved to
>> explain the depth of your involvement in your assessment, and why you agree
>> with this motion (or not). I will then vote based on my trust of the
>> process and my trust that the individuals involved have followed the
>> process.
>>
>> To start:
>> * I reviewed the RFQ that was developed and sent out, along with the
>> proposed process. I was impressed with the professionalism of both. I am
>> familiar with the individuals involved with this selection process, and
>> have been impressed over the years with their clear thinking, ability to
>> suggest good ideas, their follow through on making things happen and
>> professionalism. Assuming they confirm that they have continued to be
>> thorough in their process, and confident in their selection, I shall back
>> their decision.
>>
>> Warm regards, Cameron
>>
>>
>> On 09-Mar-17 10:08 AM, Marc VLOEMANS wrote:
>>
>> Dear Marketing List,
>>
>> Thanks to the unrelenting energy of the Marketing Committee en members of
>> the Board, I have the pleasureof asking you for approval of our choice of
>> agency to conduct the Rebranding and Website Project for OSGeo:
>> GetInteractive (for examples of their previous work see
>> www.getinteractive.nl)
>>
>> I herewith ask you formally to approve the choice for GetInteractive as
>> the agency that will execute the Rebranding and Website Project as
>> previously described in the EoI and RFP. Please do so before Saturday 12.00
>> noon CET. This allows the committee to draft the contract and collect Board
>> signature in order to have the agency start the project in time.
>>
>> Some back ground on the process:
>> - we cast our Call for Expression of Interest as widely as our network
>> and channels allowed
>> - we received 4 serious EoI's, which all were invited to send in a
>> proposal
>> - of these, 2 were shortlisted based on price and project scope
>> - GetInteractive was chosen as the winner, based on critical items such
>> as:
>> pricing, experience with community-sites, quality of reference projects,
>> comprehensiveness of their proposals, user-friendliness and technical
>> specifications of proposed CMS, their experience with open source, realisme
>> of planning and efforts, demonstrated professionalism in the EoI/RFP
>> process and such.
>>
>> We have 'happily' drawn upon Jeffrey's particular experience in the
>> CMS-field and he has volunteered to manage the project on our behalf.
>> Jody's eye for detail and process has kept us on track as the overall
>> planning needed to be met. Therefore  I feel we have achieved the best
>> value for our money and can safely enter the next stage in the project.
>>
>> Again, I wish to thank all involved in a process that has been executed
>> meticulously but (thankfully) fast enough to have our revamped brand and
>> website in place well before FOSS4G2017 to immediately benefit from it.
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Marketing mailing listMarketing at lists.osgeo.orghttps://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing
>>
>> --
>> Cameron Shorter,
>> Software and Data Solutions Manager, Jirotech,
>> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
>> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
>>
>> P +61 2 8099 9000 <+61%202%208099%209000>, M +61 419 142 254 <+61%20419%20142%20254>, W www.jirotech.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________ Marketing mailing list
>> Marketing at lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailma
>> n/listinfo/marketing
>
> --
> Cameron Shorter
> M +61 419 142 254 <+61%20419%20142%20254>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Marketing mailing list
> Marketing at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/marketing/attachments/20170311/6c5bd106/attachment.html>