Versions Compared

Old Version 1

changes.mady.by.user King

Saved on

compared with

New Version 2

changes.mady.by.user cedenoj@oregonstate.edu

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

Date

Attendees

Image Added

Goals

  • Discuss Levels and Attributes and finalize a starting framework.

...

TimeItemWhoNotes
5mRoll Call / ScribeLEK 
5mReview of kickoff meetingLEK

 

40mDiscussionAll 
10mNext StepsAll 
  • Reviewed document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/17rQOtcdY5gv2sdfp9tccxQZf1dWlX0zSD8wCFV-Mcvk/edit
    • Focused on combined document & attributes
    • The goal is to try and come to a consensus of the levels
    • JJ - his approach / lenses come from ITSM / ITL service characteristics
    • Piet - not sure about the levels (based on notes from first meeting). Were the levels supposed to reflect the organization or the practice of EA itself?
      • Louis - The most mature level is where the EA program is tightly integrated with the organization's processes.
      • Dan - depending on the organization the scope of the EA program will be different (for example, if EA is part of central IT vs if EA is outside of IT and has broader impact to the university)
      • Louis - Believes that the EA maturity should be related to the integration of EA to the integration as a whole vs just central IT
      • Jim - It might be better to separate the EA maturity level from the reach of EA practice.
      • JJ - the scope EA and its maturity should be separate from each other
      • Dan - the scope vs EA maturity levels should be orthogonal from each other.
      • Piet - agrees with Louis in that EA should have a broad range / scope across the larger organization (the whole university)
      • Louis - the goal of EA should be to have a large impact to the organization as a whole.
    • Levels
      • Louis - take on the exercise was more about the practice of EA and its reach vs JJ and Dan's approach were more about the practice level itself
      • Dan - we can think of the levels as a way to assess an institution's EA practice and how to evaluate how to move to the next level of EA maturity (guidance on the path)
      • JJ - some institutions may choose to only go to a certain level of maturity for some characteristics.
      • Louis - depending on the industry or organization (politic situation) some characteristics / things may never work for an organization
    • Characteristics
      • JJ - should we be using an existing model?
        • Louis - the existing models & language is not accessible to higher ed? The existing documentation is not always great.

Action items

  •