NGI International Task Review MS116 Spain

From EGIWiki
Revision as of 16:29, 22 February 2012 by Isabel (talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search

Main page with instructions. In this page, you can provide your assessments for the EGI Global Tasks (MS115) and your self-assessment for the NGI International Tasks (MS116).

Notes:

  • Both milestones are an assessment of services from a managerial perspective'and should be reported as an evaluation of the services -do 'not report what your NGI did for those tasks/services as this is covered by the Quarterly Reports.
  • MS115: External assessments of NA2.2 EGI Dissemination and Marketing as a global task. 
  • MS116: Self-assessment of NGI International Tasks, required for tasks where your NGI has effort. (The operations part is covered through a survey linked at the bottom of this page).


The content will be used for the following documents:


Global Tasks (MS115)

In this box, please provide your external assessment on the quality of the following tasks:

External Relations

Table 4: EGI Global Tasks Assessment: Dissemination (May 2011 - Oct 2011) + Marketing and Communication (since Nov 2011)
EGI-InSPIRE Name Assessment Score How to Improve
NA2.2E Dissemination (May 2011 - Oct 2011)
Marketing and Communication (since Nov 2011)
In our experience contact with users needs to be direct. Scientific users do not follow up Newsletters nor dissemination events not directly organized by their field. 2 EGI should attend dissemination events of the users, like major conferences of the different research areas. The presence of EGI there should be in the form of demonstrations or showcases. Besides these large events, the NGIs need to take more seriously the dissemination inside each own country.


NGI International Tasks (MS116)

In this box, please provide your self-assessment on the quality of the following tasks. 

External Relations

Table 4: NGI Assessment: May 2011 - Oct 2011
EGI-InSPIRE Name Assessment Score How to Improve
NA2.2N Dissemination The dissemination of the NGIs is very irregular. Some know what their users portfolio is, have annual meetings, etc... others we have no input at all. This needs to be shorted out. 2 NGIs need to take more seriously the dissemination inside each own country, and report on the 3-months basis about the activity carried-on. Currently we have the QR but it does not seem to be enough.
NA2.3N Policy Development This is an activity much liked by the Commission, but it is always unclear how the interaction with us is taking place. We clearly have a Policy problem on the side of the people responsible for infrastructures in Europe, and at the country level. On the one hand they told us to go ahead with the NGIs and EGI, but they continue funding computing resources without any apparent coordination for each user community. There is a clear policy problem. 3 We need to get more in touch with the commission and the country authorities to understand what are the needs and what is expected from us. Here a possible way to improve would be more clarity in the policy documents. Often they are very long and not to the point.

User Services

Table 4: NGI Assessment: May 2011 - Oct 2011
EGI-InSPIRE Name Assessment Score How to Improve
NA3.3N Requirements Gathering The setup of the requirements gathering mechanism is already a very good step. However it is unclear still who needs to do the work and how in order to implement changes when a requirement is performed. 3 The inclusion of a well defined workflow for requirements follow up.
NA3.3N Application Database The AppDatabase is becoming visually appealing. 3 OK
NA3.3N Training Marketplace It is a good initiative to centralize the information about the training events. We have been able to include the applet on our web site and make a selection filtered for Spain. It works quite well. 4 I am not sure many people is aware of its existence. It needs to be self-disseminated and second, broadcasted to general users.
NA3.3N Consultancy Our consultancy activity with users are ongoing on an everyday basis, at almost all the sites of the infrastructure. It is based on a direct conversation with users, first to understand their needs, second to help them with their first steps in using the infrastructure. 4 An improvement in the information about site availability would be very helpful when advising users how to access the infrastructure.

Operations


For the assessment of the operations, a dedicated survey page is available