December 16, 2009
General IT, ITIL, Standardization
No Comments
Policy creates structure for an organization. Policy limits errors, waste and creativity. Policy makes the irresponsible produce expected results. It can also corrode high responsibility levels.
A creative, high initiative and responsible person can be structured to carefulness, seriousness and inactivity. Excellence demands more than thinking outside the box – it requires acting outside the limits. Quantum leaps means taking risks, not only managing or mitigating them. Emphasis on policy and structure builds an organizational system, a machine producing the expected output. Geniuses, the wildly creative and people of outstanding initiative and responsibility create the unexpected. Sometimes the brilliant. Sometimes havoc. But desperately avoiding the trouble will leave out the excellent. With policy one can regulate and make all the people behave according to the rules.
There is much to recommend toeing a party line. Well organized groups can raise the standard of output. Toyota comes to mind. Henry Ford pioneered it. But it will never foster an Einstein, an Edison or a Da Vinci.
Individuality must be preserved for an organization to excel. And policy must never replace common, uncommon or even rare sense. The essence of good structure is to keep it minimal and really, really simple. The litmus test is if an organizational concept can be conveyed to a ten year old in 15 minutes. If not, it’s too complex, too cumbersome.
Unfortunately some policy is needed. But only because all the people are not brilliant and in constant synchronization. Because an army of telepathic geniuses needs no command.
April 16, 2008
General IT, Standardization
1 Comment
Look not at what you see but what you don’t see. Answers may lie in missing information.
When Novell struck its now infamous deal with Microsoft, a crowd of cheerleaders tried to convince us that the deal was the second coming for Novell and for free software. An hour long chat session was even conducted where top Novell executives fended off criticism and spread the good word.
But no one asked the important question.
Later Microsoft struck a deal with ECMA and lobbied ISO to the extreme. The company is busy convincing the world that it embraces open standards and even free software. Publishing code on Sourceforge, opening up their latest document format, hiring free software developers and employing a PR army to tell us that they have turned nice. What on earth is happening? Has hell frozen over?
Some have been easily convinced. Others have been cautious; with natural skepticism and even verbal attacks on this newfound strategy. And Microsoft have defended its position, telling you to look at its actions, see how open they are, showing off their New Ethics Order.
But no one is asking the important question.
What question?
Here we go:
“Dear Microsoft, how is this good for your shareholders Return On Investments?”
A public company has an obvious commitment toward its shareholders ROI. It has a business and moral obligation toward those who has invested in the company. All strategic decisions must focus on a greater monetary return.
So, ask not how the deal is good for Novell. Ask how the deal is good for Microsoft. Ask not how OOXML as an ISO standard is good for the world. Ask how it benefits the Monopoly’s profit.
April 9, 2008
Standardization
6 Comments
The demo went from about 12:15 and lasted for about 45 minutes. The demo was only 50 meters from the GoOpen (Norwegian text) conference, and with good preparation (although short notice), about 150 turned up in the rain.
This was only the second IT demo in Norwegian history according to Dagens IT. It attracted even mainstrem media (as seen in the report below).
It was an emphatic crowd - lots of energy, good speech by Steve and important points delivered by several others. Pictures were taken, and I am sure there will be more pictures and videos online in the next few hours. Here are some from photos from fickr:
Per Inge Østmoen’s photo of me appealing to ISO to create a standard for standardization. After I sent my Open Letter to ISO, the UN/CEFACT have according to Computerworld (dk) started it’s process to create a standard for its standardization work. This may set the precedence needed to coax ISO into doing the same.
Update (20:55): More photos from the demonstration by the eminent photographer Per Inge Østmoen.
April 9, 2008
Standardization
14 Comments
The demonstration was completed about an hour ago - more about that later (with pictures). Here is the speech by Steve Pepper held during the demonstration - and it is a very good summary of the whole OOXML case:
Friends, Bloggers, Free Coders, Supporters of Open Standards!
We are not here today in order to bash Microsoft.
We are here because we believe in open standards.
We are not even here today because we are opposed to OOXML.
We are here because we are opposed to OOXML as an ISO standard.
We are not here because we want to discredit the ISO.
We are here because we want to defend ISO’s integrity.
We are here because we want to draw attention to the scandalous behaviour of the people in Standard Norway whose job it is to represent Norwegian users and software vendors.
And we are here because we want to prevent the adoption of a damaging IT standard in Norway.
I will get back to this shortly. First I want to spend a few minutes explaining some background for the benefit of people who don’t understand what this issue is all about. Please bear with me.
This issue is all about documents - digital documents.
It’s about how we store documents and how we interchange documents with one another. I’m talking about the kind of documents many of you create every day: reports, letters, articles, school essays, books, theses, spreadsheets, and the like, using programs like Microsoft Word and Excel.
But let us forget documents for a moment and talk instead about hair dryers.
Let me show you an ordinary hair dryer, bought in a shop here in Norway. It has a plug. The plug has two pins. I can plug this hair dryer into any electricity socket anywhere in Norway.
The reason I can do this is because all sockets are the same. There is a standard for sockets in Norway.
The same standard is used in large parts of Europe and elsewhere: If I go to Denmark, I can take this hair dryer, plug it in, and it just works.
I can do the same in Finland, Sweden, Germany and many other countries. I just plug it in and it works.
But if I go to England, I can’t just plug it in, because the sockets there are different. They have 3 square pins instead of 2 rounds ones.
If I go to the US or Japan, I can’t just plug it in, because their sockets are different again. They have 2 flat pins instead of 2 round ones.
Documents are like hair dryers. We want to be able to plug them in to any piece of software and be able to work with them. But that’s not how it is today. If you create a document in Microsoft Word and send it to someone else, that person cannot use it unless they also have Microsoft Word.
I believe that is wrong.
People should not have to pay money to Microsoft in order to read my documents. The way things are at the moment, Microsoft effectively has control of the documents you and I create.
That’s not how it should be.
Open standards can solve this problem, and that is why I believe in them. That is why I have spent the last 13 years representing Norway as a volunteer in a committee for international standards. I have worked with many standards, including SGML, XML and Topic Maps, and I have been Chairman of the Norwegian ISO committee since 1995.
Two years ago, my committee approved an open standard for office documents called ODF. ODF was developed through an open and democratic process in an organization called OASIS.
The purpose of ODF was to provide an alternative to what we call “proprietary” formats. Instead of document formats that are owned and controlled by a single vendor and that force you to use a particular piece of software, the ODF people wanted to define an open format that would make it possible to plug your documents into any piece of software.
ODF was developed, as I said, through an open and democratic process. But one important player was absent from that process. The vendor who dominates this market, Microsoft, refused to participate, and they have refused to support ODF since it became a standard.
Instead they decided to create a competing standard called OOXML and to use Ecma as a back door into ISO.
That is why we are here today.
We are not against OOXML itself. In fact, we thank Microsoft for finally - after twenty years of market dominance - documenting its format in an open specification.
However, we are against ISO’s approval of OOXML. The reason for this is simple: It is not in the interests of users like you and me to have two standards for the same purpose. It would be as if Microsoft were to come here and start installing sockets with 3 pins rather than 2, and then force us to buy their hair dryers.
We are not against ISO either. What we are against is the way in which what has always been an open and democratic organization, where each country has one vote, has been subverted by a large multinational corporation.
I do not hate Microsoft. I would like to welcome Microsoft into the standards community, but only if Microsoft abides by the rules and in particular the spirit of the standardization process.
Microsoft has a bad reputation in the standards community. They are the Big Bad Wolf of standards, just like IBM was 20 years ago. But IBM has shown that it is possible to change.
I hope that Microsoft too will change. I think it is possible. But it will only happen if we, the users, force them to change.
Microsoft needs our help. We have to tell them to stop behaving like a bull in a china shop. They have to help them understand that standards work is about co-operation, not about conflict. Standards should not be created through warfare. They should be created through collaboration.
Microsoft has a lot to learn, and it will take time. It will also take time for Microsoft to earn the trust of all those whose work they have sabotaged during the last twenty years.
Microsoft now says that it now believes in open standards. They need to understand that it will take time before everyone really trusts them. They have to start showing less arrogance and more humility, and they have to prove in practice that they mean what they say.
They can take the first step by admitting that they were wrong not to support ODF.
I call on Microsoft to admit its mistake in trying to force OOXML through ISO’s fast track procedure, and I call on them to support ODF.
I call on Ecma to withdraw OOXML from ISO and keep control of it themselves. We need it for legacy documents.
I call on Standard Norway to admit that it was wrong to overrule its own committee of experts and on them to change Norway’s vote from Yes to No.
I call on the Norwegian Government to stand firm against Microsoft and not to approve OOXML as a Norwegian standard.
Finally I call on users all around the world to look to Norway and follow the example we have set. Raise a storm of protest! Uncover the irregularities that have taken place in your country! Insist that your Governments change their vote to reflect the interests of ordinary people and not the interests of monopolists and bureaucrats.
Kjære nordmenn, vi er ikke alene. Dear Norwegians, we are not alone.
Countries representing the majority of the world’s population voted No to OOXML - and for good reason.
Let me quote just one example. This is from a speech given by the South African Minister for Public Service and Administration, Ms. Geraldine J Fraser-Moleketi. She was speaking at a Conference on the Digital Commons and Open Source Software in Dakar, Senegal just three weeks ago. Here is what she said:
“The adoption of open standards by governments is a critical factor in building interoperable information systems which are open, accessible, fair, and which reinforce democratic culture and good governance practices.
ODF is an open standard developed by a technical committee within the OASIS consortium. South Africa is amongst a growing number of National Governments who have adopted ODF over the past year.
It is unfortunate that the leading vendor of office software, which enjoys considerable dominance in the market, chose not to participate and support ODF in its products, but rather to develop its own competing document standard…
If it is successful, it is difficult to see how consumers will benefit from these two overlapping ISO standards. I would like to appeal to vendors to listen to the demands of consumers as well as Free Software developers. Please work together to produce interoperable document standards. The proliferation of multiple standards in this space is confusing and costly.”
Ms. Fraser-Moleketi: The people of Norway are with you, and we beg your forgiveness for the unacceptable behaviour of our standards bureaucracy.
We were robbed of victory in ISO by a mere 3 votes.
Without the irregularities in Norway, that would have been just 2 votes. Reports are coming in of similar irregularities in other countries, including France and Denmark. Let’s get those non-representative votes changed. Let’s throw OOXML out of ISO.
Microsoft thinks it has won this battle, but I say it’s not over yet.
It’s never over until the fat lady sings, and this fat lady only just got started.
April 8, 2008
Standardization
No Comments
Having attended the Norwegian GoOpen conference today, I must say I am delighted to see so many people getting the idea of free software and how openness will forward innovation. More than 500 people is attending GoOpen - which will prove good for tomorrow’s demonstration.
At the and of the day, Computerworld arranged a debate about OOXML, free software, Microsoft and related subjects. Ron Tolido, CTO in CapGemini had just before made a reference to Robert Mugabe when speaking about how the Norwegian OOXML process was mistreated.
The journalist asked the debate panel if they thought the reference to Mugabe was appropriate. Well, I did not think it was appropriate myself, but the answer by Håkon Wium Lie made the day: “I cannot comment on that as I do not have sufficient information about the situation in Zimbabwe“.
April 7, 2008
Standardization
6 Comments
It ain’t over until the fat lady sings - and she ain’t gonna sing until the majority of the Norwegian committee is heard and action is taken by ISO. A demonstration will take place outside the plenary meeting of the ISO subcommittee responsible for the roughest ISO landing ever. Here we go:
Steve Pepper, the former Chairman of the Norwegian committee responsible for deciding the Norwegian vote on OOXML, is calling for a demonstration to take place outside the building where SC34, the ISO committee that has been landed with OOXML, is holding its spring plenary.
The demonstration will take place outside Håndverkeren, Rosenkrantzgate 7, Oslo, Norway, on Wednesday April 9 at 12.00. Among the slogans are:
* No to ISO approval of OOXML!
* Defend the integrity of ISO!
* Microsoft: Support ODF!
* Ecma: Withdraw OOXML!
* Norway must say no to OOXML!
Steve Pepper is supported by the majority of the Norwegian technical committee who were against approving OOXML, but who were overruled by the bureaucracy at Standard Norway.
“I call on all those opposed to ISO’s approval of OOXML to join this demonstration”, says Steve Pepper. “Standard Norway defends its scandalous act by pointing to 37 identical letters that were formulated by Microsoft and sent to Standard Norway by Microsoft’s partners and customers during the open hearing.”
“If they want numbers, we can give them numbers. Join me on the street and show your disapproval. Please pass this message on around the globe. Let’s use *our* technology for everything it is worth.”
Hopefully, I will see you in Oslo, it’s a nice city 
For reference, here is a list of process irregularities in Norway.
April 1, 2008
Standardization
6 Comments
On the OOXML standardization process in Standard Norge (SN; the Norwegian Standards Institute):
2007-08-22: Ivar Jachwitz (Deputy General Manager of SN):
“This will be a process based on consensus to determine the standard on its technical merits. There will be no voting, so no, the 37 form letters initiated by Microsoft supporting OOXM will not count.”
Source: Me, I was at the meeting.
2008-04-01: After Mr. Jachwitz overturned his technical committee and decided to vote “Yes” to OOXML on behalf of Norway:
“We had an initial vote back in 2007 of nearly 50 people and the vast majority were in favor,” Jachwitz said. He did acknowledge that 21 members of the group last week submitted a letter asking for Norway to oppose Ooxml. “Our vote reflected the majority opinion,” Jachwitz said. “I do not see that it was improper.”
Source: The International Herald Tribune
He is now counting votes all of a sudden - and the 37 form letters are the basis for his justification to change Norway’s vote to “Yes”. Sorting to untruth to justify an irregular decision only adds to the irregularity.
The EU commission has already inquired about possible irregularities in the Norwegian process. This too will be reported.
April 1, 2008
Standardization
3 Comments
What?
The Norwegian Standards Institute (Standard Norge) steamrolled its own technically committee and voted Yes to OOXML on behalf of Norway. As much as 80% of the committee was against Norway changing its previous vote of “No, with comments” to “Yes”. The reason being that more than 80% of Norway’s technical comments were not handled satisfactory in the Ballot Resolution Meeting in Geneva in February. The man responsible for the steamrolling is the Deputy General Manager of Standard Norge, Mr. Ivar Jachwitz.
Who?
Ivar Jachwiz is also on the board of the ISO TMB/SMB (International Organisation for Standardization’s Technical Management Board/Standardization Management Board). Mr. Jachwitz has his share of defending to do against allegations of irregularities in the Norwegian process. He even reported in February to the EU commission that there had been no irregularities or criticism of the Norwegian process. Those who have read my blog post after the meeting in August last year know this to be untrue. He will undoubtedly keep on defending right into the ISO TMB/SMB. Here is why:
The part of ISO responsible for handling the OOXML case is the JTC1 (The Joint Technical Committee #1 for ISO and the IEC [International Electrotechnical Commission]). A decision on the OOXML by the National Bodies (NBs) may be appealed within two months. And I am sure we will see an appeal if the result is an approval of the standard.
The JTC1 rules specifies in part:
11.3.2 The documented appeal shall, in all cases, be submitted to the Secretaries-General, with a copy to the JTC 1 Chairman and Secretariat.
11.3.3 The Secretaries-General shall, following whatever consultations they deem appropriate, refer the appeal together with their comments to the TMB/SMB within one month after receipt of the appeal.
11.3.4 The TMB/SMB shall decide whether an appeal shall be further processed or not. If the decision is in favour of proceeding, the Chairmen of the TMB/SMB shall form a conciliation panel (see 9.2). The conciliation panel shall hear the appeal and attempt to resolve the difference of opinion as soon as practicable. If the conciliation panel is unsuccessful in its endeavours, it shall so report within three months to the Secretaries-General, giving its recommendations on how the matter should be settled.
11.3.5 The Secretaries-General, on receipt of the report of the conciliation panel, shall inform the TMB/SMB, which will make their decision.
The very person responsible for the unilateral decision by the administrative staff of Standard Norge will be on the board of appeal in ISO. Watch the news. This will be interesting.
March 31, 2008
Standardization
19 Comments
This was just sent to ISO from the chairman of the Norwegian standards committee responsible for evaluating OOXML:
Formal protest regarding the Norwegian vote on ISO/IEC DIS 29500
I am writing to you in my capacity as Chairman (of 13 years standing) of the Norwegian mirror committee to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC34. I wish to inform you of serious irregularities in connection with the Norwegian vote on ISO/IEC DIS 29500 (Office Open XML) and to lodge a formal protest.
You will have been notified that Norway voted to approve OOXML in this ballot. This decision does not reflect the view of the vast majority of the Norwegian committee, 80% of which was against changing Norway’s vote from No with comments to Yes.
Because of this irregularity, a call has been made for an investigation by the Norwegian Ministry of Trade and Industry with a view to changing the vote.
I hereby request that the Norwegian decision be suspended pending the results of this investigation.
Yours sincerely,
Steve Pepper
Chairman, SN/K185 (ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34 mirror committee)
(sign.)
The Letter to ISO in pdf