A Planning Work Group
Charlie Murphy, Kean College of New Jersey
18 September 1997

It is obvious that planning for future Unidata applications software must incorporate a substantial input from the Unidata Users Community. The question is how to obtain meaningful and representative input from the users.

One approach is to have the Users Committee work on these issues and provide the necessary input. Unfortunately, the Users Committee has other work to do and limited time at its meetings, as a result the time for in-depth discussion and consensus building is not available. Secondly, in some cases maybe the Users Committee knows too much about the limitations faced by the UPC and as such it may prejudge ideas and suggestions related to applications software.

A second approach is to solicit input from the entire user community in the form of a survey instrument. Surveys are a valuable tool in assessing some aspects of the user community's desires, but in planning and forming a consensus they fall short because

  1. the response is generally limited to the questions that are asked,
  2. if comments are included it is difficult to summarize and quantify these items to build a consensus position, and
  3. a survey is on one-way vehicle that does not allow interaction and response to that interaction among the individuals in the group surveyed.

A third approach that could be implemented to address some of the problems mentioned above is to form a small working group specifically charged with planning for a new generation of applications software. The group should consist of perhaps four to six (not too big) individuals that are known to be active users of Unidata data streams and software, and who represent the various Unidata constituencies (i.e. undergraduate education, graduate education, atmospheric science research, associated areas such as oceanography, environmental, etc.)

This group should be brought together to work face-to-face for a couple of days - to discuss, explore, define, and refine the characteristics, features, a capabilities of the ideal future software packages. A face-to-face meeting will keep the group away from distractions, allow them to focus on the task at hand, and provide the opportunity to engage in extended discussions.

To enhance the opportunity for success the working group should:

  1. be given a clear charge of their task,
  2. have a leader or facilitator that will keep discussions on track, move the group through the issues of concern, and facilitate the consensus process, and
  3. be provided with background materials before meeting and have UPC staff available, upon request, during the meeting to answer technical questions.

If successful this type of group should be able to give an additional dimension to the planning process and offer an in-depth component that surveys cannot provide.