What are the detractors to standardisation and working together? How can the reasons for the tension work alongside standardisation?#

Overview#

Summary#

Everyone loves a standard as long as it’s theirs: because implementing standards = real work on operational systems, everyone has an interest in keeping the standard as close as possible to what they already have. Rationalising these different approaches needs space and time to coordinate joint R&D activity that is separate from, but connected to, actual operations.

We also need to recognise that coordinating across multiple TRE providers will (a) be slower than operational timescales, and (b) need dedicated people who are not trying to run ops at the same time.

Currently, R&D is typically funded by competetive grants to “innovate”, and operational expenses are often top-sliced from these grants. Separating operational funding from innovative R&D grants is one thing that would help.

So: separating ops teams from R&D teams in both people and funding terms is the biggest single help.

Next Steps#

  • Funding model evolution

  • Speed date - understand who/can collaborate with for mutual benifit

  • Value of this activity seen by organisation / funders

Raw notes#

  • Cant see the wood for the TREs :-)

  • Changing in flight - how to manage updates to existing services / platforms in use

  • No ability to translate research into applied use of TRE things. Devops models and supporting

  • Data controllers risk appetite and policies needing alignment against something common

  • Consensual management for the person : How does the citizen become involved in the TRE across TREs.

  • Inertia and reluctance to change their worlds towards a harmonised picture - Budgets and funding to do plus stick.

  • Purpose is lost as to what a TRE SDE etc is.

  • No clear definitions of these and separations of their function and facilities.

  • Operational funding - top slicing / core funding thats not funded to innovation

  • Funding !!!

  • Academic model.

  • Knowledge about who to collaborate with / capabilities / specialisms

  • Job Role recognition, value of contribution to whole machine

  • Governance is the biggest effort

  • UK Wide program to define governance framnework.

  • Innovation must still be supported

Handwritten notes on day#

Transcripted by CMWG

  • Incompatible standards?

    • SDE/TRE/Safe Haven

    • Organic growth

    • Legacy debt (inertia)

  • Clarity of language

  • Follows the funding

  • Capacity for change management

    • Service environment often R&D (run it and improve it)

  • Bridge: research prototype -> ‘Product’ (i.e. TRL 1 -> 9)

  • Risk definition & tiering -> No standard?

    • DEA?

    • Legislate it

  • Lots of standards arise for good reasons

    • had to exist, so grew in isolation

  • Have lost sight (perhaps) of the “why” are we doing this

  • Existing inertia (changing engines when plane is in flight)

  • Ops is funded one way, R&D funded by very diff methods, there is no clear bridge from one to the others

  • Differing risk appetites from DCs, often for “poor” reasons

Roadmap plan#

Questions#

  • What would a solution to this problem look like?

  • What resources would be needed (people, time, funds, infrastructure etc.)?

  • How can this community support you in getting them?

  • What working groups/orgs are already working on this, if any? How can we collaborate with them effectively?

Summary#

  • Everyone loves a standard as long as it’s theirs: because implementing standards = real work on operational systems, everyone has an interest in keeping the standard as close as possible to what they already have.

  • Rationalising these different approaches needs space and time to coordinate joint R&D activity that is separate from, but connected to, actual operations.

    • We also need to recognise that coordinating across multiple TRE providers will (a) be slower than operational timescales, and (b) need dedicated people who are not trying to run ops at the same time.

  • Currently, R&D is typically funded by competitive grants to “innovate”, and operational expenses are often top-sliced from these grants.

    • Separating operational funding from innovative R&D grants is one thing that would help.

  • So: separating ops teams from R&D teams in both people and funding terms is the biggest single help.