Appendix 4: Computing Coordinator Decision making Process 

The UCSC Computing Coordinator decision making process for making recommendations to ITC has 

proven to be an effective process in the past year. A full description of the process is shown on 

http://www2.ucsc.edu/coord/decisions.shtml

 and includes these essential elements of principles and 

process: 

Principles 

Everyone on the computing coordinators' list should be able to contribute in discussions.  

Everyone who has input valuable to a discussion is encouraged to contribute that input.  

The purpose of coordinator discussions should be to hear and weigh everyone s concerns and 

points of view and to seek a resolution that considers them all.  

It is acceptable to present as "general consensus" an item that does not receive 100% 

agreement. For example a resolution that one person or a small group disagrees with can still go 

forward to the ITC. The person (or group) in disagreement will be encouraged to document their 

dissent, and this dissent should be presented along with the "general consensus" resolution.  

Anything that is presented to the ITC should deal with impact and cost issues rather than 

technical issues. While our discussion will of course include technical issues, the summary we 

present to the ITC should focus on their effects rather than their details.  

Process 

An issue is presented for discussion on the coordinators' email list or in a face to face meeting.  

Discussion occurs on the list.  

There is discussion in at least one face to face coordinator meeting.  

A summary of the discussion resolution is presented to the email list by the topic owner (who is 

not necessarily Scotty Brookie, Coord rep to ITC, or Eric Goodman, Coord leader).  

Any follow up discussion (focused on clarifying and closing the resolution) occurs on the list.  

Members indicate their concerns (or support) to the topic owner (which may happen on or off the 

list).  

If the response shows general consensus, the item should be presented at an upcoming ITC 

meeting, if appropriate. Note that according to the above principles, this may include presenting 

one or more dissenting views.  

This represents the minimal process Coordinators would follow. Some topics will require extra 

discussions with the whole group, or work in working/interest groups that is presented back to 

the main coordinators group.  

We will use a "general consensus" method of coming to agreement. No formal consensus 

gathering metric (e.g., vote counting) will be used at this time.  

_________________________________________________________________________________

Web Services Committee 

Page 22 

May 28, 2002