Day 2: Tuesday, November 15th
Time | Session | Facilitator(s) |
0830-0930 | COTS vs OpenSource Analysis & Q&A | Kaleb Brownlow |
0930 – 1015 | 2017 OpenLMIS Roadmap Review | Mary Jo Kochendorfer |
1015 -1030 | Coffee Break | |
1030 -1230 | 2017 Roadmap Prioritization Exercise & Discussion | Brian Taliesin |
1230 -1330 | Lunch | |
1330 -1415 | Approach to Zambia/Tanzania/Cote d’Ivoire Gap Analysis | Kevin Cussen |
1415 - 1510 | Governance Committee Process Review | Jake Watson |
1510 -1530 | Coffee Break | |
1530 - 1700 | Product Committee Process Review | Jake Watson |
* Group Drinks & Dinner (optional)
COTS vs OpenSource Analysis & Q&A
Kaleb gave a summary of a report prepared by the Plaster Group to the BMGF comparing COTS vs. open source solutions. There was significant pushback from several parties on whether an apples-to-apples comparison of COTS to open source software can be made. Specifically around whether many of the LMICs where we work have a formal enough process to support the rigid processes present in many COTS solutions. There was lengthy discussion about how COTS is a good solution for higher maturity supply chains, but that OpenLMIS is filling the gap between paper and that level of rigor. Kaleb fully embraced that he didn't think there could be but was unclear on the outcomes of the evaluation and he made a point of stating that the recommendations of the Plaster Group did not necessarily represent the opinions or decision of the BMGF.
Lindabeth sees OpenLMIS as a foot in the door and the successor to a paper process, but would like most OpenLMIS nations to be on COTS in 7 - 10 years.
Big takeaways:
- The OpenLMIS Community cannot assume continued funding
- Push for adoption of best practices rather than just configuring OpenLMIS for current supply chain "Make it great, automate!"
- Focus implementation on configuration not customization
- Introduce better controls and transparency for users into the backlog
2017 OpenLMIS Roadmap Review
Presentation: Roadmap.pptx
2017 Roadmap Prioritization Exercise & Discussion
For this exercise the facilitators printed out stories on the OpenLMIS backlog and put them in piles roughly representing functional areas (Requisitions, Fulfillment, Stock Management, Vaccines). They then asked the audience to break up into small groups and prioritize them according to high need, medium need, or low need. Stories above the first line, were considered "must have" or high need. Once the stories were positioned both with priority and in sequence of activities, all members had stickers to vote on the "most" important stories.
Photos
Outcomes were digitized by Brian: Roadmap Stories_Stakeholder Working group Minutes.xlsx.
Approach to Zambia/Tanzania/Cote d’Ivoire Gap Analysis
Based on discussion and follow-up discussion; VR, JSI, and PATH have decided to approach the gap analysis as a "leaner" process than originally planned.
See Gap Analysis: eLMIS Tanzania & Zambia and OpenLMIS 3.x for original deck presented and December 2016 update
Governance Committee Process Review
Rough meeting minutes documented here
Product Committee Meeting
Notes are here.
OpenLMIS: the global initiative for powerful LMIS software