CrossGrid Internal Review Procedure Marios Dikaiakos Dept. of - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

X# X# X#

CrossGrid Kick-off Meeting, Krakow, March 2002

CrossGrid Internal Review Procedure

Marios Dikaiakos

• Dept. of Computer Science

University of Cyprus

X# X# X#

CrossGrid Kick-off Meeting, Krakow, March 2002

Summary

– Mission: guarantee the quality of project deliverables reports) prior to their release to the European Commission and the public. – All participants in the project are expected to use the proposed IRP. – Deliverables to European Commission are reviewed by CrossGrid and/or external volunteer experts. – Internal reviews coordinated by the Internal Review Board (IRB). – Internal deliverables are reviewed during internal reviews

• rganised by WP Managers (WPM’s) according to the X#

Quality Assurance Plan.

X# X# X#

CrossGrid Kick-off Meeting, Krakow, March 2002

Parties & Products

– Parties involved in order of appearance:

• Responsible Partner (RP)
• Workpackage Manager (WPM)
• Workpackage Quality Engineer (QE)
• Moderator (aka Active Internal Review Coordinator-AIRC)
• Reviewers
• Internal Review Board (IRB)
• Project Management (PM)

– Products produced

• Internal Review Forms (IRF)
• Corrective Actions Form (CAF)

X# X# X#

CrossGrid Kick-off Meeting, Krakow, March 2002

Internal Review Procedure: Step 1

Submission of Deliverable to IRB – The Responsible Partner provides the final version of the document to the Work Package Manager (WPM) for checking of compliance to the Quality Assurance Plan of CrossGrid. – Each Workpackage has a designated person, the Workpackage Quality Engineer (QE), who conducts the quality checks in collaboration with the WPM. – Subsequently, the WPL submits the deliverable in electronic form to the Moderator (aka Acting Internal Review Coordinator-AIRC) for internal review.

X# X# X#

CrossGrid Kick-off Meeting, Krakow, March 2002

Internal Review Procedure: Step 2

Review Preparation – Upon release of the deliverable to the Moderator, he assigns two or three reviewers to review the particular deliverable. – Assigned reviewers are volunteers belonging to the CrossGrid consortium or external experts. – Reviewers participating in CrossGrid, however, should not be involved in the WP producing the deliverable under review.

X# X# X#

CrossGrid Kick-off Meeting, Krakow, March 2002

Internal Review Procedure: Step 3

Review of Deliverable – Each Reviewer reviews the deliverable in due time (6 days). – Any questions or clarifications that may arise during the review can be addressed via direct, informal consultations with the Responsible Partner. – Upon completion of the review, the Reviewer inserts comments and recommendations in a specific form, the Internal Review Form (IRF), which is submitted to the Moderator.

X# X# X#

CrossGrid Kick-off Meeting, Krakow, March 2002

Internal Review Procedure: Step 4

Internal Review Board Meeting – Upon collection of all reviews by the Moderator, the Moderator submits IRF’s to the IRB and calls for an IRB meeting (virtual, via email or VRVS) to make a final recommendation and produce the outcome of the review procedure. – The final recommendation is inserted in an IRF. The Moderator forwards all IRF’s to the Responsible Partner (RP).

X# X# X#

CrossGrid Kick-off Meeting, Krakow, March 2002

The good, the bad and the ugly

– Possible outcomes of a review procedure are:

• Deliverable is approved with no changes.
• Deliverable is approved with suggestions for changes.
• Deliverable is not approved.

X# X# X#

CrossGrid Kick-off Meeting, Krakow, March 2002

Internal Review Procedure: Step 5

Follow-up Activities – In case of approval with changes, the Responsible Partner coordinates the handling

• f

IRB comments & recommendations by respective partners, completes a standard Corrective Actions Form (CAF) with the corrective actions taken, and submits the deliverable to the PM for release to the EC and the public. – The RP has to make sure that all Internal Review Forms (IRFs) and Corrective Actions Form (CAF) are attached to the deliverable before this is submitted to the European Commission and its reviewers. – If the deliverable is not approved, involved parties need to re-work and re-submit it for a second internal review.

X# X# X#

CrossGrid Kick-off Meeting, Krakow, March 2002

Conflict Resolution

– Typically, decisions about acceptance or rejection of a deliverable should be taken by unanimity and comply with the reviewers’ recommendations. – If the reviewers’ suggestions disagree, the final decision lies with the majority of the Internal Review Board. – The final approval of a deliverable, before its submission to the E.C. lies with the Project Management (PM).

X# X# X#

CrossGrid Kick-off Meeting, Krakow, March 2002

Timeline

Reviewers submit IRFs to AIRC IRB Consultation Review Corrective Actions AIRC submits IRFs and final recommendation to RP WPM submits draft deliverable to Web site and notifies AIRC RP submits deliverable to Web site and notifies PM Due Date

Timeline

1d

6 work. days 5 work. days 1

X# X# X#

CrossGrid Kick-off Meeting, Krakow, March 2002

Internal Review Board Structure

– Moderator (aka Acting Internal Review Coordinator

• r AIRC): a member of the Internal Review Board

that coordinates the IRP for a particular deliverable. – Moderator pre-assigned with the review of the particular deliverable under consideration. – Internal Review Coordinator coordinates the whole process and assigns Moderators.

X# X# X#

CrossGrid Kick-off Meeting, Krakow, March 2002

Internal Review Board Members

– IRC: Marios Dikaiakos – TATL: Marian Bubak – Expert: Andres Gomez Tato – WP1 Rep: Celso Martinez-Rivero – WP2 Rep: Roland Wismueller – WP3 Rep: Miquel Senar, Pawel Wolniewicz – WP4 Rep: Jorge Gomes – Expert: Krzysztof Zielinski

X# X# X#

CrossGrid Kick-off Meeting, Krakow, March 2002

Issues and Questions

– IRF and CAF submitted to the EC or not? – 12 days reviewing process. – Procedure for review of reports. What about Software? – Selection of Reviewers:

• Internal Reviewers from other Work-packages.
• Attracting External Reviewers.

– Roadmap ahead: scheduling reviews and assigning reviewers to deliverables (in less than three months from now, first review).