System iNetwork

All these links go to an MS Exchange server. ????

Should the links: "Top Concerns 2009 Survey", "fourth annual survey only takes five minutes to complete" and "Top Academic Concerns Survey" point to the penton.com web outlook server?

[*Note from Chris: I've adjusted the links -- copy/paste issue. Sorry!]

The survey basically asks us to rank someone's top concerns since the top concerns are already listed in the survey. I would rather have the survey asking us to input the top concerns and the people conducting the survey sort out and consolidate the data. Otherwise, the results will be biased.


Also, it would be good to know the actions taken based on the survey results. I believe there was a similar survey last year. So, what has been done with the results? Did IBM and the Power Systems community do something to address the issues? Otherwise, it will be much ado about nothing -- even though it is 5-minute :-)

As an academic, I took the Top Academic Concerns Survey also. Again, I felt like I was ranking or justifying or supporting someone's top concerns.



Who came up with the list of Top Concerns in the first place? I thought we, who were asked to fill up the survey, should be the ones listing the top concerns and not to justify or rank someone's top concerns.



One question that caught my attention in the Top Academic Concerns Survey is the following:

08. Geographically equitable distributions of the IBM Academic Initiative budgets (Europe, America, Africa, Australasia)


One wonders who came up with this top concern and the rationale for its inclusion.

I would rather have the survey asking us to input the top concerns and the people conducting the survey sort out and consolidate the data.


You expressed my sentiments, as well.

Chad

I guess the "underwhelming participation" in this survey, could be explained by the issues stated by Keng Siau above.

I've now looked at the questions and I must admit, that I failed to fullfill the survey, as I can't see how my answers to theese Top concerns could influence the future development of our beloved i5 ?

Maybe others with real interest in the i5 have thought the same ...

I believe the System i and Power Systems communities appreciate the effort and initiative taken by COMMON Europe. And we would like to compliment and thanking them for embarking on this initiative. Needless to say, such initiative is much needed. We would also like to see more such effort in the future in identifying common issues and concerns, and more dialogues between IBM and its customers and partners (big and small).


The operationalization of the Top Concerns Surveys, however, is far from ideal. The rankings of the top concerns identified by some individuals involved in creating the surveys are unlikely to accurately reflect the top concerns from the System i and Power Systems communities.


This creates a dilemma for most of us. On one hand, we would like to support COMMON Europe and complete the surveys. On the other hand, by completing the surveys and rankings the top concerns listed, we are inadvertently and involuntarily agreeing that these correctly reflect our top concerns too, which, unfortunately, is not the case.


Having said that, I sincerely hope the initiators will reengineer and fine-tune the research method, and further the initiative and effort. As I mentioned earlier, such initiative and effort are vital and urgently needed.

I partially agree with the previous comments, but there is a real-world consideration involving the time and resources that would be necessary to parse out these concerns into a meaningful survey.
--There are other ways, I understand, to request individual changes from IBM to their various products, including compilers and operating systems.

Alan mentioned about time constraint, etc. Nevertheless, an inaccurate result from a survey is worse than no result.

Besides, a simple alternative is to ask respondents to provide their top 3-5 concerns and the researchers analyze and consolidate the results.

Hello System i aficionados,

It is Ranga Deshpande, the Top Concerns project leader from COMMON Europe. Before everything else, thanks from the bottom of my heart for your interest in the project, I highly appreciate it. And also once more thanks to Chris Maxcer for the excellent coverage he is giving (and to TPM and others who are so nicely covering this project elsewhere).

I am not hiding in a cave. In addition to my day job involving two University hospitals, I was busy amongst other things in sending the reminders to maximize the response and setting up the statistical program. And doing all this, I did not have the immediate reflex to put myself in the alert list when Chris first wrote his article. Thus, it is only this morning that I discovered your comments. I will try to answer all the issues raised (forgive me, my post is very long). I am very passionate with this project and I simply love the interest it has created.

* First of all, thank you Rick, Ron Bordador, Keng Siu (twice), Chad, Soren and Alan. Please remember, this is a work in progress. We have gone worldwide since last year, and with this first message I seek everybody’s help to make the project better and better.

Dear all, I once again welcome your comments and stay available to give more information in my humble way. The aim of the Top Concerns’ project is to make our IT ecosystem better and better and to offer an improved quality of life to ourselves and the future generations: ranga@bordet.be

We very much appreciate the effort and comments by Ranga, and his enthusiasm and effort in running the surveys. Thank you Ranga.


Such energy and enthusiasm are contagious and much needed in the System i and Power Systems communities.


As someone who teaches research methods to doctoral students, has been conducting empirical studies for the past 20 years, and involves in System i and Power Systems, I am disquiet about the operationalization of the surveys. My postings on this blog hope to benefit the future refinement and improvement of the surveys. I would like to see the surveys improved and refined, not stopped. The best way to improve System i and Power Systems is open dialogue. I believe the same applies to the surveys.


Some points to further the discussion and hopefully improved the process:


First, “we have open space for a golden concern asking the participants to freely convey unlisted concern(s).”


This is a good effort but one concern from each participant will not change the ranking of the list of concerns in a survey that will be ranked by all participants. Besides, I believe there were some “discovered golden concerns” from last year. Are these “discovered golden concerns” from last year in this year’s list of top concerns?


Let me use an example to illustrate this point. Imagine one is asked to fill up a survey on Top Restaurants in Europe. The survey lists 15 restaurants in Europe to be ranked and provide a space to list one restaurant not on the list from each participant. Some of these restaurants may not be known or applicable (dietary restrictions) to all participants. So, participants may feel that they are simply ranking someone’s favorite restaurants, which is the fact and the case. More importantly, the final outcome is already known before the survey is conducted – the 15 restaurants on the list will be the top 15 restaurants in Europe although the ranking is not known before the survey.


In short, the use of a list of top concerns in the survey already defined the list of top concerns to be “discovered” from the survey.


Of course, one can argue about practical constraints such as time limitation and fatigue of the participants. Nevertheless, the most important thing about the survey is the reliability and validity of the results. KISS is important but KISS is only important once the survey’s reliability and validity are first taken care of and enforced in the process. An IT manager will not be impressed with a subordinate for delivering an incomplete and inaccurate program because the subordinate follows the KISS principle.


Second, “*“-- There are other ways to request individual changes …”. The objective of asking participants to complete a survey and rank the top concerns is to forward a “common” list of top concerns to IBM and the communities. This is to allow us to speak with one voice as mentioned by Ranga (although the question is whose voice we are endorsing). Of course, there are other means of requesting individual changes. But, that will not be as powerful and forceful as saying that this is a top concern from the community.


Thus, the surveys are tricky for the communities. If one’s top concerns match the lists of top concerns from the creators of the surveys, great! If not, a valid top concern may not rise to the top and may be suppressed. Imagine an individual trying to argue for a top concern that is not on the surveys’ lists. An uninformed or uninterested person may simply say that the concern is not one of the top concerns from the surveys. Thus, the concern will be dismissed and ignored. The surveys’ results may also be used to silence critics – particularly those who raise concerns that are not on the lists.


No company will release a software to the public for comments without thoroughly testing the software. It would be good to give the same care and attention to the surveys. Thus, I was surprised that the survey on the Academic Top Concerns, which is labeled by Ranga as an absolute work-in-progress and created in four days, is being administered.


As we always say in the IT field, garbage in, garbage out.


The results from the surveys should definitely be interpreted cautiously. It is the responsibilities and duties of the people running the surveys to clearly warn readers about the potential limitations and biases.


As I mentioned before, the initiative and effort should be complimented and appreciated by the System i and Power Systems communities. The operationalization of the survey, nevertheless, can be improved and fine-tuned.

Dear Keng Siau, My apologies up-front for not spelling your name correctly. It is (Keng) Siau and not Siu. Sorry.
Your points could not be better taken. I see with delight another person full of passion for the survey. I appreciate.
The timeliness of new projects demands real world decisions and at times some sacrifices.
Regards, Ranga.