| July 29, 1999 | 04 00069 61 99072901 |
Mr. Mark Haselkorn
Professor and Founding Chair
Department of Technical Communication
College of Engineering
University of Washington
| Subject: | NSF Proposal 9961176, |
|
Communication Metrics Can Revisions be Made to NSF Proposal After Submission? |
Dear Mark,
Thanks for your ideas on improving the proposal. If you have time, please comment on a few detailed issues in the analysis of your letter.
Otherwise, could you advise if it would be appropriate at this time to
submit proposal revisions?Yesterday, Sally Nerlove at NSF reported that proposals will be reviewed in August and September, with notice of award in October and November. Nominally, there is time to refine the presentation; however, is it permissible? Possibly your work with NSF offers a clue about whether such an effort would be accepted, or seen as improper, i.e., has the bell rung?
Second, Sally called on June 9, several weeks after submission. and spoke for about 2 hours, offering ideas for advancing the proposal. She asked me to seek out people, like you, for peer review. So, in one sense your remarks accomplish that objective. Her larger point, however, was to associate with people to contribute to the project. Like you, most people, who have expertise to contribute, are busy.
Can you suggest someone who has time to help, for example, implement your suggestions reviewed in my record for today? I can only pay for help if NSF provides funding. But someone might be attracted enough to the ideas (e.g., solve information overload, accomplish virtual office, add intelligence to management, etc.) to help improve the proposal, with the prospect of being part of the project, in the event of NSF approval.Mark, your title suggests possible interest in recent discussions with Intel on engineering management. Communication is a key source of productivity that is overlooked by industry under the guise of expediting. As a result, time and cost of projects and products is increased due to continual rework. A friend at Intel suggests doing a study to prove this point based on Communication Metrics tools and practices. I have not presented that effort in the current NSF proposal because it requires a team effort.
Is your technical communication department addressing this issue?
Do you think it could be tackled with a formal study?
It occurs to me that you might have a relationship at Microsoft. They undoubtedly have the same difficulties performing engineering management. Possibly a team could be formulated to do this study. We have pretty good indications that significant savings can be realized based on work with PG&E and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
I hope it is at least clear, that we don't have to create tools. We have the tools and work practices for implementation. What is missing is faith that investing the time to learn and use the tools and practices saves time and money. A study could address this point.
My NSF effort is a first stage step to do the larger study. Phase II requires commercial partners, so that may provide a basis to procede. What do you think?
Thanks again for your suggestions and time.
Sincerely,
THE WELCH COMPANY
Rod Welch
Copy to: