THE WELCH COMPANY
440 Davis Court #1602
San Francisco, CA 94111-2496
415 781 5700
S U M M A R Y
DIARY: December 21, 1999 12:06 PM Tuesday;
Called Sally at NSF on proposal for Com Metrics.
Click here to comment!
0201 - National Science Foundation O-00000716 0502
020101 - Mr. Joe Hennessey; 703 292 7069 O-00000716 0502
0202 - National Science Foundation O-00000716 0503
020201 - Ms. Sara B. Nerlove; 703 292 7077 O-00000716 0503
Diamond in the Rough Recommends Associating SDS Com Metrics with Peo
Shocking New Way Working SDS Design Conflicts Common Sense Tradition
Experience Builds Faith Credibility Reliable Sources Adding Intellig
Integrated Schedule Diary Not Intuitive Diffiuclt to Understand to L
Front-end Investment Difficult Managers to Make, Wideman
Inexperience Causes Fear, Denial Cannot Afford to Save Money Not Eno
Paradigm Shift Hard Sell Because People Fear Untried Costly Solution
New Way Working Good Management Consistent SDS Plan Perform Report F
Award Response to Proposal, 991204
1711 - ..
1712 - Summary/Objective
171301 - Follow up ref SDS 46 0000, ref SDS 41 0000.
171303 - Sally feels it would help for Welch to associate with an academic or
171304 - established research organization to show stronger credentials.
171306 - ..
171307 - She explained Welch is a "diamond in the rough," and NSF only
171308 - occassionally reaches out to make awards on these proposals that
171309 - demonstrate very high merit.
171311 - [On 030708 Gary reports experience using SDS at
171312 - aerospace company shows that rather than being difficult to
171313 - see, like a "diamond in the rough," benefits of SDS and Com
171314 - Metrics are "hidden in plain sight." ref SDS 47 595H
171316 - ..
171317 - We reviewed the research process that seeks useful new directions from
171318 - the foundations of core understandings. Similarly, diamonds begin in
171319 - a rough condition that requires insight, strength, persistance and
171320 - expertise to extract diamonds from the rough and polish it up, long
171321 - before reaching the over-the-counter stage. Accordingly, there is no
171322 - reason for NSF to shrink from seeking diamonds in the rough.
171324 - ..
171325 - We recalled Sally's colleague, Joe Hennesy, who urged on 990615 that
171326 - reviewers be notified to click on links in the Welch proposal in order
171327 - to grasp the merit of adding "intelligence" to information, set out in
171328 - the proposal. ref SDS 20 1044 Since this was done, as Joe requested,
171329 - I asked if there is anything else that could have been done to help
171330 - educate reviewers on the merit of Com Metrics?
171332 - ..
171333 - Sally advised that reviewers did not have time to examine Com Metrics
171334 - on the web, as requested in the proposal. Therefore, reviewers
171335 - believed proposing a system of intelligence that strengthens literacy
171336 - by enhancing alphabet technology seemed like a far out theoretical
171337 - effort that beyond reach for anyone, and so given Welch's lack of
171338 - credentials, NSF made award to others for more plausible proposals.
171340 - ..
171341 - She feels it is too bad that reviewers did not have time to click on a
171342 - link to discover that intelligence for education, enterprise and
171343 - national security is available. Sally noted that NSF gets thousands
171344 - of proposals, and so the agency has to expedite review.
171345 - ..
171346 - We discussed the burden imposed on NSF review from selecting a
171347 - panel of computer experts, when Com Metrics requires cross-discipline
171348 - analysis, as set out on 991213. ref SDS 46 8855
171350 - ..
171351 - Sally advised that the Project Summary should explain the fields of
171352 - expertise NSF should use for review.
171354 - ..
171355 - We reviewed the project summary which says in the first para...
171357 - Advances in computer science and cognitive science make possible a
171358 - method of business "metrics" for communication based on automated
171359 - integration of time and information. Communication Metrics on the
171360 - Internet connects information in helpful ways that support key
171361 - aspects of human intelligence. ref OF 8 0001
171363 - ..
171364 - The field of "business metrics" is clearly part of management science,
171365 - and "cognitive science" is cited expressly. The implication is that
171366 - composite expertise is needed for review.
171368 - ..
171369 - Sally is not sure why reviewers ignored the report by USACE that says
171370 - the system already exists, ref SDS 46 1645, and thereon incorrectly
171371 - state that no support for the methodology is presented in the
171372 - proposal.
171374 - ..
171375 - She explained again that NSF can only make so many awards to "Diamonds
171376 - in the Rough" on the hope that despite lack of credentials, they can
171377 - succeed.
171379 - ..
171380 - I asked about success NSF has had making awards to others for
171381 - knowledge management solutions. The record on 991213 shows $M of
171382 - dollars have been expended, but no solution has been produced.
171383 - ref SDS 46 4617
171385 - ..
171386 - An example, is the NSF award for a proposal to produce a system of
171387 - double entry bookkeeping applied across organic subjects (i.e.,
171388 - taxonomy) Sally asked me to investigate this matter when she called
171389 - on 990629. ref SDS 23 3000 Investigation on 990716 showed that the
171390 - objective stated in the proposal was not achieved. ref SDS 34 3840
171391 - Failure to support Com Metrics which has already accomplished the
171392 - distributed bookkeeping objective, and demonstrates the ability to
171393 - perform, appears to conflict with the standard of review that approved
171394 - the prior award.
171396 - ..
171397 - In this case NSF has passed up the opportunity to research deployment
171398 - of a system that saves time and money, as reported by USACE, because
171399 - NSF did not have enough time to click on a link.
171401 - ..
171402 - Sally pointed out that mistakes are inevitable in trying to forecast
171403 - who can accomplish effective research, and produce results.
171405 - ..
171406 - She said NSF does not have a re-review or appeal process to correct
171407 - mistakes on Phase I awards. She suggests re-submitting the proposal
171408 - next year, and considering associating with a credentialed academic to
171409 - help NSF feel comfortable reviewing the proposal.
Distribution. . . . See "CONTACTS"