Developing Standards – involving Non-Tech? and Tech? People

Developing Standards – involving non-tech? and tech? People

Wednesday 6F

Convener: Heather Vescent

Notes-taker(s): Ellie Stephens

Tags for the session - technology discussed/ideas considered:

Discussion notes, key understandings, outstanding questions, observations, and, if appropriate to this discussion: action items, next steps:

How do

If your goal with standards is to solve real business problems, if you could parallel path the development of implementation tools will lead to real adoption. Nobody knows how to do it. Ratifying a standard and people taking advantage theirs a lag. There’s a lack of implementation tools. Then you an involve biz ppl from the get go and lead to real adoption.

A biz requirements document had to be written. The technical working group has to meet the biz requirements

Long history in standards work with Telekom. Involved in internet standards in b2b alliance deliberately partnering with and including users in the process. We’re working with Don Norman, father of user-centric design. Lab at UCSD. This is all nascent but my vision. We have academic and expertise.

The problem we are facing are not tech problems. It’s design.

It’s not rocket science. UX experts (anthro, socio). A virtual user community a dedicated and available. Creating a certification mark to know that my tech is treating me with dignity. It’s user facing so everything has to be very understandable.

Are users helping you develop standards protocol ?

Create a code of practice. We want an interoperability spec but we’re far from it. Intended to be understandable by people.

Very important. Goes back to the implementation tools. As a reader of standards, the barrier to entry is really high. I don’t have time to read the full standard of every standard. There’s a marketing gap. I don’t need to know the details, I just need to know “Is this right for me?” A name a logo, the human side to it, and implementation tool to quickly try this thing out. Web Authentication standard.

Blown away by the fact that the visceral user community isn’t. Will end users contribute to specs and standards?

At least code of practice, but we don’t know how it will look from there (Telekom example) Nobody does it.

It’s not unlike the way the web was. I started my career doing usability testing. The small startup I Was in wanted to test the product with users. I never thought of applying that to standards. UX Usability in recent years has taken off. The tech should mold to what a human should actually do rather than the other way around.

Do people do emotional association? Positive negative? Does usability testing get down to emotional reaction to tasks. We’re a teenager in this tech space?

How do you get people on the roadway booking along to recognize opportunity to step aside from being a user to being a beneficiary

It’s really about the relationship that you have with that service provider. The technology arc we’re on allows us to have a richer relationship

Of course it makes sense we have a relationship arc with our providers as well, but the pain of leaving and changing is too high we often

What is the mechanism for bringing the language to users and back?

Anyone here have example using user data to influence a standard?

If you ask a user they’ll say I want X, Y, and Z. 75% of what they want already exists they just don’t know what they want.

What info can I give a developer to influence how they write the spec so they consider this vast body of experience? I don’t know how to communicate the information to influence the spec.

It was expected the user wouldn’t have to do anything. Now the user needs to take precautions etc. we are asking them to do stuff they wouldn’t ordinarily otherwise.

The soft factors are evolving. Some of these standards failed because of a human usability. Key dependencies based on the wet wear.

This whole IEEE7000 ethics group. If ever, this group should be thinking about users and the same cast and crew (technologists). The use of use cases as a proxy.

That’s really important. Standards do a really great job of covering all the cases.

This iterative process. In SSI, we cannot really include the users there right now because they can’t experience SSI in the real world. What frustrates me in this discussion is that we have very experienced techies and they have this idea of decentralized identity not directly coming from techies and then they grab the conversation and it stops. We have this technical part and the specifications part and the political part and we just focus on this one here. We can’t include the user at this point.

I develop products and services for tech that doesn’t exist today – we can test the ideas today, even before the technology is implemented. I don’t want to not include people. It’s challenging to be a leader. Step into the space to learn more. It’s even harder for tech experts. I don’t want to shut them out so they can take less room and make more space for others.

How to start to translate this into engagement with standards body. Doing product discovery calls and writing three paragraphs helps the developers. We’re wondering how we connect these to standards bodies.

We talk in our language and we have a problem ourselves with our own language. If we eradicated SSI from our conversations with the outside world. Listening to real world people.

Even the word identity doesn’t really resonate. I just want to know who am I working with and am I safe to work with them.

This SSI thing, that work needs to start happening now. It’s a great academic idea and we viscerally get. I need to know how that will look to my last pass or logging in experience. It smacks to me like more work.

Security is not easy. How do you get feedback that’s code able?

My first intro to SSI was yesterday and my first question was how does this apply to my personal experience (example of daughter entering a bar not having to flash an ID with home address on it).

Often the problem we think we’re tackling isn’t the one we think we are. SSI is a solution but telling someone SSI is the solution isn’t going to arrive where you want.

Let’s do a rapid fire ways to involve people in the standards? I’d like to factor in real life use cases.

Not understanding if these are recommendations for the standards body or for individuals.

To create the RFID tech specs, there was a business group that then determined how this standards group

We can create partnerships between and within the standards groups themselves

The 3 Ps whats the purpose, the process for your own involvement, what’s the payoff

Outreach and discoverability. I am interested in contributing to specs the I have a problem.

Productising standards. We’re trying to package standards the standards development process for different stakeholder and we need that full continuum and that translation has to resonate at different levels.

As a marketing person I am not invited to be part of these things.

As an organizer, I need to step back and volunteer and I did the CCG survey. I want a volunteer. I put it out and got a non typical suspect when we presented the results and that he was successful and used my power as a leader. You have to step back and the people in power and unless you step back and make the space new people won’t join. The peer programming model and I’d love to see that in peer leadership.

Radical candor around this is the way you can engage and this is what we are going to do with it.

Ways 2 involve people in the standards?

Welcome humans (welcome center) / industry consortium, your voice/experience is important/useful —> invite + make welcome non-technical people

Update discipline of standards development (Agile, scrum master)

Business requirements (biz group)

Care and feeding process for participants —> expertise, expectations, valued

Understand current state - experts in this role

!Discoverable - status, problem, solution

Networking for personal/professional development IRL

Look to civic engagement for ideas