Abolish the Build phase?
We suggest it should be revised entirely. If the NSOs are using standard methods and IT tools for the business process, then the main activity here is to implement the plans prepared in Phase 2. Design using these tools. If a new tool/functionality needs to be developed, it is a separate process, not part of the data production. (Hungary) Phase_3
Boundary between Design and Build phases (and Overarching processes)
• We have changed the balance between phases 2 and 3. We have moved most of the “build” phase to phase 2, to reflect that design and configuration of common tools is done at the same time. We have removed the building of IT tools from the statistical production process because we have a specific process for IT development. This means that we will only have plan (resources) and test the full production flow remaining in phase 3. Phase_2, Phase_3, Overarching (Sweden)
Boundary between Build and Collect phases
• In case of administrative data sub-process 4.2 includes making some checks with test files and arranging secure channel. - It is unclear to what extent this task could be done as part of 3.5 or 3.6. Is 4.2 just about routine check made prior to launching the collection ? (France)
Boundary between Build and Disseminate phases (also covered in Disseminate issues)
Phase 7.1 Update output systems: Is this not supposed to happen already in Phase 3 Build? Phase_3 vs 7.1 (Hungary)
Outputs from execution of each subprocess
Design and construction phase - In these phase, some issues have been identified in differentiating which are the resulting products corresponding to each one, for this reason, it is recommended to include examples or create a generic repository of the documents that stem from the execution of each process so that the statistical producers could understand what are the main products that can be obtained from each phase of the generic model. Phase_3, Phase_4, Outputs of each subprocess / Examples (Ecuador)
Promoting agile development?
Can we add about designing in an iterative and agile way? This would be mainly in the design and build phases – to ensure what we build is fit for purpose and not following waterfall development which risks building the wrong thing Phase_2, Phase_3
Training Machine Learning models (also covered in Process issues)
GSBPM does not contain anything on training machine learning models. Should this, and similar, model design and build activities be explicitly included or described in any phases? Phase_2, Phase_3, Phase_5 (United Kingdom)
Geospatial
• We suggest adding the following geospatial considerations in the point 56 on the Build phase: “New services are built by exception, created in response to gaps in the existing catalogue services of services sourced from within the organisation and externally. Nevertheless, geospatial data and services used to support this phase should have a general and stable basis and not be included in separate activities and solutions for different production processes. (…)” Phase_3 (Portugal)
Workflow framework – 3.2
What is "workflow framework" under sub-process 3.2, is it a kind of service? 3.2 (Linking GSBPM-GSIM task team, 2021)
Security – 3.5, 2.6
• We suggest adding considerations on compliance with information security requirements concerning the design of production systems and workflow (point 55, p. 15) as well as mentioning security information implications regarding the testing of production systems (point 63, p. 16). We consider information security to be a crucial aspect of statistical production and we look forward to seeing it included within GSBPM. 2.6, 3.5 (Portugal)
Training – 3.7
• We suggested in the point 65 add some detailed regarding the type of the training. 3.7 (Portugal)
Finalize subprocesses - 3.7, 4.4, 5.8, 6.5 (also covered in Collect issues)
Sub-process 4.4: The GSBPM needs to systematically analyse and define what is happening in the "finalise" sub-processes (Phases: 3, 4, 5, 6). 3.7, 4.4, 5.8, 6.5 (Linking GSBPM-GSIM task team, 2021)
3 Build.docx
Abolish the Build phase? We suggest it should be revised entirely. If the NSOs are using standard methods and IT tools for the business process, then the main activity here is to implement the plans prepared in Phase 2. Design using these tools. If a new tool/functionality needs to be developed, it is a separate process, not part of the data production. (Hungary) Phase_3
Boundary between Design and Build phases (and Overarching processes) • We have changed the balance between phases 2 and 3. We have moved most of the “build” phase to phase 2, to reflect that design and configuration of common tools is done at the same time. We have removed the building of IT tools from the statistical production process because we have a specific process for IT development. This means that we will only have plan (resources) and test the full production flow remaining in phase 3. Phase_2, Phase_3, Overarching (Sweden)
Boundary between Build and Collect phases • In case of administrative data sub-process 4.2 includes making some checks with test files and arranging secure channel. - It is unclear to what extent this task could be done as part of 3.5 or 3.6. Is 4.2 just about routine check made prior to launching the collection ? (France)
Boundary between Build and Disseminate phases (also covered in Disseminate issues) Phase 7.1 Update output systems: Is this not supposed to happen already in Phase 3 Build? Phase_3 vs 7.1 (Hungary)
Outputs from execution of each subprocess Design and construction phase - In these phase, some issues have been identified in differentiating which are the resulting products corresponding to each one, for this reason, it is recommended to include examples or create a generic repository of the documents that stem from the execution of each process so that the statistical producers could understand what are the main products that can be obtained from each phase of the generic model. Phase_3, Phase_4, Outputs of each subprocess / Examples (Ecuador)
Promoting agile development?
Training Machine Learning models (also covered in Process issues) GSBPM does not contain anything on training machine learning models. Should this, and similar, model design and build activities be explicitly included or described in any phases? Phase_2, Phase_3, Phase_5 (United Kingdom)
Geospatial • We suggest adding the following geospatial considerations in the point 56 on the Build phase: “New services are built by exception, created in response to gaps in the existing catalogue services of services sourced from within the organisation and externally. Nevertheless, geospatial data and services used to support this phase should have a general and stable basis and not be included in separate activities and solutions for different production processes. (…)” Phase_3 (Portugal)
Workflow framework – 3.2 What is "workflow framework" under sub-process 3.2, is it a kind of service? 3.2 (Linking GSBPM-GSIM task team, 2021)
Security – 3.5, 2.6 • We suggest adding considerations on compliance with information security requirements concerning the design of production systems and workflow (point 55, p. 15) as well as mentioning security information implications regarding the testing of production systems (point 63, p. 16). We consider information security to be a crucial aspect of statistical production and we look forward to seeing it included within GSBPM. 2.6, 3.5 (Portugal)
Training – 3.7 • We suggested in the point 65 add some detailed regarding the type of the training. 3.7 (Portugal)
Finalize subprocesses - 3.7, 4.4, 5.8, 6.5 (also covered in Collect issues) Sub-process 4.4: The GSBPM needs to systematically analyse and define what is happening in the "finalise" sub-processes (Phases: 3, 4, 5, 6). 3.7, 4.4, 5.8, 6.5 (Linking GSBPM-GSIM task team, 2021) 3 Build.docx