Meeting notes - December 5th, 2023

[Chris-ECE]

Numbering of GSBPM subprocesses

Toi address the discussions on this topoic in previous calls, a poll was sent to members of the group containing the following options:-

• Option 1: Remove all numbering/identifiers from GSBPM subprocesses, apart from their names (the same as for whole phases and for GAMSO activities)
• Option 2: Have text string identifiers of the form e.g. DesOut (for Design Outputs, in the Design phase), etc.
• Option 3: Have text string identifiers as initially proposed by ILO, such as D.DO. for Design Outputs, etc. (We have decided against the counter-proposal to have prefixes that indicate change processes versus ongoing processes.)
• Option 4: Keep things as they are, and just remind people that GSBPM is non-linear.

Based on responses received, the majority wanted to retain the existing subprocess numbering scheme.

Phase 4, Geospatial aspects

Regarding the comment from Saudi Arabia to change reference to GPS with location-enabled systems (in 4.2 and 4.3), this change was made in 4.3, but for 4.2, it was felt that GPS was not highly relevant, and this led to a number of changes to paragraph 69 (to focus on setting up devices and communication channels), with its associated bullet points on activities relevant to setting up the collection of data.

Changes to 4.2

1. It was decided the first point about translation of materials is already covered by the existing text.
2. For the second issue, there was discussion of which point you would typically provide information to users (in addition to respondents)
   • Andrew suggested that some information is created during the design phase (for example on confidentiality) and that that might be communicated to respondents during phase 4, and to users during the disseminate phase.
   • Edgardo suggested that communicating is covered elsewhere in GSBPM, and can be jumped to without adding a sequentially to this phase.
   • Chris mentioned that designing dissemination (in design phase) was proposed in some of the feedback received, as well as managing the relationship with respondents.
   • Carlo said it’s important to distinguish respondents and users, as one might not give them the same information. He suggested modernizing the tools for communicating with users (away from letters and brochures).
   • Joni asked about differentiating information campaigns from instructions to respondents.
   • Edgardo stressed the importance of communication, but mentioned that this is partly covered by GAMSO, with which we should avoid overlap.
3. Further changes were made to paragraph 69 under 4.2 to mention the provision of emails to respondents with guidance, credentials, guidance or tailored information.
4. The third issue was already covered by previous changes, though one of the bullets under paragraph 69 was reworded slightly.