HL7 Committee Best Practices

HL7 Committee Best Practices Guide (Brought to you by your friendly HL7 Process Improvement Committee)

Purpose One of the significant strengths of HL7 and its committee structure is that every committee has a high degree of flexibility to design and innovate. In this light, many committees have produced creative and productive practices to solve problems that they face. What has been lacking within the organization has been a formal venue for idea sharing and capture. This “HL7 Committee Best Practices Guide” is intended to help fill that void. Its purpose is to collect and document many of the wonderful grassroots ideas that have evolved within the HL7 committee and are being used successfully in a way that they can be retained, shared, and “recycled” for use in other committees. This is intended to be a living document, with additions being made based upon the Process Improvement Committee’s observations as well as candidate submissions to that group. PIC retains ownership of this document and its content, and welcomes input, which can be brought to committee, posted to the PIC listserv, or sent to one of the co-chairs.

Scope These best practices are in no way required activities. Quite the contrary, they are often nothing more than extensions to formal practices that committees have found valuable. It is essential to recognize that no best practice can conflict with the HL7 Bylaws, HL7 Policies and Procedures, and the relevant committee Decision-making Practices (DMPs). Since DMPs vary from committee to committee, it is possible that not all best practices may be used in every committee.

How this document works In the Committee Practices section are identified each of the best practices documented for this guide. Each practice has a name, a purpose, a process, and a benefit listed. Also cited are the committees that have pioneered or are using the best practice. The listing gives the basic details about the activity, how it is performed, and the value that it brings to the committee. The description of the practice itself is but a “teaser”, often referencing more detailed documentation that resides elsewhere. The intent is to provide the reader with enough information so that they can make an educated decision as to whether the practice is of value to their situation, and whether to investigate further. HL7’s Best Practices Committee Practices Best Practice Name Committee(s) Details Action Item Tracking PM Purpose: To ensure that actions items are identified, assigned and tracked to closure. Process: At every committee meeting, action items are identified and documented in a spreadsheet. The action items are documented with an action item identifier, description, assignee, status and due date. At subsequent committee meetings, the action item spreadsheet is reviewed. Each open action item is reported on by the responsible party until there has been sufficient action as to close the action item. Benefit: HL7 committees are required to collaborate with each other in order to complete the chapters for the standard. The collaboration may be face-to-face at the WGMs, via email or by a committee member attending another committee’s meeting. This process allows for the documentation of open actions until such time that the collaboration can occur. This process can also be used for Issues tracking. Action Item Tracking PM

Establishing Guiding PIC Purpose: To set some ground-rules for the way the committee Principles strives to operate. Process: To identify some key, long-lasting [values approach qualities] that underpin the way the committee operates. For instance, PIC has a guiding principle to lead by example and to not propose processes that they do not follow themselves. Benefit: The principles are an extension of the mission and charter, but a little more practical. They help the committee shape its solution and serve as a pragmatic reminder of how it has chosen to do business. Peer Review Process MnM, PIC Purpose: To ensure a fair, open process for comment and review of documents, as well as providing clear documentation as to the results of the discussion. Process: Documented at <>. In brief, a document is circulated to the list with a blank peer review forms. All comments must be returned by a pre-specified date (in advance of the actual review). The review requester compiles the comments, designating those comments that will be accepted without discussion. The review itself then focuses on those comments that were not immediately accepted. Benefit: The Peer Review Process has proven its value to reaching a clearer conclusion in less time than simply informally circulating documents for comment. It allows people to participate without being on a telecon, ensures that every identified issue is discussed, and provides clear documentation of the result of the groups decision for each issue. Project Chartering RCRIM, MnM Project Management OO Prioritization Process PIC, PA, ORC Mission and Charter PIC Purpose: To ensure that the committee stays focused and on track Review Process: At the beginning of each WGM, the committee reviews and discusses its Mission and Charter. If appropriate, changes are identified. Benefit: Given the nature of infrequent face-to-face meetings and a rapidly changing environment, this ensures that the committee remembers its purpose. Further, it serves as a brief “pause” to identify if the world has changed and how the committee must adapt. Mail Thread Topic MnM Ownership Process

/ WARTS

Ballot Practices

Database-oriented Management of Ballot [CQ]

Dispositioning Practices [PA] HL7 PIC’s Committee Best Practice Award

Description The HL7 community employs a number of innovative and creative practices that facilitate communication, improve work quality, and ultimately benefit the HL7 membership that engages in the standards development process. In an effort to both earn from each other and improve efficiency and productivity, this “Best Practice Award” has been created. The Award will be presented to the committee demonstrating innovation and leadership in the areas of process improvement and committee practices, and will be presented at each working group meeting. Nominations may be made by any active participant in the HL7 process. All submissions will be made to the Process Improvement Committee, which will review them and issue a recommendation to the HL7 Board of Directors (which ultimately selects the recipients).

Purpose There are a number of reasons for creating this award. First, this provides a venue for HL7 to recognize those groups demonstrating leadership and innovation in ways that are positively impacting the organization. Secondly, it provides an ideal way for HL7 to “learn from ourselves” – by identifying practices that work within the community we can document them and reuse those ideas across the organization. Ultimately, the award feeds the development of the HL7 Best Practices Guide. This document is intended to be a reference source for committees, containing ideas that are proven to be useful and productive, reinforcing the notion that “all of us are smarter than one of us.” The Nomination Process Nominations must be submitted via e-mail to the HL7 Process Improvement Committee. This may be done either by posting it directly to the list or by sending them to the committee co- chairs. In order to be considered, all nominations are subject to the rules that follow. All committees (TCs, SIGs, and Board committees) are eligible for awards1:

Nominations must be posted to the list or sent to PIC co-chairs no later than 3 weeks prior to the start of a Working Group Meeting. Any nominations submitted after this time will not be considered until the subsequent meeting. All submitted practices must be actively used by the committee nominated. Nominations should include: Name of Submitter Name of the Committee following the “best practice” Rationale behind the nomination (why is this a best practice?) / testimonial A brief description of the problem it is solving A brief description of the “best practice” (2-3 paragraphs) The benefit(s) of the “best practice” Nominations will be assessed based upon: The impact the “best practice” has had The degree to which the “best practice” addresses its purpose Innovation/creativity The anticipated viability/applicability of the best practice to other committees and the whole of HL7

A best practice does not need to be labor-intensive or cumbersome to be considered. In fact, many may be very simple steps that can be taken that add value to HL7 committees and their participants. Admittedly, the assessment of the above will be by its very nature subjective. Committees may submit their practices even if they appear in the “HL7 Best Practices Guide.” PIC has a responsibility to distribute information that we believe is pertinent to the HL7 community as soon as possible, and it is likely that a practice may appear in the guide before an award is presented. The difference is that even a practice that appears to be good on paper may be carried out to varying degrees of success. Part of the value of the award is to recognize committees that are going the “extra kilometer” (or “extra mile” for the HL7 US folks) in their day-to-day practices. The HL7 Chair will present the Best Practice Award during the awards presentation occurring at each HL7 Working Group Meeting.

1 Except for the Process Improvement Committee (PIC). That wouldn’t be particularly fair, now would it?!