1. 1 The SOS Group MSIS meeting, Luxembourg, 7-9 April 2008 Rune Gløersen Director of IT and Data Collection Statistics Norway

2. Background The Nordic Contact Network on IT (Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Iceland) The need for anchoring at management level The Wouter Keller Appearance The common interest The informality and other driving forces

3. The Objectives The Objectives were discussed in 1999, and in 2003 Exists in a draft terms of reference, most likely not formally approved Aiming at common developments and reuse of components Also pointing out the need for a common (view upon) business process model Build upon de facto standards Hierarchical organisation, Steering Group and technical subgroups Cooperation based upon joint interests and efforts, and no formal procedures

4. The SOS Group in practice Cooperation: –Dissemination database (DK, SE, NO) –Cristal (everyone, but the object disappeared) –SuperStar (FI, SE, NO, UK, CH, DK is out) –Classification database based on Neuchatel specification (NO, DK…., CH (Bridge)) –Standards (CoSSI, XML4DR) Exchange of experiences –Various items… –Discussions (and occasionally common viewpoints) upon international issues –Actions to harmonise methods, architecture, developments (not always successful)

5. Outcome and lessons learned Informality and self-interest are nice, but not enough if we really want to achieve the goals of sharing software The relationships and trust is still a very valuable outcome of the network. Regular meetings, even at low frequency, could lead to valuable cooperation and connect to cooperative work at an early stage. Cooperation implies investments according to common goals, and willingness to invest more in the development projects than initially necessary for one party. But you get other results for free. Still most of the successes along these lines are pending.

6. Outcome and lessons learned (cont.) The SOS Group has been vulnerable to change in members (or when members have moved) Often (regarded to be) easier to redevelop than to implement software components. –Examples from cooperation on dissemination databases where we have a common database model, but have developed a lot of similar software on our own.

7. The future of the SOS Group The concurrence of IT strategies and visions for future developments within the member NSIs form a basis for common developments that we for the first time can take advantage upon Service Oriented Architecture constitutes a technological platform suited for exchange of components, if based upon common architecture (principles) Somewhat uncertain who is in and who is out for the moment If we shall stick to the main objectives, the group should be anchored at top management level, and be recognised by the Director General of the member NSIs.

8. Questions or comments?