MPI-CBG LMF short strategy points
From BioDIP
(Difference between revisions)
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
==Summary of LMF advisory board meeting Feb 2010=== | ==Summary of LMF advisory board meeting Feb 2010=== | ||
| + | Here is a list of major points brough up in that meeting, and afterwards by individual stakeholders. | ||
| + | |||
There will be more details than this short list lower in this page, once we put them there... | There will be more details than this short list lower in this page, once we put them there... | ||
| − | + | That's where we will keep all the small and large suggestions as we get them. | |
| + | |||
#Stakeholders agreed that LMF will be over stretched in manpower due to | #Stakeholders agreed that LMF will be over stretched in manpower due to | ||
Revision as of 18:57, 11 February 2010
WARNING!!!! ...no official policy here yet.... just LMF thinking about stuff....
Contents |
Summary of LMF advisory board meeting Feb 2010=
Here is a list of major points brough up in that meeting, and afterwards by individual stakeholders.
There will be more details than this short list lower in this page, once we put them there... That's where we will keep all the small and large suggestions as we get them.
- Stakeholders agreed that LMF will be over stretched in manpower due to
- too high equipment / staff ratio coming in 2010
- basic teaching burden is too high
- Directors point out that increasing staff is not an option currently, after SAB report said no.
- Thus equipment must be shed. Old/non "State of the Art" (SOTA) systems are to be released to homebases (maintained by homebase tech/staff trainedby LMF?)
- Thus teaching burden must be reduced
Facility Aims
- Enable better quality and higher output of science than if facility did not exist
- Cutting edge tech - well trained knowledgeable staff - extract max potential from tech
- A facility not a service
- Equal access to all
Status Quo - Recharge Mechanism
- Shows where demand is.
- Resources should follow demand
- Resources are limited and must be allocated according to demand and other criteria (eg?)
Problem - Coming Situation - Conundrum
- Increasing equipment/staff ratio = decreased user response time and inequality of service
- SAB says Services and Facilities should not increase in size (staff and/or equipment?)
SAB says no more staff in services and facilities - but recharge mechanism and equipment/staff ratio indicate requirement for more staff.
Food queue analogy:
Equipment/Users = those in queue. Staff = Cooks.
Even with more fancy ovens, cooks only push out food so fast.
If more queuing items -> queue gets longer -> slower response time = user frustration and service inequality
Solutions
- Use staff resources more efficiently
- Wiki to share/retain info for staff and users
- Share user project information within the team (UP: emails to lmf and ipf)
- Internal training to increase bus number
- More small group teaching
- Retain trained staff - don't lose skill and knowhow - turnover in few years isn't good for the facility aims - training new staff eats time = longer response time.
- Retire older - less used - LMF equipment
- Reduces equipment/staff ratio
- Support for some well used systems is lost.
- How to choose what systems to retire?
- Find a way to hire more staff
- SAB report suggests against this
- Resources are limited
- When directors want something - they find ways to make it happen.
- Redefine LMF Aims/Responsibilities
- teaching and training
- research of new technology.
- only or also support new or old technology
- Do or Don't get involved in user projects at the experimental design / equipment choice level (we believe not getting involved does not pay off)
