[Marketing] Motion on choice of agency GetInteractive for Rebrand & Website Project

Dear Marketing List,

Thanks to the unrelenting energy of the Marketing Committee en members of the Board, I have the pleasureof asking you for approval of our choice of agency to conduct the Rebranding and Website Project for OSGeo: GetInteractive (for examples of their previous work see www.getinteractive.nl)

I herewith ask you formally to approve the choice for GetInteractive as the agency that will execute the Rebranding and Website Project as previously described in the EoI and RFP. Please do so before Saturday 12.00 noon CET. This allows the committee to draft the contract and collect Board signature in order to have the agency start the project in time.

Some back ground on the process:

  • we cast our Call for Expression of Interest as widely as our network and channels allowed
  • we received 4 serious EoI’s, which all were invited to send in a proposal
  • of these, 2 were shortlisted based on price and project scope
  • GetInteractive was chosen as the winner, based on critical items such as:
    pricing, experience with community-sites, quality of reference projects, comprehensiveness of their proposals, user-friendliness and technical specifications of proposed CMS, their experience with open source, realisme of planning and efforts, demonstrated professionalism in the EoI/RFP process and such.

We have ‘happily’ drawn upon Jeffrey’s particular experience in the CMS-field and he has volunteered to manage the project on our behalf. Jody’s eye for detail and process has kept us on track as the overall planning needed to be met. Therefore I feel we have achieved the best value for our money and can safely enter the next stage in the project.

Again, I wish to thank all involved in a process that has been executed meticulously but (thankfully) fast enough to have our revamped brand and website in place well before FOSS4G2017 to immediately benefit from it.

···

Kind regards,

Marc Vloemans

Mobile +31(0)651 844262
LinkedIn: http://nl.linkedin.com/in/marcvloemans
Twitter: http://twitter.com/marcvloemans
http://www.slideshare.net/marcvloemans

Thank you to all who have put in a significant effort in pushing through on this website re-branding activity.
For transparency, and to demonstrate the rigour that has been applied to this process, could I please ask each person who has been involved to explain the depth of your involvement in your assessment, and why you agree with this motion (or not). I will then vote based on my trust of the process and my trust that the individuals involved have followed the process.

To start:
* I reviewed the RFQ that was developed and sent out, along with the proposed process. I was impressed with the professionalism of both. I am familiar with the individuals involved with this selection process, and have been impressed over the years with their clear thinking, ability to suggest good ideas, their follow through on making things happen and professionalism. Assuming they confirm that they have continued to be thorough in their process, and confident in their selection, I shall back their decision.

Warm regards, Cameron

On 09-Mar-17 10:08 AM, Marc VLOEMANS wrote:

Dear Marketing List,

Thanks to the unrelenting energy of the Marketing Committee en members of the Board, I have the pleasureof asking you for approval of our choice of agency to conduct the Rebranding and Website Project for OSGeo: GetInteractive (for examples of their previous work see www.getinteractive.nl <http://www.getinteractive.nl/&gt;\)

I herewith ask you formally to approve the choice for GetInteractive as the agency that will execute the Rebranding and Website Project as previously described in the EoI and RFP. Please do so before Saturday 12.00 noon CET. This allows the committee to draft the contract and collect Board signature in order to have the agency start the project in time.

Some back ground on the process:
- we cast our Call for Expression of Interest as widely as our network and channels allowed
- we received 4 serious EoI's, which all were invited to send in a proposal
- of these, 2 were shortlisted based on price and project scope
- GetInteractive was chosen as the winner, based on critical items such as:
pricing, experience with community-sites, quality of reference projects, comprehensiveness of their proposals, user-friendliness and technical specifications of proposed CMS, their experience with open source, realisme of planning and efforts, demonstrated professionalism in the EoI/RFP process and such.

We have 'happily' drawn upon Jeffrey's particular experience in the CMS-field and he has volunteered to manage the project on our behalf. Jody's eye for detail and process has kept us on track as the overall planning needed to be met. Therefore I feel we have achieved the best value for our money and can safely enter the next stage in the project.

Again, I wish to thank all involved in a process that has been executed meticulously but (thankfully) fast enough to have our revamped brand and website in place well before FOSS4G2017 to immediately benefit from it.

Kind regards,

Marc Vloemans

Mobile +31(0)651 844262
LinkedIn: http://nl.linkedin.com/in/marcvloemans
Twitter: http://twitter.com/marcvloemans
http://www.slideshare.net/marcvloemans

_______________________________________________
Marketing mailing list
Marketing@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing

--
Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager, Jirotech,
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009

P +61 2 8099 9000, M +61 419 142 254, W www.jirotech.com

Hi All,

Thanks for the great questions Cameron.

I'll start with my +1. Marc, Jody and I spoke with GET earlier this
week and went over a series of questions from both parties. I'm happy
with their proposal and the proposed approach as well as satisfied
that they understand the scope and are prepared to execute
effectively, on time and within budget. I did not participate in the
interview with the other shortlisted firm, but have reviewed the notes
from those that did and discussed their answers in addition to
reviewing their proposal in detail. I am satisfied that GET is the
better choice. I also did not participate in the call when the
shortlisted firms were selected, but again read the notes from those
that did and discussed it with a few of these members. I am again
satisfied with the decision that was made. All of the proposals we
received were high quality and I believe any of the firms that
submitted could do a good job and provide a quality product, but am
secure with my +1 for GET representing the best value for the
foundation's investment.

Happy to answer any specific questions any one may have. I look
forward to getting started!

Jeff

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 3:46 PM, Cameron Shorter
<cameron.shorter@gmail.com> wrote:

Thank you to all who have put in a significant effort in pushing through on
this website re-branding activity.
For transparency, and to demonstrate the rigour that has been applied to
this process, could I please ask each person who has been involved to
explain the depth of your involvement in your assessment, and why you agree
with this motion (or not). I will then vote based on my trust of the process
and my trust that the individuals involved have followed the process.

To start:
* I reviewed the RFQ that was developed and sent out, along with the
proposed process. I was impressed with the professionalism of both. I am
familiar with the individuals involved with this selection process, and have
been impressed over the years with their clear thinking, ability to suggest
good ideas, their follow through on making things happen and
professionalism. Assuming they confirm that they have continued to be
thorough in their process, and confident in their selection, I shall back
their decision.

Warm regards, Cameron

On 09-Mar-17 10:08 AM, Marc VLOEMANS wrote:

Dear Marketing List,

Thanks to the unrelenting energy of the Marketing Committee en members of
the Board, I have the pleasureof asking you for approval of our choice of
agency to conduct the Rebranding and Website Project for OSGeo:
GetInteractive (for examples of their previous work see
www.getinteractive.nl)

I herewith ask you formally to approve the choice for GetInteractive as the
agency that will execute the Rebranding and Website Project as previously
described in the EoI and RFP. Please do so before Saturday 12.00 noon CET.
This allows the committee to draft the contract and collect Board signature
in order to have the agency start the project in time.

Some back ground on the process:
- we cast our Call for Expression of Interest as widely as our network and
channels allowed
- we received 4 serious EoI's, which all were invited to send in a proposal
- of these, 2 were shortlisted based on price and project scope
- GetInteractive was chosen as the winner, based on critical items such as:
pricing, experience with community-sites, quality of reference projects,
comprehensiveness of their proposals, user-friendliness and technical
specifications of proposed CMS, their experience with open source, realisme
of planning and efforts, demonstrated professionalism in the EoI/RFP process
and such.

We have 'happily' drawn upon Jeffrey's particular experience in the
CMS-field and he has volunteered to manage the project on our behalf. Jody's
eye for detail and process has kept us on track as the overall planning
needed to be met. Therefore I feel we have achieved the best value for our
money and can safely enter the next stage in the project.

Again, I wish to thank all involved in a process that has been executed
meticulously but (thankfully) fast enough to have our revamped brand and
website in place well before FOSS4G2017 to immediately benefit from it.

Kind regards,

Marc Vloemans

Mobile +31(0)651 844262
LinkedIn: http://nl.linkedin.com/in/marcvloemans
Twitter: http://twitter.com/marcvloemans
http://www.slideshare.net/marcvloemans

_______________________________________________
Marketing mailing list
Marketing@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing

--
Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager, Jirotech,
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009

P +61 2 8099 9000, M +61 419 142 254, W www.jirotech.com

_______________________________________________
Marketing mailing list
Marketing@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing

We may want a seperate thread for this one Cameron; should we take your response as a +0 :slight_smile:

+1 - Get Interactive - treated us (and this project) with respect, handling their communication seriously demonstrating a great work ethic in both their EOI and RFP responses. They were not the most visually impressive response; but they more than made up for this with communication and consideration.

It has been a bit of whirlwind so I am trying to remember what I did:

  • Took part in the EOI creation, rewriting some sections around how projects are presented (to make it less confusing between osgeo projects, community projects and incubation)

  • Reviewed the EOI responses and attended some discussion meetings; as part of this meeting I made some notes capturing the pros and cons of the responses, and voted for the four short-listed organizations.

  • Helped craft the “EOI response” letters sent out to short listed firms, using the notes above to both encourage respondents and to highlight areas where the committee wanted more information

  • Quickly reviewed the proposals with Helena (at a local GIS conference). This review formed the core of a comparison between proposals (“EOI/RFP Comments and Feedback” document), that was added to be Antia, Jeffrey, Marc and others on both the marketing and board lists.

  • Tried to make a “Comparison RFP” spreadsheet of the responses (wanted to double check the proposals for any variances - such as cutting scope from their financials and not noting it as a variance). This did not prove super useful; but the high level comparison of costs helped me at least.

  • Attended a meeting to select a firm, the “EOI/RFP Comments and Feedback” document was updated over the course of the meeting to help guide negotiations. Specifically we captured for each firm
    a) what would be need from the firm? example demonstrate an understanding of scope
    b) what would be needed internally from OSGeo? example volunteers in the same timezone
    c) what questions do we have for negotiation? example: Content migration appears unrealistic - can you explain your approach.

  • Helped “proposal response letters” to the two firms selected for Q&A interview - questions composed from the above document.

  • I was only able to attend on of the Q&A interviews; I was quite impressed by the selected firms questions for OSGeo, and work ethic they displayed in their EOI and RFP. I also appreciated Jeffrey and Marc’s representation of OSGeo and our interests.

  • I was able to talk to Marc about the second meeting, while he got answers to the above questions (thanks Marc). The firm in question did not match Get Interactive for being prepared.

Over the course of the above I did my best to keep osgeo board in the loop; sending the above notes and documents osgeo-priv, and highlighting the correspondence as they were saved into dropbox. I think I also managed to email discuss@osgeo.org and ask for more volunteers to take part :slight_smile:

If anyone on the marketing committee (or osgeo board) needs a copy of the notes referenced above give me a shout. Doing this commercial-in-confidence stuff really conflicts with our “open all the things” mantra at OSGeo.

···

On 8 March 2017 at 15:46, Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter@gmail.com> wrote:

Thank you to all who have put in a significant effort in pushing through on this website re-branding activity.
For transparency, and to demonstrate the rigour that has been applied to this process, could I please ask each person who has been involved to explain the depth of your involvement in your assessment, and why you agree with this motion (or not). I will then vote based on my trust of the process and my trust that the individuals involved have followed the process.

To start:

  • I reviewed the RFQ that was developed and sent out, along with the proposed process. I was impressed with the professionalism of both. I am familiar with the individuals involved with this selection process, and have been impressed over the years with their clear thinking, ability to suggest good ideas, their follow through on making things happen and professionalism. Assuming they confirm that they have continued to be thorough in their process, and confident in their selection, I shall back their decision.

Warm regards, Cameron

On 09-Mar-17 10:08 AM, Marc VLOEMANS wrote:

Dear Marketing List,

Thanks to the unrelenting energy of the Marketing Committee en members of the Board, I have the pleasureof asking you for approval of our choice of agency to conduct the Rebranding and Website Project for OSGeo: GetInteractive (for examples of their previous work see www.getinteractive.nl)

I herewith ask you formally to approve the choice for GetInteractive as the agency that will execute the Rebranding and Website Project as previously described in the EoI and RFP. Please do so before Saturday 12.00 noon CET. This allows the committee to draft the contract and collect Board signature in order to have the agency start the project in time.

Some back ground on the process:

  • we cast our Call for Expression of Interest as widely as our network and channels allowed
  • we received 4 serious EoI’s, which all were invited to send in a proposal
  • of these, 2 were shortlisted based on price and project scope
  • GetInteractive was chosen as the winner, based on critical items such as:
    pricing, experience with community-sites, quality of reference projects, comprehensiveness of their proposals, user-friendliness and technical specifications of proposed CMS, their experience with open source, realisme of planning and efforts, demonstrated professionalism in the EoI/RFP process and such.

We have ‘happily’ drawn upon Jeffrey’s particular experience in the CMS-field and he has volunteered to manage the project on our behalf. Jody’s eye for detail and process has kept us on track as the overall planning needed to be met. Therefore I feel we have achieved the best value for our money and can safely enter the next stage in the project.

Again, I wish to thank all involved in a process that has been executed meticulously but (thankfully) fast enough to have our revamped brand and website in place well before FOSS4G2017 to immediately benefit from it.

Kind regards,

Marc Vloemans

Mobile +31(0)651 844262
LinkedIn: http://nl.linkedin.com/in/marcvloemans
Twitter: http://twitter.com/marcvloemans
http://www.slideshare.net/marcvloemans

_______________________________________________
Marketing mailing list
[Marketing@lists.osgeo.org](mailto:Marketing@lists.osgeo.org)
[https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing](https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing)
-- 
Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager, Jirotech,
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009

P +61 2 8099 9000, M +61 419 142 254, W [www.jirotech.com](http://www.jirotech.com)

Marketing mailing list
Marketing@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing


Jody Garnett

Thank you Jeff, Jody and Marc for explaining the rigour you have followed.

My vote is +1, which is in line with my trust in the people involved and their prior track record, the process set up, and description of how it was followed.

Cameron

···

On 9/3/17 12:36 pm, Jody Garnett wrote:

We may want a seperate thread for this one Cameron; should we take your response as a +0 :slight_smile:

+1 - Get Interactive - treated us (and this project) with respect, handling their communication seriously demonstrating a great work ethic in both their EOI and RFP responses. They were not the most visually impressive response; but they more than made up for this with communication and consideration.

It has been a bit of whirlwind so I am trying to remember what I did:

  • Took part in the EOI creation, rewriting some sections around how projects are presented (to make it less confusing between osgeo projects, community projects and incubation)

  • Reviewed the EOI responses and attended some discussion meetings; as part of this meeting I made some notes capturing the pros and cons of the responses, and voted for the four short-listed organizations.

  • Helped craft the “EOI response” letters sent out to short listed firms, using the notes above to both encourage respondents and to highlight areas where the committee wanted more information

  • Quickly reviewed the proposals with Helena (at a local GIS conference). This review formed the core of a comparison between proposals (“EOI/RFP Comments and Feedback” document), that was added to be Antia, Jeffrey, Marc and others on both the marketing and board lists.

  • Tried to make a “Comparison RFP” spreadsheet of the responses (wanted to double check the proposals for any variances - such as cutting scope from their financials and not noting it as a variance). This did not prove super useful; but the high level comparison of costs helped me at least.

  • Attended a meeting to select a firm, the “EOI/RFP Comments and Feedback” document was updated over the course of the meeting to help guide negotiations. Specifically we captured for each firm
    a) what would be need from the firm? example demonstrate an understanding of scope
    b) what would be needed internally from OSGeo? example volunteers in the same timezone
    c) what questions do we have for negotiation? example: Content migration appears unrealistic - can you explain your approach.

  • Helped “proposal response letters” to the two firms selected for Q&A interview - questions composed from the above document.

  • I was only able to attend on of the Q&A interviews; I was quite impressed by the selected firms questions for OSGeo, and work ethic they displayed in their EOI and RFP. I also appreciated Jeffrey and Marc’s representation of OSGeo and our interests.

  • I was able to talk to Marc about the second meeting, while he got answers to the above questions (thanks Marc). The firm in question did not match Get Interactive for being prepared.

Over the course of the above I did my best to keep osgeo board in the loop; sending the above notes and documents osgeo-priv, and highlighting the correspondence as they were saved into dropbox. I think I also managed to email discuss@osgeo.org and ask for more volunteers to take part :slight_smile:

If anyone on the marketing committee (or osgeo board) needs a copy of the notes referenced above give me a shout. Doing this commercial-in-confidence stuff really conflicts with our “open all the things” mantra at OSGeo.


Jody Garnett

On 8 March 2017 at 15:46, Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter@gmail.com> wrote:

Thank you to all who have put in a significant effort in pushing through on this website re-branding activity.
For transparency, and to demonstrate the rigour that has been applied to this process, could I please ask each person who has been involved to explain the depth of your involvement in your assessment, and why you agree with this motion (or not). I will then vote based on my trust of the process and my trust that the individuals involved have followed the process.

To start:

  • I reviewed the RFQ that was developed and sent out, along with the proposed process. I was impressed with the professionalism of both. I am familiar with the individuals involved with this selection process, and have been impressed over the years with their clear thinking, ability to suggest good ideas, their follow through on making things happen and professionalism. Assuming they confirm that they have continued to be thorough in their process, and confident in their selection, I shall back their decision.

Warm regards, Cameron

On 09-Mar-17 10:08 AM, Marc VLOEMANS wrote:

Dear Marketing List,

Thanks to the unrelenting energy of the Marketing Committee en members of the Board, I have the pleasureof asking you for approval of our choice of agency to conduct the Rebranding and Website Project for OSGeo: GetInteractive (for examples of their previous work see www.getinteractive.nl)

I herewith ask you formally to approve the choice for GetInteractive as the agency that will execute the Rebranding and Website Project as previously described in the EoI and RFP. Please do so before Saturday 12.00 noon CET. This allows the committee to draft the contract and collect Board signature in order to have the agency start the project in time.

Some back ground on the process:

  • we cast our Call for Expression of Interest as widely as our network and channels allowed
  • we received 4 serious EoI’s, which all were invited to send in a proposal
  • of these, 2 were shortlisted based on price and project scope
  • GetInteractive was chosen as the winner, based on critical items such as:
    pricing, experience with community-sites, quality of reference projects, comprehensiveness of their proposals, user-friendliness and technical specifications of proposed CMS, their experience with open source, realisme of planning and efforts, demonstrated professionalism in the EoI/RFP process and such.

We have ‘happily’ drawn upon Jeffrey’s particular experience in the CMS-field and he has volunteered to manage the project on our behalf. Jody’s eye for detail and process has kept us on track as the overall planning needed to be met. Therefore I feel we have achieved the best value for our money and can safely enter the next stage in the project.

Again, I wish to thank all involved in a process that has been executed meticulously but (thankfully) fast enough to have our revamped brand and website in place well before FOSS4G2017 to immediately benefit from it.

Kind regards,

Marc Vloemans

Mobile +31(0)651 844262
LinkedIn: http://nl.linkedin.com/in/marcvloemans
Twitter: http://twitter.com/marcvloemans
http://www.slideshare.net/marcvloemans

_______________________________________________
Marketing mailing list
[Marketing@lists.osgeo.org](mailto:Marketing@lists.osgeo.org)
[https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing](https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing)
-- 
Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager, Jirotech,
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009

P +61 2 8099 9000, M +61 419 142 254, W [www.jirotech.com](http://www.jirotech.com)

_______________________________________________ Marketing mailing list Marketing@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing

-- 
Cameron Shorter
M +61 419 142 254

+1 Peter

Sorry I haven’t had time recently to be directly engaged in this, but thanks to all of you who have been for pushing this ahead.

···

On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter@gmail.com> wrote:

Thank you Jeff, Jody and Marc for explaining the rigour you have followed.

My vote is +1, which is in line with my trust in the people involved and their prior track record, the process set up, and description of how it was followed.

Cameron

On 9/3/17 12:36 pm, Jody Garnett wrote:

We may want a seperate thread for this one Cameron; should we take your response as a +0 :slight_smile:

+1 - Get Interactive - treated us (and this project) with respect, handling their communication seriously demonstrating a great work ethic in both their EOI and RFP responses. They were not the most visually impressive response; but they more than made up for this with communication and consideration.

It has been a bit of whirlwind so I am trying to remember what I did:

  • Took part in the EOI creation, rewriting some sections around how projects are presented (to make it less confusing between osgeo projects, community projects and incubation)

  • Reviewed the EOI responses and attended some discussion meetings; as part of this meeting I made some notes capturing the pros and cons of the responses, and voted for the four short-listed organizations.

  • Helped craft the “EOI response” letters sent out to short listed firms, using the notes above to both encourage respondents and to highlight areas where the committee wanted more information

  • Quickly reviewed the proposals with Helena (at a local GIS conference). This review formed the core of a comparison between proposals (“EOI/RFP Comments and Feedback” document), that was added to be Antia, Jeffrey, Marc and others on both the marketing and board lists.

  • Tried to make a “Comparison RFP” spreadsheet of the responses (wanted to double check the proposals for any variances - such as cutting scope from their financials and not noting it as a variance). This did not prove super useful; but the high level comparison of costs helped me at least.

  • Attended a meeting to select a firm, the “EOI/RFP Comments and Feedback” document was updated over the course of the meeting to help guide negotiations. Specifically we captured for each firm
    a) what would be need from the firm? example demonstrate an understanding of scope
    b) what would be needed internally from OSGeo? example volunteers in the same timezone
    c) what questions do we have for negotiation? example: Content migration appears unrealistic - can you explain your approach.

  • Helped “proposal response letters” to the two firms selected for Q&A interview - questions composed from the above document.

  • I was only able to attend on of the Q&A interviews; I was quite impressed by the selected firms questions for OSGeo, and work ethic they displayed in their EOI and RFP. I also appreciated Jeffrey and Marc’s representation of OSGeo and our interests.

  • I was able to talk to Marc about the second meeting, while he got answers to the above questions (thanks Marc). The firm in question did not match Get Interactive for being prepared.

Over the course of the above I did my best to keep osgeo board in the loop; sending the above notes and documents osgeo-priv, and highlighting the correspondence as they were saved into dropbox. I think I also managed to email discuss@osgeo.org and ask for more volunteers to take part :slight_smile:

If anyone on the marketing committee (or osgeo board) needs a copy of the notes referenced above give me a shout. Doing this commercial-in-confidence stuff really conflicts with our “open all the things” mantra at OSGeo.

-- 
Cameron Shorter
M +61 419 142 254

Marketing mailing list
Marketing@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing


Jody Garnett

On 8 March 2017 at 15:46, Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter@gmail.com> wrote:

Thank you to all who have put in a significant effort in pushing through on this website re-branding activity.
For transparency, and to demonstrate the rigour that has been applied to this process, could I please ask each person who has been involved to explain the depth of your involvement in your assessment, and why you agree with this motion (or not). I will then vote based on my trust of the process and my trust that the individuals involved have followed the process.

To start:

  • I reviewed the RFQ that was developed and sent out, along with the proposed process. I was impressed with the professionalism of both. I am familiar with the individuals involved with this selection process, and have been impressed over the years with their clear thinking, ability to suggest good ideas, their follow through on making things happen and professionalism. Assuming they confirm that they have continued to be thorough in their process, and confident in their selection, I shall back their decision.

Warm regards, Cameron

On 09-Mar-17 10:08 AM, Marc VLOEMANS wrote:

Dear Marketing List,

Thanks to the unrelenting energy of the Marketing Committee en members of the Board, I have the pleasureof asking you for approval of our choice of agency to conduct the Rebranding and Website Project for OSGeo: GetInteractive (for examples of their previous work see www.getinteractive.nl)

I herewith ask you formally to approve the choice for GetInteractive as the agency that will execute the Rebranding and Website Project as previously described in the EoI and RFP. Please do so before Saturday 12.00 noon CET. This allows the committee to draft the contract and collect Board signature in order to have the agency start the project in time.

Some back ground on the process:

  • we cast our Call for Expression of Interest as widely as our network and channels allowed
  • we received 4 serious EoI’s, which all were invited to send in a proposal
  • of these, 2 were shortlisted based on price and project scope
  • GetInteractive was chosen as the winner, based on critical items such as:
    pricing, experience with community-sites, quality of reference projects, comprehensiveness of their proposals, user-friendliness and technical specifications of proposed CMS, their experience with open source, realisme of planning and efforts, demonstrated professionalism in the EoI/RFP process and such.

We have ‘happily’ drawn upon Jeffrey’s particular experience in the CMS-field and he has volunteered to manage the project on our behalf. Jody’s eye for detail and process has kept us on track as the overall planning needed to be met. Therefore I feel we have achieved the best value for our money and can safely enter the next stage in the project.

Again, I wish to thank all involved in a process that has been executed meticulously but (thankfully) fast enough to have our revamped brand and website in place well before FOSS4G2017 to immediately benefit from it.

Kind regards,

Marc Vloemans

Mobile +31(0)651 844262
LinkedIn: http://nl.linkedin.com/in/marcvloemans
Twitter: http://twitter.com/marcvloemans
http://www.slideshare.net/marcvloemans

_______________________________________________
Marketing mailing list
[Marketing@lists.osgeo.org](mailto:Marketing@lists.osgeo.org)
[https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing](https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing)
-- 
Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager, Jirotech,
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009

P +61 2 8099 9000, M +61 419 142 254, W [www.jirotech.com](http://www.jirotech.com)

_______________________________________________ Marketing mailing list Marketing@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing

+1 Astrid

Am 2017-03-11 21:53, schrieb Peter Batty:

+1 Peter

Sorry I haven't had time recently to be directly engaged in this, but
thanks to all of you who have been for pushing this ahead.

On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Cameron Shorter
<cameron.shorter@gmail.com> wrote:

Thank you Jeff, Jody and Marc for explaining the rigour you have
followed.

My vote is +1, which is in line with my trust in the people involved
and their prior track record, the process set up, and description of
how it was followed.
Cameron

On 9/3/17 12:36 pm, Jody Garnett wrote:

We may want a seperate thread for this one Cameron; should we take
your response as a +0 :slight_smile:

+1 - Get Interactive - treated us (and this project) with respect,
handling their communication seriously demonstrating a great work
ethic in both their EOI and RFP responses. They were not the most
visually impressive response; but they more than made up for this
with communication and consideration.

It has been a bit of whirlwind so I am trying to remember what I
did:

- Took part in the EOI creation, rewriting some sections around how
projects are presented (to make it less confusing between osgeo
projects, community projects and incubation)

- Reviewed the EOI responses and attended some discussion meetings;
as part of this meeting I made some notes capturing the pros and
cons of the responses, and voted for the four short-listed
organizations.

- Helped craft the "EOI response" letters sent out to short listed
firms, using the notes above to both encourage respondents and to
highlight areas where the committee wanted more information

- Quickly reviewed the proposals with Helena (at a local GIS
conference). This review formed the core of a comparison between
proposals ("EOI/RFP Comments and Feedback" document), that was added
to be Antia, Jeffrey, Marc and others on both the marketing and
board lists.

- Tried to make a "Comparison RFP" spreadsheet of the responses
(wanted to double check the proposals for any variances - such as
cutting scope from their financials and not noting it as a
variance). This did not prove super useful; but the high level
comparison of costs helped me at least.

- Attended a meeting to select a firm, the "EOI/RFP Comments and
Feedback" document was updated over the course of the meeting to
help guide negotiations. Specifically we captured for each firm
a) what would be need from the firm? _example demonstrate an
understanding of scope_
b) what would be needed internally from OSGeo? _example volunteers
in the same timezone_
c) what questions do we have for negotiation? example: _Content
migration appears unrealistic - can you explain your approach._

- Helped "proposal response letters" to the two firms selected for
Q&A interview - questions composed from the above document.

- I was only able to attend on of the Q&A interviews; I was quite
impressed by the selected firms questions for OSGeo, and work ethic
they displayed in their EOI and RFP. I also appreciated Jeffrey and
Marc's representation of OSGeo and our interests.

- I was able to talk to Marc about the second meeting, while he got
answers to the above questions (thanks Marc). The firm in question
did not match Get Interactive for being prepared.

Over the course of the above I did my best to keep osgeo board in
the loop; sending the above notes and documents osgeo-priv, and
highlighting the correspondence as they were saved into dropbox. I
think I also managed to email discuss@osgeo.org and ask for more
volunteers to take part :slight_smile:

If anyone on the marketing committee (or osgeo board) needs a copy
of the notes referenced above give me a shout. Doing this
commercial-in-confidence stuff really conflicts with our "open all
the things" mantra at OSGeo.

--
Jody Garnett
On 8 March 2017 at 15:46, Cameron Shorter
<cameron.shorter@gmail.com> wrote:

Thank you to all who have put in a significant effort in pushing
through on this website re-branding activity.
For transparency, and to demonstrate the rigour that has been
applied to this process, could I please ask each person who has been
involved to explain the depth of your involvement in your
assessment, and why you agree with this motion (or not). I will then
vote based on my trust of the process and my trust that the
individuals involved have followed the process.

To start:
* I reviewed the RFQ that was developed and sent out, along with the
proposed process. I was impressed with the professionalism of both.
I am familiar with the individuals involved with this selection
process, and have been impressed over the years with their clear
thinking, ability to suggest good ideas, their follow through on
making things happen and professionalism. Assuming they confirm that
they have continued to be thorough in their process, and confident
in their selection, I shall back their decision.

Warm regards, Cameron

On 09-Mar-17 10:08 AM, Marc VLOEMANS wrote:

Dear Marketing List,

Thanks to the unrelenting energy of the Marketing Committee en
members of the Board, I have the pleasureof asking you for approval
of our choice of agency to conduct the Rebranding and Website
Project for OSGeo: GetInteractive (for examples of their previous
work see www.getinteractive.nl [5])

I herewith ask you formally to approve the choice for GetInteractive
as the agency that will execute the Rebranding and Website Project
as previously described in the EoI and RFP. Please do so before
Saturday 12.00 noon CET. This allows the committee to draft the
contract and collect Board signature in order to have the agency
start the project in time.

Some back ground on the process:
- we cast our Call for Expression of Interest as widely as our
network and channels allowed
- we received 4 serious EoI's, which all were invited to send in a
proposal
- of these, 2 were shortlisted based on price and project scope
- GetInteractive was chosen as the winner, based on critical items
such as:
pricing, experience with community-sites, quality of reference
projects, comprehensiveness of their proposals, user-friendliness
and technical specifications of proposed CMS, their experience with
open source, realisme of planning and efforts, demonstrated
professionalism in the EoI/RFP process and such.

We have 'happily' drawn upon Jeffrey's particular experience in the
CMS-field and he has volunteered to manage the project on our
behalf. Jody's eye for detail and process has kept us on track as
the overall planning needed to be met. Therefore I feel we have
achieved the best value for our money and can safely enter the next
stage in the project.

Again, I wish to thank all involved in a process that has been
executed meticulously but (thankfully) fast enough to have our
revamped brand and website in place well before FOSS4G2017 to
immediately benefit from it.

Kind regards,

Marc Vloemans

Mobile +31(0)651 844262
LinkedIn: http://nl.linkedin.com/in/marcvloemans [6]
Twitter: http://twitter.com/marcvloemans [7]
http://www.slideshare.net/marcvloemans [8]

_______________________________________________
Marketing mailing list
Marketing@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing [1]

--
Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager, Jirotech,
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009

P +61 2 8099 9000 [2], M +61 419 142 254 [3], W www.jirotech.com [4]
_______________________________________________ Marketing mailing
list Marketing@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing [1]

--
Cameron Shorter
M +61 419 142 254 [3]

_______________________________________________
Marketing mailing list
Marketing@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing [1]

Links:
------
[1] https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing
[2] tel:+61%202%208099%209000
[3] tel:+61%20419%20142%20254
[4] http://www.jirotech.com
[5] http://www.getinteractive.nl/
[6] http://nl.linkedin.com/in/marcvloemans
[7] http://twitter.com/marcvloemans
[8] http://www.slideshare.net/marcvloemans
_______________________________________________
Marketing mailing list
Marketing@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing

--
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Astrid_Emde

+0 Nick

···

2017-03-12 20:05 GMT+01:00 Astrid Emde (OSGeo) <astrid_emde@osgeo.org>:

+1 Astrid

Am 2017-03-11 21:53, schrieb Peter Batty:

+1 Peter

Sorry I haven’t had time recently to be directly engaged in this, but
thanks to all of you who have been for pushing this ahead.

On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Cameron Shorter
<cameron.shorter@gmail.com> wrote:

Thank you Jeff, Jody and Marc for explaining the rigour you have
followed.

My vote is +1, which is in line with my trust in the people involved
and their prior track record, the process set up, and description of
how it was followed.
Cameron

On 9/3/17 12:36 pm, Jody Garnett wrote:

We may want a seperate thread for this one Cameron; should we take
your response as a +0 :slight_smile:

+1 - Get Interactive - treated us (and this project) with respect,
handling their communication seriously demonstrating a great work
ethic in both their EOI and RFP responses. They were not the most
visually impressive response; but they more than made up for this
with communication and consideration.

It has been a bit of whirlwind so I am trying to remember what I
did:

  • Took part in the EOI creation, rewriting some sections around how
    projects are presented (to make it less confusing between osgeo
    projects, community projects and incubation)

  • Reviewed the EOI responses and attended some discussion meetings;
    as part of this meeting I made some notes capturing the pros and
    cons of the responses, and voted for the four short-listed
    organizations.

  • Helped craft the “EOI response” letters sent out to short listed
    firms, using the notes above to both encourage respondents and to
    highlight areas where the committee wanted more information

  • Quickly reviewed the proposals with Helena (at a local GIS
    conference). This review formed the core of a comparison between
    proposals (“EOI/RFP Comments and Feedback” document), that was added
    to be Antia, Jeffrey, Marc and others on both the marketing and
    board lists.

  • Tried to make a “Comparison RFP” spreadsheet of the responses
    (wanted to double check the proposals for any variances - such as
    cutting scope from their financials and not noting it as a
    variance). This did not prove super useful; but the high level
    comparison of costs helped me at least.

  • Attended a meeting to select a firm, the “EOI/RFP Comments and
    Feedback” document was updated over the course of the meeting to
    help guide negotiations. Specifically we captured for each firm

a) what would be need from the firm? example demonstrate an
understanding of scope

b) what would be needed internally from OSGeo? example volunteers
in the same timezone

c) what questions do we have for negotiation? example: Content
migration appears unrealistic - can you explain your approach.

  • Helped “proposal response letters” to the two firms selected for
    Q&A interview - questions composed from the above document.

  • I was only able to attend on of the Q&A interviews; I was quite
    impressed by the selected firms questions for OSGeo, and work ethic
    they displayed in their EOI and RFP. I also appreciated Jeffrey and
    Marc’s representation of OSGeo and our interests.

  • I was able to talk to Marc about the second meeting, while he got
    answers to the above questions (thanks Marc). The firm in question
    did not match Get Interactive for being prepared.

Over the course of the above I did my best to keep osgeo board in
the loop; sending the above notes and documents osgeo-priv, and
highlighting the correspondence as they were saved into dropbox. I
think I also managed to email discuss@osgeo.org and ask for more
volunteers to take part :slight_smile:

If anyone on the marketing committee (or osgeo board) needs a copy
of the notes referenced above give me a shout. Doing this
commercial-in-confidence stuff really conflicts with our “open all
the things” mantra at OSGeo.


Jody Garnett
On 8 March 2017 at 15:46, Cameron Shorter
<cameron.shorter@gmail.com> wrote:

Thank you to all who have put in a significant effort in pushing
through on this website re-branding activity.
For transparency, and to demonstrate the rigour that has been
applied to this process, could I please ask each person who has been
involved to explain the depth of your involvement in your
assessment, and why you agree with this motion (or not). I will then
vote based on my trust of the process and my trust that the
individuals involved have followed the process.

To start:

  • I reviewed the RFQ that was developed and sent out, along with the
    proposed process. I was impressed with the professionalism of both.
    I am familiar with the individuals involved with this selection
    process, and have been impressed over the years with their clear
    thinking, ability to suggest good ideas, their follow through on
    making things happen and professionalism. Assuming they confirm that
    they have continued to be thorough in their process, and confident
    in their selection, I shall back their decision.

Warm regards, Cameron

On 09-Mar-17 10:08 AM, Marc VLOEMANS wrote:

Dear Marketing List,

Thanks to the unrelenting energy of the Marketing Committee en
members of the Board, I have the pleasureof asking you for approval
of our choice of agency to conduct the Rebranding and Website
Project for OSGeo: GetInteractive (for examples of their previous

work see www.getinteractive.nl [5])

I herewith ask you formally to approve the choice for GetInteractive
as the agency that will execute the Rebranding and Website Project
as previously described in the EoI and RFP. Please do so before
Saturday 12.00 noon CET. This allows the committee to draft the
contract and collect Board signature in order to have the agency
start the project in time.

Some back ground on the process:

  • we cast our Call for Expression of Interest as widely as our
    network and channels allowed
  • we received 4 serious EoI’s, which all were invited to send in a
    proposal
  • of these, 2 were shortlisted based on price and project scope
  • GetInteractive was chosen as the winner, based on critical items
    such as:
    pricing, experience with community-sites, quality of reference
    projects, comprehensiveness of their proposals, user-friendliness
    and technical specifications of proposed CMS, their experience with
    open source, realisme of planning and efforts, demonstrated
    professionalism in the EoI/RFP process and such.

We have ‘happily’ drawn upon Jeffrey’s particular experience in the
CMS-field and he has volunteered to manage the project on our
behalf. Jody’s eye for detail and process has kept us on track as
the overall planning needed to be met. Therefore I feel we have
achieved the best value for our money and can safely enter the next
stage in the project.

Again, I wish to thank all involved in a process that has been
executed meticulously but (thankfully) fast enough to have our
revamped brand and website in place well before FOSS4G2017 to
immediately benefit from it.

Kind regards,

Marc Vloemans

Mobile +31(0)651 844262

LinkedIn: http://nl.linkedin.com/in/marcvloemans [6]
Twitter: http://twitter.com/marcvloemans [7]
http://www.slideshare.net/marcvloemans [8]


Marketing mailing list
Marketing@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing [1]


Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager, Jirotech,
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009

P +61 2 8099 9000 [2], M +61 419 142 254 [3], W www.jirotech.com [4]
_______________________________________________ Marketing mailing
list Marketing@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing [1]


Cameron Shorter
M +61 419 142 254 [3]


Marketing mailing list
Marketing@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing [1]

Links:

[1] https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing
[2] tel:+61%202%208099%209000
[3] tel:+61%20419%20142%20254
[4] http://www.jirotech.com
[5] http://www.getinteractive.nl/
[6] http://nl.linkedin.com/in/marcvloemans
[7] http://twitter.com/marcvloemans
[8] http://www.slideshare.net/marcvloemans


Marketing mailing list
Marketing@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing


http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Astrid_Emde


Marketing mailing list
Marketing@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing

+1 Harrison

···

2017-03-12 20:05 GMT+01:00 Astrid Emde (OSGeo) <astrid_emde@osgeo.org>:

+1 Astrid

Am 2017-03-11 21:53, schrieb Peter Batty:

+1 Peter

Sorry I haven’t had time recently to be directly engaged in this, but
thanks to all of you who have been for pushing this ahead.

On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Cameron Shorter
<cameron.shorter@gmail.com> wrote:

Thank you Jeff, Jody and Marc for explaining the rigour you have
followed.

My vote is +1, which is in line with my trust in the people involved
and their prior track record, the process set up, and description of
how it was followed.
Cameron

On 9/3/17 12:36 pm, Jody Garnett wrote:

We may want a seperate thread for this one Cameron; should we take
your response as a +0 :slight_smile:

+1 - Get Interactive - treated us (and this project) with respect,
handling their communication seriously demonstrating a great work
ethic in both their EOI and RFP responses. They were not the most
visually impressive response; but they more than made up for this
with communication and consideration.

It has been a bit of whirlwind so I am trying to remember what I
did:

  • Took part in the EOI creation, rewriting some sections around how
    projects are presented (to make it less confusing between osgeo
    projects, community projects and incubation)

  • Reviewed the EOI responses and attended some discussion meetings;
    as part of this meeting I made some notes capturing the pros and
    cons of the responses, and voted for the four short-listed
    organizations.

  • Helped craft the “EOI response” letters sent out to short listed
    firms, using the notes above to both encourage respondents and to
    highlight areas where the committee wanted more information

  • Quickly reviewed the proposals with Helena (at a local GIS
    conference). This review formed the core of a comparison between
    proposals (“EOI/RFP Comments and Feedback” document), that was added
    to be Antia, Jeffrey, Marc and others on both the marketing and
    board lists.

  • Tried to make a “Comparison RFP” spreadsheet of the responses
    (wanted to double check the proposals for any variances - such as
    cutting scope from their financials and not noting it as a
    variance). This did not prove super useful; but the high level
    comparison of costs helped me at least.

  • Attended a meeting to select a firm, the “EOI/RFP Comments and
    Feedback” document was updated over the course of the meeting to
    help guide negotiations. Specifically we captured for each firm

a) what would be need from the firm? example demonstrate an
understanding of scope

b) what would be needed internally from OSGeo? example volunteers
in the same timezone

c) what questions do we have for negotiation? example: Content
migration appears unrealistic - can you explain your approach.

  • Helped “proposal response letters” to the two firms selected for
    Q&A interview - questions composed from the above document.

  • I was only able to attend on of the Q&A interviews; I was quite
    impressed by the selected firms questions for OSGeo, and work ethic
    they displayed in their EOI and RFP. I also appreciated Jeffrey and
    Marc’s representation of OSGeo and our interests.

  • I was able to talk to Marc about the second meeting, while he got
    answers to the above questions (thanks Marc). The firm in question
    did not match Get Interactive for being prepared.

Over the course of the above I did my best to keep osgeo board in
the loop; sending the above notes and documents osgeo-priv, and
highlighting the correspondence as they were saved into dropbox. I
think I also managed to email discuss@osgeo.org and ask for more
volunteers to take part :slight_smile:

If anyone on the marketing committee (or osgeo board) needs a copy
of the notes referenced above give me a shout. Doing this
commercial-in-confidence stuff really conflicts with our “open all
the things” mantra at OSGeo.


Jody Garnett
On 8 March 2017 at 15:46, Cameron Shorter
<cameron.shorter@gmail.com> wrote:

Thank you to all who have put in a significant effort in pushing
through on this website re-branding activity.
For transparency, and to demonstrate the rigour that has been
applied to this process, could I please ask each person who has been
involved to explain the depth of your involvement in your
assessment, and why you agree with this motion (or not). I will then
vote based on my trust of the process and my trust that the
individuals involved have followed the process.

To start:

  • I reviewed the RFQ that was developed and sent out, along with the
    proposed process. I was impressed with the professionalism of both.
    I am familiar with the individuals involved with this selection
    process, and have been impressed over the years with their clear
    thinking, ability to suggest good ideas, their follow through on
    making things happen and professionalism. Assuming they confirm that
    they have continued to be thorough in their process, and confident
    in their selection, I shall back their decision.

Warm regards, Cameron

On 09-Mar-17 10:08 AM, Marc VLOEMANS wrote:

Dear Marketing List,

Thanks to the unrelenting energy of the Marketing Committee en
members of the Board, I have the pleasureof asking you for approval
of our choice of agency to conduct the Rebranding and Website
Project for OSGeo: GetInteractive (for examples of their previous

work see www.getinteractive.nl [5])

I herewith ask you formally to approve the choice for GetInteractive
as the agency that will execute the Rebranding and Website Project
as previously described in the EoI and RFP. Please do so before
Saturday 12.00 noon CET. This allows the committee to draft the
contract and collect Board signature in order to have the agency
start the project in time.

Some back ground on the process:

  • we cast our Call for Expression of Interest as widely as our
    network and channels allowed
  • we received 4 serious EoI’s, which all were invited to send in a
    proposal
  • of these, 2 were shortlisted based on price and project scope
  • GetInteractive was chosen as the winner, based on critical items
    such as:
    pricing, experience with community-sites, quality of reference
    projects, comprehensiveness of their proposals, user-friendliness
    and technical specifications of proposed CMS, their experience with
    open source, realisme of planning and efforts, demonstrated
    professionalism in the EoI/RFP process and such.

We have ‘happily’ drawn upon Jeffrey’s particular experience in the
CMS-field and he has volunteered to manage the project on our
behalf. Jody’s eye for detail and process has kept us on track as
the overall planning needed to be met. Therefore I feel we have
achieved the best value for our money and can safely enter the next
stage in the project.

Again, I wish to thank all involved in a process that has been
executed meticulously but (thankfully) fast enough to have our
revamped brand and website in place well before FOSS4G2017 to
immediately benefit from it.

Kind regards,

Marc Vloemans

Mobile +31(0)651 844262

LinkedIn: http://nl.linkedin.com/in/marcvloemans [6]
Twitter: http://twitter.com/marcvloemans [7]
http://www.slideshare.net/marcvloemans [8]


Marketing mailing list
Marketing@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing [1]


Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager, Jirotech,
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009

P +61 2 8099 9000 [2], M +61 419 142 254 [3], W www.jirotech.com [4]
_______________________________________________ Marketing mailing
list Marketing@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing [1]


Cameron Shorter
M +61 419 142 254 [3]


Marketing mailing list
Marketing@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing [1]

Links:

[1] https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing
[2] tel:+61%202%208099%209000
[3] tel:+61%20419%20142%20254
[4] http://www.jirotech.com
[5] http://www.getinteractive.nl/
[6] http://nl.linkedin.com/in/marcvloemans
[7] http://twitter.com/marcvloemans
[8] http://www.slideshare.net/marcvloemans


Marketing mailing list
Marketing@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing


http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Astrid_Emde


Marketing mailing list
Marketing@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing