openEHR Transition Announcement (about regional/national openehr organizations)

[Tony Shannon]

Thanks Pablo

It's great to see the proposals generate these discussions, which was
our intention as these discussions were needed..

Regarding tools, I'm a keen advocate for open source tools and believe
better tools will be key to more widespread use of openEHR..
..but know I you cant get them for free, so if we want more tools we can
share...
-the community needs to agreed a prioritised set of open source tools
-we need to establish how much they will cost
-we need to find ways to channel funds from those who need the tools to
those who are willing to do the work..

regards,

Tony

Dr. Tony Shannon
Consultant in Emergency Medicine, Leeds Teaching Hospitals
Clinical Lead for Informatics,Leeds Teaching Hospitals
Honorary Research Fellow, University College London
+44.789.988 5068tony.shannon at nhs.net


On 07/09/2011 18:49, pablo pazos wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> You mention a big issue: we want to build local archetype and template
> repositories but we don't have the tools to do it in a coordinated way
> with the openEHR CKM.
>
> I think it would be great to have an open & free CKM to start with, and
> a common generic API to connect our local CKMs to regional CKMs and
> regional CKMs to the global CKM in a controlled way (in this scenario
> the versioning of artefacts is a big issue and I think it is not solved
> at the tool level yet).
>
> AFAIK the to install the global CKM we have to buy some licenses.
>
> --
> Kind regards,
> Ing. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez
> LinkedIn: http://uy.linkedin.com/in/pablopazosgutierrez
> Blog: http://informatica-medica.blogspot.com/
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/ppazos<http://twitter.com/ppazos>
>
>  > Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 17:47:09 +0100
>  > From: rmhidxi at live.ucl.ac.uk
>  > To: openehr-clinical at openehr.org; Martin.Severs at port.ac.uk
>  > Subject: Re: openEHR Transition Announcement (about regional/national
> openehr organizations)
>  >
>  > Just to say, I think it would be great to support the excellent efforts
>  > represented in this discussion, to work towards locally governed
>  > repositories of archetypes/templates, evolving synergistically in the
>  > sort of way being outlined. There is an important parallel with
>  > requirements for governance of terminology.
>  >
>  > I tried very hard to align openEHR within the IHTSDO governance
>  > framework for combining local and global initiative for this sort of
>  > entity, but failed in this because the politics was too hard, as we
>  > reported at the time. IHTSDO seemed, and to me still seems to have the
>  > greatest chance of achieving useful progress towards effective standards
>  > and governance for clinical content, and openEHR should stay as close as
>  > possible to them in this, I believe. There are many clinical and
>  > professional issues still to be explored and resolved as to how
>  > terminology and archetypes should best coexist within such a framework.
>  > There are also licensing issues and realistically the licensing of
>  > archetypes for use in patient care at different levels will have to be
>  > acceptable to those groups responsible for ethico-legal standards that
>  > regulate the clinical professions, and, more immediately, for control of
>  > the licensing of international terminologies. Thus archetype/template
>  > licensing was always bound to be a very thorny and politicised issue for
>  > openEHR and, as a board charged with protecting the openEHR IP for the
>  > ultimate good of the healthcare community, we had to hear arguments from
>  > both within and outside the Foundation in deciding how we should hold
>  > the position. In truth, no one really knows how this issue will play out
>  > and we have to remain flexible in our policy, as we have said. I have
>  > been involved in working groups at a national level on reform of
>  > copyright law, where the kind of argument that is put forward within
>  > openEHR lists is advocated for publication more widely, with similar
>  > push back from interests dependent on controlling completely legitimate
>  > special interests. For what it's worth, I personally am in favour of
>  > society moving towards minimally restrictive licensing of knowledge
>  > artefacts, such as archetypes and terminologies, consistent with good
>  > order. I recognise that the many different perspectives in play about
>  > the underlying issues mean there will be fierce debate and honest
>  > disagreement about what that means and how it can be achieved. 'Twas
>  > ever thus!
>  >
>  > One of the huge difficulties I have observed over the past few years or
>  > so has been the

openEHR Transition Announcement (about regional/national openehr organizations)

[pablo pazos]

Hi Ian,

> So, my question back, is
> 
> "What sort of support would you like to see, given that significant
> central resourcing is not likely in the short term?"
> 

I think we (local/regional organizations working with and on openEHR) need 
formal support from the openEHR fundation.

One basic form of support is to recognize the local/regional openEHR 
organizatons as such.
Other is to recognize our contributions to the community, like mentioning our 
work on presentations, publications and other public communications (I think a 
public communications strategy should be traced by openEHR foundation).

If we think of money, there are ways of money support without giving real 
money: we need software tools (archetype & template editors), we need access to 
events far away, we need books, educational resources, etc, etc.

The foundation should draw yearly general goals, to the openEHR project as a 
whole, and to the local/regional representatives. And should follow and 
coordinate the work and evaluate the results. Those goals could be technical, 
educational, communicational, among other kinds.


Here is a related thread with some other ideas: 
http://www.openehr.org/mailarchives/openehr-implementers/msg00889.html


What do you think?


Regards,
Pablo.
  
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

openEHR Transition Announcement (about regional/national openehr organizations)

[Erik Sundvall]

Hi!

On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 08:38, Ian McNicoll
 wrote:
> So, my question back, is
> "What sort of support would you like to see, given that significant
> central resourcing is not likely in the short term?"
[...]
> Would it be sufficient for the Foundation to give 'official status' to
> regional affiliates e.g. openEHR Japan, or are there other practical
> suggestions as to how best to support regional affiliates?

I would guess that an 'official status' recognition and thus links in
online (and some offline) information resources would be a major
thing, more imoportant than funding, especially if this also allowed
the regional organisation to arrange "official" openEHR
gatherings/conferences etc. It would be reasonable if the local
organisation could keep money left over from such (possibly partly
commercially sponsored) gatherings/conferences.

Of course it would be reasonable if the foundation had some
requirements on official local organisations, like having:
- open membership
- statutes matching regional democratic traditions and the openEHR
goals (internal governance rules or whatever the swedish word
"stadgar" should be translated to)
- proper accounting and audit
- a duty to have a dialogue with the central openEHR foundation
regarding plans involving using the openEHR tradmark for events etc
- ...probably more...

For local organisations I think bottom up comunity driven governance
with elected boards etc is the only way to go, not top-down.

Best regards,
Erik Sundvall
erik.sundvall at liu.se http://www.imt.liu.se/~erisu/? Tel: +46-13-286733

openEHR Transition Announcement (about regional/national openehr organizations)

[Ian McNicoll]

Thanks Erik,

These feel like very sound proposals, in particular the focus on
bottom-up local development.

Pablo, Shinji - would Erik's suggestions be the kind of support that
you would hope to have?

Ian

Dr Ian McNicoll
office +44 (0)1536 414 994
fax +44 (0)1536 516317
mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859
skype ianmcnicoll
ian.mcnicoll at oceaninformatics.com

Clinical Modelling Consultant,?Ocean Informatics, UK
openEHR Clinical Knowledge Editor www.openehr.org/knowledge
Honorary Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL
BCS Primary Health Care ?www.phcsg.org




On 7 September 2011 08:31, Erik Sundvall  wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 08:38, Ian McNicoll
>  wrote:
>> So, my question back, is
>> "What sort of support would you like to see, given that significant
>> central resourcing is not likely in the short term?"
> [...]
>> Would it be sufficient for the Foundation to give 'official status' to
>> regional affiliates e.g. openEHR Japan, or are there other practical
>> suggestions as to how best to support regional affiliates?
>
> I would guess that an 'official status' recognition and thus links in
> online (and some offline) information resources would be a major
> thing, more imoportant than funding, especially if this also allowed
> the regional organisation to arrange "official" openEHR
> gatherings/conferences etc. It would be reasonable if the local
> organisation could keep money left over from such (possibly partly
> commercially sponsored) gatherings/conferences.
>
> Of course it would be reasonable if the foundation had some
> requirements on official local organisations, like having:
> - open membership
> - statutes matching regional democratic traditions and the openEHR
> goals (internal governance rules or whatever the swedish word
> "stadgar" should be translated to)
> - proper accounting and audit
> - a duty to have a dialogue with the central openEHR foundation
> regarding plans involving using the openEHR tradmark for events etc
> - ...probably more...
>
> For local organisations I think bottom up comunity driven governance
> with elected boards etc is the only way to go, not top-down.
>
> Best regards,
> Erik Sundvall
> erik.sundvall at liu.se http://www.imt.liu.se/~erisu/? Tel: +46-13-286733
>
> ___
> openEHR-clinical mailing list
> openEHR-clinical at openehr.org
> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical
>

openEHR Transition Announcement (about regional/national openehr organizations)

[Ian McNicoll]

Thanks Pablo,

I am aware of the very excellent work being done around the world,
often with insufficient publicity and I too think that regional
support should be added to the White Paper but we should discuss
further what sort of top-down assistance might be realistic to achieve
in the short-term.

We all hope that the suggested changes lead to more resources becoming
available  but it would be difficult to assume that this will be the
case, given that membership and access to Foundation materials will
continue to be free of charge.

So, my question back, is

"What sort of support would you like to see, given that significant
central resourcing is not likely in the short term?"

I know Thomas has some ideas about ramping up the software repository
and I am very keen on the idea of a non-CKM archetype/ template
'nursery' (more elsewhere) and I could imagine that one or both might
be useful at regional level.

Would it be sufficient for the Foundation to give 'official status' to
regional affiliates e.g. openEHR Japan, or are there other practical
suggestions as to how best to support regional affiliates?

Ian

Dr Ian McNicoll
office +44 (0)1536 414 994
fax +44 (0)1536 516317

mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859
skype ianmcnicoll
ian.mcnicoll at oceaninformatics.com

Clinical Modelling Consultant,?Ocean Informatics, UK
openEHR Clinical Knowledge Editor www.openehr.org/knowledge
Honorary Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL
BCS Primary Health Care ?www.phcsg.org




On 6 September 2011 16:38, pablo pazos  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Not so long ago we have discussed about a governance and organization model
> to the openEHR community, and we have talked about regional/national openEHR
> communities
> (http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/oecom/Foundation+Organisational+Structure).
> I can't find this mentioned in the whitepaper.
>
> I think if we want to have a global impact on the ehr scene, we need to
> support those communities also, and define ways to coordinate the work of
> the community as a whole.
>
> What do you think?
>
> --
> Kind regards,
> Ing. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez
> LinkedIn: http://uy.linkedin.com/in/pablopazosgutierrez
> Blog: http://informatica-medica.blogspot.com/
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/ppazos
>
> 
> Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2011 02:00:45 +0100
> From: thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com
> To: openehr-announce at openehr.org
> Subject: [openEHR-announce] openEHR Transition Announcement
>
>
> Dear All,
>
> I am writing on behalf of the new Transitional Board of openEHR to share our
> plans to take openEHR to a new level of operations; a new structure,
> business model and governance. Our vision is the creation of a thriving
> community that works collaboratively to benefit humanity through efficient
> and effective electronic health records (EHRs) that support the highest
> quality health care for the least effort.
>
> Until now, the openEHR Foundation has functioned as an owner of intellectual
> property, governed by University College London and Ocean Informatics, with
> board members Prof David Ingram (UCL), Prof Dipak Kalra (UCL) and Dr Sam
> Heard (Ocean).
>
> With the support of the considerable community of Members and via engagement
> of a new category of sponsoring organisational Member known as ?Associates?
> - Companies, Universities and Governments - the Transitional Board proposes
> a number of changes:
>
> The openEHR Foundation becomes an operational non-profit organisation with
> paid key staff and resources;
> The Board (of governance) of the Foundation is extended to up to 10 people
> with a shift to election by the openEHR Associates;
> Members who participate are recognised by their peers, may take on
> decision-making roles, and have the right to commit changes to the key
> development assets of the Foundation.
>
> The Members will participate individually and, through qualification by peer
> recognition, will control the development within the three Programmes that
> are building the key assets:
>
> The openEHR specifications of the logical health record and attendant
> services as well as the methods for describing the content using archetypes
> (Detailed Clinical Models) and templates; and
> The openEHR archetypes and templates to be used within systems and for
> message content between systems to achieve interoperability; and
> The openEHR software projects, to provide open source development of tools
> to support the uptake and use of the specifications and templates.
>
> A group of Members will be needed to bootstrap each of these programmes and
> determine the working arrangements that are suitable to the products that
> they are managing at the current stage of development.
>
> The Associates will determine who governs the Foundation by nominating and
> voting on new members of the Board. The Board will appoint key Operational
> staff and will approve the leader of each of the Programmes. The Programme
> Leaders will be appointed by Qualified Member

openEHR Transition Announcement (about regional/national openehr organizations)

[Sam Heard]

Hi Pablo

It needs to be added.

Thanks Sam

Sent from my phone

On 07/09/2011, at 1:38 AM, pablo pazos  wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Not so long ago we have discussed about a governance and organization model 
> to the openEHR community, and we have talked about regional/national openEHR 
> communities 
> (http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/oecom/Foundation+Organisational+Structure).
>  I can't find this mentioned in the whitepaper.
> 
> I think if we want to have a global impact on the ehr scene, we need to 
> support those communities also, and define ways to coordinate the work of the 
> community as a whole.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> -- 
> Kind regards,
> Ing. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez
> LinkedIn: http://uy.linkedin.com/in/pablopazosgutierrez
> Blog: http://informatica-medica.blogspot.com/
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/ppazos
> 
> Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2011 02:00:45 +0100
> From: thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com
> To: openehr-announce at openehr.org
> Subject: [openEHR-announce] openEHR Transition Announcement
> 
> 
> Dear All,
> 
> I am writing on behalf of the new Transitional Board of openEHR to share our 
> plans to take openEHR to a new level of operations; a new structure, business 
> model and governance. Our vision is the creation of a thriving community that 
> works collaboratively to benefit humanity through efficient and effective 
> electronic health records (EHRs) that support the highest quality health care 
> for the least effort.   
> Until now, the openEHR Foundation has functioned as an owner of intellectual 
> property, governed by University College London and Ocean Informatics, with 
> board members Prof David Ingram (UCL), Prof Dipak Kalra (UCL) and Dr Sam 
> Heard (Ocean).
> 
> 
> With the support of the considerable community of Members and via engagement 
> of a new category of sponsoring organisational Member known as ?Associates? - 
> Companies, Universities and Governments - the Transitional Board proposes a 
> number of changes:
> 
> The openEHR Foundation becomes an operational non-profit organisation with 
> paid key staff and resources;
> The Board (of governance) of the Foundation is extended to up to 10 people 
> with a shift to election by the openEHR Associates;
> Members who participate are recognised by their peers, may take on 
> decision-making roles, and have the right to commit changes to the key 
> development assets of the Foundation.
> The Members will participate individually and, through qualification by peer 
> recognition, will control the development within the three Programmes that 
> are building the key assets: 
> The openEHR specifications of the logical health record and attendant 
> services as well as the methods for describing the content using archetypes 
> (Detailed Clinical Models) and templates; and
> The openEHR archetypes and templates to be used within systems and for 
> message content between systems to achieve interoperability; and
> The openEHR software projects, to provide open source development of tools to 
> support the uptake and use of the specifications and templates.
> A group of Members will be needed to bootstrap each of these programmes and 
> determine the working arrangements that are suitable to the products that 
> they are managing at the current stage of development.
> 
> The Associates will determine who governs the Foundation by nominating and 
> voting on new members of the Board. The Board will appoint key Operational 
> staff and will approve the leader of each of the Programmes. The Programme 
> Leaders will be appointed by Qualified Members working in that Programme, 
> subject to Board approval. We believe this will create the right balance 
> between the ?ground up? creation of openEHR through participation of Members 
> and ?top down? governance.
> 
> The first step is to share with you a white paper providing more detail on 
> the proposals and to ensure that the Members are reasonably satisfied that 
> this is the right direction to head. 
> Some key activities have been proceeding in the background and are reaching a 
> point of maturity. It has taken us some time to gather more clinical 
> champions in this endeavour and companies that can use and work with the 
> tools in their early stages of development. It has also taken quite some time 
> for Thomas Beale to work out how to provide a seamless pathway between 
> definition of archetypes, specialisation of archetypes to ensure development  
>scalability, to meet jurisdictional requirements, and templates that 
> allow tailoring for actual use in specific settings. The result is ADL/AOM 
> 1.5. He has, as usual, been totally committed to this work and it is probably 
> very important for me to say, it is ?no mean feat?.
> 
> There is a lot to do. Most important are:
> 
> Begin to showcase development teams and software using openEHR successfully 
> in clinical settings;
> Finalise ADL/AOM 1.5, including   its succinct XML expression, and 
> inte

openEHR Transition Announcement (about regional/national openehr organizations)

[pablo pazos]

Great, please let me know if I can help.

-- 
Kind regards,
Ing. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez
LinkedIn: http://uy.linkedin.com/in/pablopazosgutierrez
Blog: http://informatica-medica.blogspot.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/ppazos

Subject: Re: openEHR Transition Announcement (about regional/national openehr   
organizations)
From: sam.he...@oceaninformatics.com
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 07:15:26 +1000
To: openehr-technical at openehr.org

Hi Pablo
It needs to be added.
Thanks Sam

Sent from my phone
On 07/09/2011, at 1:38 AM, pablo pazos  wrote:


Hi,

Not so long ago we have discussed about a governance and organization model to 
the openEHR community, and we have talked about regional/national openEHR 
communities 
(http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/oecom/Foundation+Organisational+Structure).
 I can't find this mentioned in the whitepaper.

I think if we want to have a global impact on the ehr scene, we need to support 
those communities also, and define ways to coordinate the work of the community 
as a whole.

What do you think?

-- 
Kind regards,
Ing. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez
LinkedIn: http://uy.linkedin.com/in/pablopazosgutierrez
Blog: http://informatica-medica.blogspot.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/ppazos

Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2011 02:00:45 +0100
From: thomas.be...@oceaninformatics.com
To: openehr-announce at openehr.org
Subject: [openEHR-announce] openEHR Transition Announcement


  




  
  


Dear All,



I am writing on behalf of the new
  Transitional Board of openEHR
  to
  share our plans to take openEHR
  to a
  new level of operations; a new structure, business model and
  governance. Our
  vision is the creation of a thriving community that works
  collaboratively to
  benefit humanity through efficient and effective electronic health
  records
  (EHRs) that support the highest quality health care for the least
  effort.  



Until now, the openEHR Foundation has functioned as an owner of
intellectual property,
governed by University College London and Ocean Informatics,
with board members
Prof David Ingram (UCL), Prof Dipak Kalra (UCL) and Dr Sam Heard
(Ocean).



With the support of the
considerable
community of Members and via engagement of a new category of
sponsoring organisational
Member known as ?Associates? - Companies, Universities and
Governments - the Transitional
Board proposes a number of changes:

  
The openEHR Foundation becomes an operational
  non-profit organisation
  with paid key staff and resources;
  
The
  Board (of governance) of
  the Foundation is extended to up to 10 people with a shift to
  election by the openEHR
  Associates;
  
Members
  who participate are
  recognised by their peers, may take on decision-making roles,
  and have the
  right to commit changes to the key development assets of the
  Foundation.

The Members will participate individually
and, through qualification by peer recognition, will control the
development within
the three Programmes that are building the key assets:



  The openEHR specifications of the logical health
  record and attendant
  services as well as the methods for describing the content
  using archetypes
  (Detailed Clinical Models) and templates; and
  The openEHR archetypes and templates to be used within
  systems and for
  message content between systems to achieve interoperability;
  and
  The openEHR software projects, to provide open source
  development of tools
  to support the uptake and use of the specifications and
  templates.

A group of Members will be needed to
bootstrap each of these programmes and determine the working
arrangements that
are suitable to the products that they are managing at the
current stage of
development.

  

The Associates will determine who governs
  the Foundation by nominating and voting on new members of the
  Board. The Board
  will appoint key Operational staff and will approve the leader of
  each of the Programmes.
  The Programme Leaders will be appointed by Qualified Members
  working in that
  Programme, subject to Board approval. We believe this will create
  the right
  balance between the ?ground up? creation of openEHR
  through participation of Members and ?top down? governance.



The first step is to share with you a white
  paper providing more detail on the proposals and to ensure that
  the Members are
  reasonably satisfied that this is the right direction to head. 

Some key activities have
   

openEHR Transition Announcement (about regional/national openehr organizations)

[pablo pazos]

Hi,

Not so long ago we have discussed about a governance and organization model to 
the openEHR community, and we have talked about regional/national openEHR 
communities 
(http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/oecom/Foundation+Organisational+Structure).
 I can't find this mentioned in the whitepaper.

I think if we want to have a global impact on the ehr scene, we need to support 
those communities also, and define ways to coordinate the work of the community 
as a whole.

What do you think?

-- 
Kind regards,
Ing. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez
LinkedIn: http://uy.linkedin.com/in/pablopazosgutierrez
Blog: http://informatica-medica.blogspot.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/ppazos

Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2011 02:00:45 +0100
From: thomas.be...@oceaninformatics.com
To: openehr-announce at openehr.org
Subject: [openEHR-announce] openEHR Transition Announcement


  




  
  


Dear All,



I am writing on behalf of the new
  Transitional Board of openEHR
  to
  share our plans to take openEHR
  to a
  new level of operations; a new structure, business model and
  governance. Our
  vision is the creation of a thriving community that works
  collaboratively to
  benefit humanity through efficient and effective electronic health
  records
  (EHRs) that support the highest quality health care for the least
  effort.  


Until now, the openEHR Foundation has functioned as an owner of
intellectual property,
governed by University College London and Ocean Informatics,
with board members
Prof David Ingram (UCL), Prof Dipak Kalra (UCL) and Dr Sam Heard
(Ocean).


With the support of the
considerable
community of Members and via engagement of a new category of
sponsoring organisational
Member known as ?Associates? - Companies, Universities and
Governments - the Transitional
Board proposes a number of changes:

  
The openEHR Foundation becomes an operational
  non-profit organisation
  with paid key staff and resources;
  
The
  Board (of governance) of
  the Foundation is extended to up to 10 people with a shift to
  election by the openEHR
  Associates;
  
Members
  who participate are
  recognised by their peers, may take on decision-making roles,
  and have the
  right to commit changes to the key development assets of the
  Foundation.

The Members will participate individually
and, through qualification by peer recognition, will control the
development within
the three Programmes that are building the key assets:


  The openEHR specifications of the logical health
  record and attendant
  services as well as the methods for describing the content
  using archetypes
  (Detailed Clinical Models) and templates; and
  The openEHR archetypes and templates to be used within
  systems and for
  message content between systems to achieve interoperability;
  and
  The openEHR software projects, to provide open source
  development of tools
  to support the uptake and use of the specifications and
  templates.

A group of Members will be needed to
bootstrap each of these programmes and determine the working
arrangements that
are suitable to the products that they are managing at the
current stage of
development.

  
The Associates will determine who governs
  the Foundation by nominating and voting on new members of the
  Board. The Board
  will appoint key Operational staff and will approve the leader of
  each of the Programmes.
  The Programme Leaders will be appointed by Qualified Members
  working in that
  Programme, subject to Board approval. We believe this will create
  the right
  balance between the ?ground up? creation of openEHR
  through participation of Members and ?top down? governance.



The first step is to share with you a white
  paper providing more detail on the proposals and to ensure that
  the Members are
  reasonably satisfied that this is the right direction to head. 

Some key activities have
been proceeding in
the background and are reaching a point of maturity. It has
taken us some time
to gather more clinical champions in this endeavour and
companies that can use
and work with the tools in their early stages of development. It
has also taken
quite some time for Thomas Beale to work out how to provide a
seamless pathway
between definition of archetypes, specialisation of archetypes
to ensure development
scalability, to meet jurisdictional requirements