17.13 The Standards Process

The process used by Committee T1 is typical of processes used by many standards committees . The process begins with a proposal for a new standard or technical report. This may first require the approval of a new project and possibly a new committee or working group. Project approval authorizes a specific committee to perform certain activities. Contributions (technical papers that may make a proposal or offer pertinent information) are provided to the working group by its members. The working group chairperson may appoint one or more editors to prepare a working document based on the contributions that have gained the working group's agreement and the material developed during the meetings. Most standards committees use a consensus process whereby extensive efforts are made to devise a solution to which all (or nearly all) members can agree to. The consensus process can take longer than a simple voting process where the majority wins. However, the consensus process often generates superior industry support. Also, in-depth consideration of minority opinions can often add value to the end result. When a final-draft proposed standard is ready, it is sent with a voting ballot to all voting members of the committee. Members may vote YES, NO, or ABSTAIN. Members may also attach detailed comments to their ballot response. The committee reviews the ballot comments (regardless of whether the comment was on a YES or NO vote) and attempts to resolve all comments by making revisions to the draft document. If necessary, the revised document is sent out for a second ballot (sometimes called a default ballot). For most committees, the standard is approved when a two- thirds majority of the votes are YES. Upon approval, the document is published. Many committees will review an approved standard five years after its issue. To expedite the issuance of a standard, it may be released with some aspects to be addressed in a future issue of the standard. In this case, work on the Issue 2 standard will begin upon completion of the Issue 1 standard.

In the United States, Section 273 of the Telecommunication Act of 1996 requires Non-Accredited Standards Developments Organizations (NASDOs) to follow rules of due process which assure open and fair operation. Further, U.S. antitrust laws require standard development organizations to avoid anticompetitive behavior. As a result, standard activities must avoid discussion of cost, price, product availability, market allocation, and other topics that might lead to anticompetitive behavior. Most standards development organizations require their members to identify any intellectual property (e.g., patents) that may be necessary for implementation of a proposed standard and to agree to license the intellectual property at fair and nondiscriminatory terms to an unlimited number of parties. This may be interpreted as offering a license to all parties at a cost that does not prevent them from offering products that are truly competitive.

17.13.1 When to Develop a Standard

The success of a standard depends on timing. If work starts too soon, the committee will waste time due to poor requirements and constantly changing technology fundamentals. If work starts too late, much of the market window may be lost or proprietary products may form a de facto standard. Work on a standard may begin while a technology is in the laboratory stage. However, before completion of the standard, it is best to have completed some field trials of prestandard systems to provide the benefit of practical experience learned from operating in the field. The committee leadership must keep a close watch on the interests of the committee members, the marketplace , and technology trends. New projects should be started quickly once several committee members express a strong interest in contributing work to a new project. In the case of ISDN, strong arguments can be made that standards were too late to address the market and too early for maturity of the technology.

17.13.2 Is a Standard Needed?

There is no definitive rule for when to start work on a standard or if a standard should be developed at all. Standards are necessary when equipment from multiple vendors must interwork. In many cases, a standard can help create a market that attracts many competitive suppliers. Often the end- user 's interests drive the need for standards. End-users desire standards to assure service uniformity across many service providers. Network operators desire standards to encourage multiple sources for the systems they will buy. Equipment vendors desire standards to avoid the need to develop many redundant versions of their products. Regulatory and legal developments can create the need for new standards.

Compliance with consensus standards are voluntary. Market dynamics may drive suppliers to comply with the standards or to provide proprietary products for differentiation. A lack of standards can stimulate the introduction of government regulation where noncompliance results in penalties. Even the harshest critic of the standards process will admit that the regulatory process is inflexible and much slower.

So, if a new standard is needed, where will it be developed? Selection of the most suitable committee should be based largely on the expertise of the committee membership and the committee charter. Several committees may have an interest in the new topic. Sometimes certain companies will attempt to place the development of a standard in a committee where they have strong influence. In the event that more than one committee must be involved in the standard's development, it is vital that the committees establish and maintain a cooperative and coordinated relationship. This may be accomplished by one committee having lead responsibility and the other committee(s) providing input in defined areas. Another method is for two committees to jointly develop the standard as peers; this often involves a series of joint meetings. It is essential that conflicts between committees be quickly resolved to avoid an intercommittee war which can waste an enormous amount of time.

In some cases, there is no existing committee with an interest in developing the new standard. The creation of a new committee may be necessary. The creation of a new subcommittee within an existing standards development organization requires the approval of the parent organization and the election or appointment of subcommittee leadership. The creation of a new standards development organization, which is not a subpart of an existing standards development organization, requires a massive administrative effort to begin and also to maintain. Thus, an exhaustive effort should first be made to find a way for the standard to be developed within an existing standards development organization.

17.13.3 Standard or Standards?

Some have suggested that multiple standards for the same item can help stimulate competition. However, the fundamental value of a standard lies in the uniformity it creates. All systems defined to the standard will interwork, and as future enhancements are introduced, there is single base for which compatibility must be maintained . Lively competition is often seen with standardized products (e.g., V.34 modems). A market with multiple standards represents a high-risk venture and may discourage the entry of suppliers and confuse customers. There are some cases where multiple standards are warranted. Different standards may be needed to address different applications (e.g., a low-cost, low-performance consumer grade version, and a higher-cost, higher-performance professional grade version). For political reasons different standards may apply for different areas (for example, different standards for different countries ). International standards bodies such as the ITU-T try to minimize the extent of country-specific standards. In a voluntary standards environment, a company or an alliance of companies can create and publish their own specification. Thus, it is not necessary to produce redundant standards.

Top