Refurbishers List: Definitions, standards, certification, labeling, branding

[John L. German]

Refurbishers List:
Definitions, standards, certification, labeling, branding

Willie Cade's ringing call for action, in his email message of Wednesday November 18, 2009, about:

> untested equipment or equipment on an as is basis

> Can we come up with a uniform good policy

set off a flurry of email responses.

This email message that you are now reading, is to lay out a way forward that, properly designed, implemented, and enforced, would take into account and satisfy the good and valid, and valuable, observations made by all so far and to come.

Thanks to all who have contributed their observations so far, and to those who will going forward.


A way forward

I couldn't agree more with Willie Cade's cri de coeur, that those who provide used equipment that meets defined standards, need to have the value proposition of that properly recognized -- it helps a lot if it's supported by independent third-party certification, labeling, and branding, and by reporting and auditing and delisting authority that has real teeth in it -- and to manage, promote, and protect all that, as diligently, constantly, energetically and effectively as any world major brand manages, promotes, and protects its brand.

Having used equipment go through organizations that meet defined standards by means of policies and procedures, or that put equipment through defined processes, is a popular solution -- for example, ISO certification.

An appropriately designed, implemented, and enforced certification of an organization's policies and procedures, or of processes through which equipment is put, to ensure that the used equipment being provided under the agreed labeling and branding actually meets the defined standards, would go a long way toward meeting the need Willie Cade highlighted in his ringing call for action.

Note that organizations can meet defined standards, by means of policies and procedures, or by putting equipment through defined processes -- what counts for purposes of the agreed labeling and branding, is that the equipment meets the defined standards.

Those who make equipment available that doesn't meet such defined standards, would be able to continue to do so, but not under the defined certification and agreed labeling and branding -- a solution that would seem to meet the needs of, and which should attract the support of, all honest, legitimate providers.

A solution for the above considerations should include:

Levels of defined standards, and agreed labeling and branding for each level -- equipment is being provided, and needs to be able to continue to be provided, at various levels of quality assurance, for good and valid reasons that will continue to be good and valid going forward

Providers that provide more than one level of quality assurance must ensure that the agreed labeling and branding as to level of defined standards met for each piece of equipment is clearly and unambiguously made clear, in order to avoid confusion by anyone concerned -- including donors or other sources, recipient organizations, funders or other resource providers, legal or regulatory authorities, policymakers, as well as fellow providers

Provision must be made to take into account the inevitable changes that will occur, and to be able to adapt to them sensibly based on the principles and ethics to be made explicit at the beginning of the initiative -- standards that cast in stone, current practice in implementing such principles and ethics, are inevitably destined to prove to be not the best idea over time

Enforcement in practice, will be indispensable to the integrity and credibility of the whole initiative, in order for it to mean what we want it to mean for ourselves and others -- delisting of providers who don't live up to or violate the agreed codes of conduct, must be provided for as appropriate, and must be done promptly and publicly, on an ongoing basis going forward

Next steps

It's time to jump-start the process of bringing to fruition, a solution for the above considerations.

Those who are working on the various initiatives highlighted at ICRS 2009 in Miami Beach a few weeks ago, probably either already have, or certainly will have, views -- perhaps strong views -- about how, and institutionally where, such an effort should be initiated, legitimized, organized, informed, moved forward, agreed upon, and where it should be housed as its institutional home upon implementation and thereafter going forward.


Looking forward

Reactions are invited, encouraged, welcome, to any and all aspects of the above.

If anyone needs anything else, about the above or anything else, let me know.

If this email message leads to any useful or interesting results, I'd be interested in hearing about it.


John L. German (a pro bono volunteer)

Director
Non-Profit Computing, Inc. (a nonprofit organization) -- since 1984, an all-volunteer organization best known for arranging computer donations, procurement, and logistics worldwide

Main Representative to the United Nations
Member of the Board of Trustees
People to People International (founded by President Eisenhower) -- includes Committee on Disability

Co-Chair, International Service Division
The Rotary Club of New York

Non-governmental organization (NGO) representative
Technical Subgroup of the Ad Hoc Open-Ended Working Group on Informatics
(informally, the Working Group on Informatics)
Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC)
United Nations

Senior Advisor
United Nations Public-Private Alliance for Rural Development

212-759-2368

Non-Profit Computing is a member of the United Nations Global Compact