1 / 29

ASC X12 CHAIR REPORT

ASC X12 CHAIR REPORT. Kendra L. Martin, ASC X12 Chair February 2, 1998. 1000. 848. 842. 838. 800. 782. 728. 600. FY 93. FY 94. FY 95. FY 96. FY 97. X12 Membership Remains Steady. Transportation. Computer. Insurance. 5%. Banking & Financial. 5%. 21%. 6%. Healthcare.

osma
Télécharger la présentation

ASC X12 CHAIR REPORT

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ASC X12 CHAIR REPORT Kendra L. Martin, ASC X12 Chair February 2, 1998

  2. 1000 848 842 838 800 782 728 600 FY 93 FY 94 FY 95 FY 96 FY 97 X12 Membership Remains Steady

  3. Transportation Computer Insurance 5% Banking & Financial 5% 21% 6% Healthcare Service Industry 7% 2% Trade & Nonprofit Software Association 11% 8% Government Manufacturing Consulting 8% Other 13% 9% 5% General Industry TypesComprising X12 Membership

  4. $800,000 $682,900 $624,400 $700,000 $564,000 $600,000 $474,000 $464,000 $424,800 $500,000 $400,000 $300,000 $200,000 $100,000 $0 FY 93 FY 94 FY 95 FY 96 FY 97 FY 98 Projected X12 Publications Net Revenue Grows

  5. 1200 1036 934 930 1000 901 899 875 831 828 800 792 800 600 400 200 0 Feb-95 Jun-95 Oct-95 Feb-96 Jun-96 Oct-96 Feb-97 Jun-97 Oct-97 Feb-98 projected X12 Meeting Attendance

  6. 350 295 300 273 256 232 250 195 200 150 100 50 0 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 X12 Draft Standards for Trial Use Published in Annual Release

  7. 10 Accounting, Auditing, Reg. & Financial Info Serv. Arch., Eng. & Construct. 13 Customs 10 Directory Support Services 7 Finance 41 22 Healthcare Insurance 53 Material Management 13 Product Quality Data 9 Purchasing 27 42 Social Security, Employment & Education Statistics 16 Transportation 54 Travel, Tourism & Leisure 27 Other 6 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 UN/EDIFACT Messages

  8. 800 747 700 639 589 600 501 500 375 400 300 200 100 0 FY 94 FY 95 FY 96 FY 97 FY 98 projected X12 Data MaintenanceRequests Processed

  9. 12000 10,369 10000 8033 7731 8000 Number of Unique Visitors 6000 4000 2000 0 NOV 97 DEC 97 JAN 98 Web Site Activity

  10. KEY 1998 CHALLENGES • Strategic Implementation Task Group • Global EDI Standards • Six-Month Maintenance Cycle

  11. SITG OBJECTIVE Make EDI technology widely available, non-obtrusive to the business process, & cost effective for all organizations METRICS: • Well-defined, consistent standards for interoperability • Off-the-shelf, commercially available tools • Separate standards development from application design & programming • Availability of training & reference solutions, e.g., leverage industry efforts • Automatic generation of EDI interactions • Separation of data definition & format from transport layer

  12. SITG DELIVERABLES • Develop US action plan for implementation of next generation of EDI • Develop framework for and ensure design of architecture to support next generation of EDI • Develop appropriate bridges from current to future state • Ensure there is a single adopted EDI architecture solution for both X12 & international requirements

  13. WHAT WE HAVE DONE • Formed 2/97 • Cleared deck of “history & emotion” • Confirmed that change was required • Organized to begin work • WG 1 Plan Development • WG 2 Education & Awareness • WG 3 Technical Development • WG 4 Customer Requirements & Metrics • Participating in comparable international process • Developed “Reference Guide” • Draft Project Plan

  14. DUAL TRACK • Any way of doing EDI must permit current & new EDI to exist in parallel • Must define a migration path to assist user community in transition • NOT talking alignment • But we are talking “convergence”

  15. WHAT IS OUR VISION? Implement Open-edi • Modeled Approach • Object-Oriented Technology The “Shrink Wrap” Solution

  16. WHY OPEN-EDI? • Opportunity to lower barriers to electronic data exchange by introducing standard business scenarios & services to support them • Permits electronic processing of business transactions among autonomous organizations within & across sectors • Broadens X12’s scope in the Electronic Commerce playing field

  17. BRINGING IT ALL TOGETHER Standards Body for: Business Process Models and Class Libraries Software Providers for: Application Development Expertise WIN - WIN Affordable “Plug and Play” Business Solutions for the User Community

  18. ISSUES FOR X12 • Change will be required • Process • Roles (users, membership, etc.) • Nature of the standards • Acceptance of convergence of all EDI standards • Level of modeling • Rapidity of change • Resource implications • External relationships • Corporate awareness & support • “Co-opetition” & liaison with other organizations • Outreach

  19. SITG & X12 -- NEXT STEPS • Approve the “plan” for the Project Plan • Conduct the analysis • Technical Work • Build pilot for Catalog Order • Create business models • Create business objects • Organizational Work • Define components for standardization • Define organizational structure • Training & education in and out of X12

  20. GLOBAL EDI STANDARDS Shift in Focus from EDIFACT Integration to CEFACT Implementation First Empowered “EDIFACT Work Group” Meeting set for 3/98 DLTG and P&P Enhancing OPM and SD6

  21. 6-MONTH MAINTENANCE CYCLE • Proposal: • 2 publication updates each year • 2 Full X12 Meetings each year (May & Nov.) • - Approve X12 Ballots & Publication Updates • 2 Working X12 Meetings each year (Feb. & Aug.) • - Review/respond to X12 ballot comments • - Optional meetings for Subcommittees

  22. WHY DO THIS? • X12’s focus continues to shift from pure development • to maintenance & implementation. Implications: • Most users don’t need 3 publication cycles/year • Most X12 subgroups don’t need 3 meetings/year • Plus: X12’s current 4-month cycle does not align well with EDIFACT Working Group’s 6-month schedule

  23. HOW WOULD IT WORK? Mid Feb Change Request Cut-Off Early Apr TAS Interim Meeting (Assign Change Requests) Early May FULL X12 MEETING (Ballot Package Determined) Jun 45-day X12 Ballot Period Early Aug X12 Working Meeting (Ballot Comment Response) Sep 30-day Rebuttal Ballot Period or 45-day Reballot Period Early Nov FULL X12 MEETING (Publication Authorized) Jan Annual Release is Published

  24. FULL X12 MEETINGS Who Would Meet? -- Subcommittees Yes -- Steering Comm. Yes -- TAS Yes -- General Session Yes -- PRB Yes DELIVERABLES: Approved X12 Ballot Package (current cycle) Approved publication (previous cycle) WORKING X12 MEETINGS Who Would Meet? -- Subcommittees Optional, except for ballot comment responses -- TAS Yes -- Steering Comm. No -- PRB No -- General Session No DELIVERABLES: Ballot comment responses Rebuttal vs. Reballot decision

  25. ADVANTAGES • Provides flexible meeting frequency options • Reduces # meetings to attend for many people (3 to 2) • Reduces elapsed time to approve a complicated change • Allows better SC participation in maintenance ballot review • Allows better process alignment with EDIFACT • Reduces # sub-releases users have to deal with (2 to 1) • Reduces administrative costs somewhat

  26. DISADVANTAGES • Increases number of meetings for some people (3 to 4) • Increases elapsed time to approve some new transaction sets • Decreases opportunities to publish new standards (3 to 2) • Requires some X12 process change

  27. PATH FORWARD Feb ‘98 Steering Committee decides whether to authorize an X12 member ballot Feb-Jun X12 Member Ballot Jun ‘98 Steering Committee decides when to implement based on positive ballot result Feb ‘99 Earliest potential start-up of new process

  28. THIS WEEK’S AGENDA: • Education on Strategic Implementation Task Group activities • Input into Procedures for EDIFACT Working Group and SD6 • Discussion of Six-Month Publication Cycle Proposal

  29. I welcome your on-going input... martink@api.org Tel: (202) 682-8517 Fax: (202) 963-4730

More Related