Executive Committee of the American Institute of Physics
Minutes of Meeting
1. Convene – Roll Call
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 a.m. by Chairman Frauenfelder in Conference Room F at the AIP Woodbury office.
Members Present
Hans Frauenfelder, Chairman of AIP
Robert T. Beyer
Peter B. Boyce
Roderick M. Grant, Secretary
William W. Havens, Jr.
H. William Koch, Executive Director
David Lazarus
Edward N. Sickafus
F. Dow Smith
Jack M. Wilson
Non-voting Participants:
William L. Duax (ACA) (end of meeting)
A. F. Spilhaus, Jr. (AGU)
Guests
Kenneth W. Ford, Executive Director-Elect
Sid Gudes (Productivity Improvement Enterprises)
AIP Staff
Gerald F. Gilbert, Treasurer
Robert H. Marks, Director of Publishing
Lewis Slack, Director of Educational Programs
Bernard Dolowich, Controller
Lawrence T. Merrill, Assistant to the Director
Nathalie D. Wagner, Assistant to the Secretary
For clarity in presentation with reference to the printed agenda, events recorded here are not necessarily in the same chronological order in which they occurred.
2. Secretary's Report
Grant aid there were no minutes to be offered for approval at this meeting.
3. Report on Space Issues
Havens commented on the Landauer report, which had been sent to members of the Executive Committee and Governing Board prior to this meeting. The report makes clear that the decision as to what to do on long range space needs is not governed by economic factors. It is also clear that we cannot continue to do what we are now doing, namely renting space as needs develop. We need to make a decision and to follow through this year.
Koch thought no decisions could be made now. The idea is to stimulate discussion in the Governing Board.
Frauenfelder proposed forming a large ad hoc committee, to report by September. Appointments will made by the conclusion of the Governing Board meeting. He suggested one representative from each Society, to be chosen from among the Governing Board representatives, and two from AIP.
Frauenfelder proposed the following list [subsequently approved at Governing Board meeting]:
| APS: | Havens |
| ASA: | Beyer |
| AAPT: | Holcomb |
| AAS: | Landolt |
| AVS: | Murday |
| AIP: | Ford, Gilbert, Frauenfelder, ex officio. |
| OSA: | Smith |
| SOR: | Wissbrun |
| ACA: | Duax |
| AAPM: | Purdy |
| AGU: | Walt |
Frauenfelder proposed Havens or Ramsey as possible chairpersons for the committee. Havens said he should not be chairman as the APS is a large society and it might appear as if they were trying to influence the committee. Frauenfelder said he would talk with Ramsey [Subsequently, Ramsey declined, and when the committee met during the Governing Board meeting, Ford agreed to serve as the chairperson.]
As it is very difficult to get this many people together for a meeting, a replacement will be allowed, with full proxy powers, if a designated member cannot attend a meeting.
4. Status of AIP's Data General Subscription Fulfillment System
Koch noted the following information which had been sent by express mail to the Executive Committee: 1) 20 March 1987 memo to the Executive Committee from AIP Management, and 2) Report on Options Regarding Inhouse Completion of the Dues and Subscription Fulfillment System by Productivity Improvement Enterprises. (These are included herein as Appendices A and B.)
The report from Productivity Improvement Enterprises, Sidney Gudes:
Gudes said he had wanted to do a quantitative study in preparing this report, but this was impossible in the time available, so he drew upon his previous experiences. He reviewed the options as he saw them:
1) Terminate AZTECH's involvement after obtaining program corrections and some support (about a year's work). This would still give AIP the benefit of AZTECH's knowledge of these remaining complex programs.
2) Terminate AZTECH's involvement at the end of the 90-day warranty periods for which we have already paid. This would entail AIP's hiring two temporary programmers and a considerable learning curve on the part of all AIP staff.
Gudes noted that AZTECH has not met the delivery dates and has not delivered products to specification; on the other hand, the AIP staff is overloaded and to have them take over would take time. In addition, AZTECH has experience with the project, and he is reluctant to make a judgment as to which option would be best. There is a margin of safety in having AZTECH continue to be involved. In response to a question he stated that AZTECH's programmers are not better nor worse than others he has seen, including AIP's.
Sickafus asked Gudes to comment on the long-term stability and the possibility of keeping the project going if taken over by AIP.
Gudes said if the code is adequately documented it would not be a problem. However, the AZTECH-produced code he has seen from early 1986 is not well documented.
Havens noted that no system is static and that AIP staff will have to handle this eventually.
Gudes agreed that in the long term there must be in-house knowledge. It is not cost-effective to involve AZTECH over the long run. He is now addressing the question of completing the system as soon as possible. One of the reasons the staff is overloaded is that the programmers are maintaining the UNIVAC system and working on the new software as well. Resources can be reallocated once the UNIVAC is turned off.
The report from AIP management recommends the following:
1) Acquire the MV7800 computer as soon as possible, as recommended by Gudes.
2) Request AZTECH to complete the programs under our present contract.
3) Negotiate with AZTECH for the remaining work, with an upper limit of $100,000.
4) Have AIP staff assume responsibility for the support, operation, and maintenance of the system as rapidly as possible during the next year.
Dolowich reviewed the completed programs delivered by AZTECH which are currently in use. Among the unfinished work are several critical modules (Journal Select, Renewal Billing, and Renewal Ageing) about which AZTECH staff know much more than AIP staff; there would be additional delays if these were brought in house now. He thinks the new system will be operational by January if AZTECH does this work. The demands on the AIP staff are heavy, and it is a question of finishing it in an orderly way . He had thought that with the 90-day warranty it would be finished, but he could not have predicted the problems with the modules they delivered.
Frauenfelder asked about the second computer which is contemplated. Will it speed up things?
Dolowich said the purpose of the MV7800, which has been approved, is to take Accounting off the Data General. Data General recently has announced an MV15000 which is more powerful. This could accommodate the accounting functions. No decision has yet been made on whether to recommend this, as it has not been evaluated. He does not yet have all the particulars nor the price on the MV15000.
Frauenfelder said if we decide the subscription fulfillment project is to be done in house, we have to know about the cost of the computer, as it will be critical for the programs.
Sickafus said he would like to get an idea of what the proposed AZTECH payment of $100,000 would buy AIP.
Dolowich said it would be about 250 man days, at their Time and Materials rate, less 10%. It would buy more days at AIP, but their level of expertise is a factor in the picture.
Frauenfelder asked Ford for his opinion. Ford asked Gudes if the goal of getting a working system by the end of 1987 was a realistic one.
Gudes said the probability is that staying with AZTECH would be the better choice if time is the main concern, but there is no guarantee that they will meet any particular target date.
Ford said that Management would naturally appreciate the greatest flexibility. If the Executive Committee authorizes spending for AZTECH, then it could be reviewed in the coming weeks to consider whether such spending is actually the best plan of action.
Sickafus said it is not clear what the pressures of time are.
Dolowich noted the UNIVAC situation. The programs under development cannot be handled by the UNIVAC. The sooner we get rid of it the better; the maintenance is $50,000 per year, higher than on our Data General.
Havens said the APS has been holding off on projects, waiting for the new system. There is pressure on his office for movement.
Dolowich said the delay in the decision creates havoc; it would be helpful to have a decision. Money goes down the drain in a limbo situation. He does not think AZTECH is blackmailing AIP. He is of course disappointed that the $101,500 did not conclude the system, but they have continued working until the conclusion of the 90-day warranty. Their labor costs have also increased. Dolowich said he could negotiate for much less than $100,000, and if Selectron were pulled it would be even less. He was asking for an outside number to be disbursed as needed.
Frauenfelder said he sees three possibilities:
1) Terminate involvement after one year.
2) Terminate involvement now.
3) Give AIP management the option by allocating money.
Havens noted that AIP would have to gear up its staff. He thinks we should state that we want to be independent of AZTECH in one year. If AIP has to hire additional staff, they should do it. Havens then made the following motion, which was seconded by Beyer and CARRIED, with six in favor, one opposed and one abstention.
MOVED that AIP Management take steps to achieve the objective to be free of involvement with AZTECH as soon as possible.
Lazarus then made the following motion, which was seconded by Sickafus, and was DEFEATED on a tie vote, four in favor and four opposed. There was extensive discussion on the motion, as reported below.
MOVED that the Executive Committee allocate an additional $100,000 in funds to be used at the discretion of AIP management for completion of the Dues and Subscription Fulfillment system.
In response to Boyce's question, Gudes said with the current method of testing, each compile of the program take a long time; this is bogging down the system. With an additional computer dedicated to development, it would be significantly faster. He has worked on the MV8000, and found that a given compile took two hours during the day versus 15 minutes in off hours.
Smith stated that he thinks management is the place to resolve the issue of equipment; they should be given the resources to resolve it. We need a dramatic change in direction toward solving the problem; he hopes this has been communicated to management.
Frauenfelder noted that the smaller computer had been approved. If a bigger one is needed, would they come back to the Executive Committee?
Grant clarified that the budget estimate was for $40-50,000 additional for new equipment. This covers the MV7800. Dolowich clarified by stating that this may not be the entire cost; he would get the estimates for a subsequent meeting.
Wilson said he was opposed to the motion. He feels Ford needs to be given flexibility, but this only gives him flexibility to spend $100,000. We have already approved equipment. Every year we come to reasonable reasons for appropriating additional funds. In the aggregate, this is too much.
Grant said he would be opposed to the motion. If approved, we would be putting money down a black hole with no guarantee of getting anything in return.
Lazarus said the intent was to permit Ford, after consideration, to have some discretion. It was not intended to encourage spending.
Sickafus said he thinks by bringing it in house we would be shooting ourselves in the foot. There are two factors: cost and timing. The cost is obvious. With open ended timing, if brought in house the timing is shifted to AIP. He asked if we are putting enough in to get an operating system this year.
Dolowich said bringing it in house would increase the time for completion. It is a dilemma; he would hate for AIP to have to rewrite the incomplete programs.
The vote was taken at this point, as recorded following the motion.
Frauenfelder said that Ford will have to look at this seriously in the next two weeks. We will decide whether to call a special meeting after firm information is compiled. Ford said he would try to get information to the Executive Committee by May l.
5. Review of Governing Board Agenda - Financial Handling Charge
The only item requiring review by the Executive Committee was that of the financial handling charge. Gilbert read, from the Constitution, the action that is required on this matter. The Executive Committee must make a recommendation to the Governing Board.
Wilson made the following motion 1 which was seconded by Lazarus and unanimously CARRIED.
MOVED that the Executive Committee recommend to the Governing Board that the financial handling charge for 1988 be fixed at five-eighths of one percent of business done on behalf of Member Societies.
6. Report on Faxon Company Collections
Gilbert reviewed the record of the payment of F. W. Faxon Co.'s 1987 renewal subscriptions. He had asked them for a financial arrangement of 6% interest in 70 days which we have received.
7. Report on Letter to IEE and Report on Copyright
Koch said this will be discussed at the Governing Board meeting. No response has yet been received from the IEE. He will propose to Ford that Losty (IEE) confirm receipt of his letter to him and that he request a time period for reply. If they then do not answer he would suggest a harder position, to be developed with our copyright attorney.
8. Financial Statements
Gilbert said the financial statements will be distributed to the Governing Board. 1986 was a banner year 1 with a net revenue of $3.5 million. The net income from operations was $880,000. Net investment income was $2.6 million.
8. Executive Session
AIP staff were excused for the executive session at 8:45 a.m. This is reported in the official minutes only.
9. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 9:14 a.m.