Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 17:30:40 -0400
From: Aaron Price <aaronp
	<20060412173327.GA26450
Cc: 

> Here is our parameter space:

 Thanks. It really helps to determine what we can do to have such details. I like it, 
with a few caveats:

> 	Education is defined as:
> 		get into  variable stars
> 		  without overlapping with work already being done by others 
> 		  (but  building on the
> 		  work of others and collaborating with others in encouraged)

 I see now. That's not the definition of education I was thinking of. I thought it meant 
more formal education, but I see the emphasis is more on getting more people involved in 
the AAVSO. I'd call that marketing, but its a matter of semantics so I won't belabor the 
point. :)

> tractable. You don't start a company with the goal of earning a  
> million dollars and then devise the product/service you're going to  

 Heh. You just defined the role of venture capital. :) Every company I've worked for is 
described by that statement. 

> retail. Instead, you come up with a product or service and project  
> what is a reasonable profit expectation. Our product will be the  
 
 There is no single way to develop a business. But the most traditional model is to 
define a market first and *then* develop a product to fit the market.  The first thing 
you do in a business plan is define an underserved market. We haven't discussed what 
astronomy education NEEDS. We've only discussed what the AAVSO has to offer. To me that's 
putting the cart before the horse and I'd be hesitant to support any project that doesn't 
know who and what it is serving. 

 Without direction we may create some awesome materials and have no one use it: case in 
point, HOA.  HOA is some of the best written curriculum I've read. But the AAVSO did not 
understand the market for it, so they packaged and sold it in a "if we build it, they 
will come" manner.  As a result 8 years later we still have hundreds sitting on our 
shelves and it's utilization is far below its potential.

 So all I'm saying is that if we want to minimize our risk, a thorough discussion of what 
the community needs should come before beginning projects and defining our model. 

 This, to me, is a logical flowchart for successfull project implementation, with an 
estimated amount of time needed in parenthesis:

  1. Needs analysis research and discussion (2 months)
  2. Find one or more areas where the needs intersect with our goals (1 month)
  3. Design a project to meet the need(s)/goal(s) (1 month)
  4. Implement project (5 months)
  5. Assess results (1 month)

 That would give the council some hard returns by the Calgary meeting. Ideally someone 
will be in charge of each phase, with the committee chair (John) overseeing everything.  
I'm happy to do #1 if we adopt something along this route.

 These are just my suggestions and that's all. I'm more than happy to follow other 
methodology also. I'd like to hear other people's ideas and comments. 


Aaron
_______________________________________________