OMA IOP Survey - November 2005


Please complete the following questions to help the OMA Board Interoperability sub-commitee understand progress made in fulfilling the Interoperability objectives, as well as help the group plan for improvements going forward. Required fields are marked in Bold.

GENERAL QUESTIONS
1a. Member Category	1b. Member Class
2a. My company participates in BOD-IOP: Yes No	2b. I personally participate in BOD-IOP: Yes No
3a. My company participates in the IOP-WG: Yes No	3b. I personally participate in the IOP-WG: Yes No
4. My company has participated in one or more TestFests: Yes No
All (optional) identification and contact information supplied will be maintained confidential to the OMA staff.
5. What is your Name? (Optional)
If we may contact you regarding your comments, please provide either of:
6. your email address (Optional)
7. or, your phone number (Optional)	(+ )	-
	country-code	area-code	number

EVALUATION OF THE INTEROPERABILITY PROCESS:
With regard to the Interoperability Process as currently defined, please can you answer the following questions
	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied Nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied	Not Applicable	No Comment
8. On the outcome of the new IOP Process approved in San Diego, are you:
9. On the Effectiveness and Efficiency of the IOP Process, are you:
10. On the usefulness of the current Quarterly Electronic Enabler Poll, are you:
11. On the Quality of the Test Specifications, are you:
12. On the Timeliness of the IOP Specifications, are you:
13. On the Effectiveness of the IOP Working Group, are you:
14. On the Support by the OMA Board for Interoperability, are you:
15. On the adaptability of the Interoperability Program to change, are you:

16. What aspects of Interoperability do you think the Interoperability Program should focus on? (Check all that apply):	Get Products Ready for Market	Test OMA Specs for Completeness	Check OMA Specs for Bugs	Prove capabilities of Products	Promote Market Acceptance of Specs	Don't Know	No Comment
17. Do you have any General Comments on the Interoperability Process?

TESTFESTS IN GENERAL
With regard to the TestFests as currently operated, please can you how satisfied you are with the following statements, even if your company has not participated in any of the TestFests.
	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied Nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied	Not Applicable	No Comment
18. The TestFests offer "good value for money":
19. The TestFests have protected my company's confidential information:
20. The TestFests have provided sufficient Enabler coverage:
21. The Test Specification offer good coverage of each Enabler:
22. The TestFests have been well organized and implemented:

23. The number of TestFests per year should be:

Increased
to 9 or 10

Increased
to 7 or 8

Stay the same
at 5 or 6

Decreased
to 3 or 4

Decreased
to 1 or 2

Not
Applicable

No
Comment

24. Do you have any General Comments on the TestFests?

TESTFESTS IN DETAIL:
Please can you answer the following specific questions about the organization and your participation in the TestFests.
25. When do you think your company will participate in a Test Fest:	Already Participating	0 to 3 Months	3 to 6 Months	6 to 12 Months	More than 12 Months	Never	Don't Know	No Comment
26. Is the provision of W-CDMA/UMTS Essential for your company to participate in a TestFest:	Essential	Important	Nice to Have	Not Needed	Don't Know	No Comment
27. Is the provision of GSM/GPRS Essential for your company to participate in a TestFest:	Essential	Important	Nice to Have	Not Needed	Don't Know	No Comment
28. Is the provision of CDMA Essential for your company to participate in a TestFest:	Essential	Important	Nice to Have	Not Needed	Don't Know	No Comment
29. Would it increase your participation in TestFests if Client teams could test more than one Enabler:	Increase	Stay the Same	Decrease	Don't Know	No Comment
30. Do you think the testing at TestFests should be more or less formal:	More Formal	Stay the Same	Less Formal	Don't Know	No Comment
31. What do you see as the optimum time between test sessions for an Enabler at a TestFest, assuming regular changes of location and air interfaces, etc.:	1 to 2 Months	3 to 4 Months	5 to 6 Months	More than 6 Months	Don't Know	No Comment
32. Which new Enablers should OMA start offering at TestFests in 2006?
33. What should OMA do to improve the TestFests?

OMA COMMUNICATION PROCESS:
Please can you indicate how satisfied you are with the communications, you have received regarding the Interoperability Process and its implementation.
	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied Nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied	Not Applicable	No Comment
34. Visibility of the overall Interoperability Process:
35. Completeness/ Openness of the Test Results:
36. Value of the Test Results to your company:
37. The coverage of the questions in the IOP Enabler in meeting your company's needs:
38. Publication of the IOP Enabler Poll Results:
39. OMA's public messages on Interoperability:
40. OMA's relationships to other Bodies/Fora:
41. Do you have any General Comments on Interoperability Communications?

CONFORMANCE TEST TOOLS:
With regard to the Open Source initiative for the SCTS Tool, and the recent license of new Conformance Test Tools for MMS and IMPS, please can you answer the following general questions:
42. How satisfied are you with the outcome of the project to make SCTS Open Source?:	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied Nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied	Not Applicable	No Comment
43. How satisfied are you with OMA's direction of developing or licensing additional conformance tools for the new enablers being approved:	Very Satisfied	Satisfied	Neither Satisfied Nor Dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Very Dissatisfied	Not Applicable	No Comment
44. Do you have any general comments on OMA Test Tool Strategy?

INTEROPERABILITY PROMISE ACHIEVEMENTS:

With regard to the Interoperability Promise:

Ensure OMA service enabler specifications provide interoperability across different devices, geographies, service providers, operators , and networks ; facilitate interoperability of the resulting product implementations.

please can you answer the following general questions:

45. On Overall Progress toward the Interoperability Promise, are you:

Very Satisfied

Satisfied

Neither Satisfied Nor Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very Dissatisfied

Not Applicable

No Comment

46. What has OMA done well?
47. What could OMA do better?
48. Do you have any General Comments on Progress? (Input Required, Please)

Thank you for your time to complete this survey. Your individual responses will be held in confidence and reviewed by the OMA Board Interoperability sub-committee only. Summary results will be made available to all members.