Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
PAS 00098 โ Standards Consortia Formation, Management and Suitability Assessment Standard Series (PAS 98)
Standards Consortia โ Formation and Management, and Suitability Assessment (Good Practice Guide, 2011 Edition)
๐ PAS 98 is a Publicly Available Specification (PAS) published by the British Standards Institution (BSI), developed by a group of experts with considerable experience in consortium working, to provide good-practice guidance for Standards Consortia โ an increasingly important form of standards development. This batch collects the 2011 two-part edition: Part I (PAS 98 Part I) is the formation and management good practice guide, and Part II (PAS 98 Part II) is the suitability assessment good practice guide.
๐ก Consortia play a growing role in standards development, but the nature of their formation and management can sometimes give rise to misunderstanding among observers about their objectives. PAS 98 is designed precisely to clarify these questions and provide actionable guidance for consortium establishment and governance.
1. Series Overview and Positioning ๐
PAS 98 was first published in October 2011 (BSI PAS 98:2011), targeting organisations that wish to establish or join a standards consortium, and those needing to assess whether a consortium is the right route to resolve a business/technical problem. The series is split into two parts serving two different decision stages: “establishment and management” and “whether it is suitable”.
This batch contains the following two parts:
| Document | Subject | Edition | Core content |
|---|---|---|---|
| PAS 98 Part I:2011 | Standards consortia โ Formation and management good practice guide | 2011 | Consortium nature, strategic planning, management options, constitution, governance, IPR policy and output processes |
| PAS 98 Part II:2011 | Standards consortia โ Suitability assessment good practice guide | 2011 | Judging whether a business problem suits a consortium, selecting a consortium, sustainability and defensibility assessment |
โ ๏ธ Part I addresses “how to establish and manage a consortium”; Part II addresses “whether to establish/join one”. The two are sequential steps in the decision chain: first assess suitability (Part II), then implement establishment and management (Part I).
2. Consortium Nature, Establishment and Strategic Planning (Part I) ๐ง
Part I first clarifies what a standards consortium is, where and when one can be established, its purpose, and gives strategic planning and management options:
- Consortium definition: a body of several organisations collaborating to develop standards, typically active in emerging or cross-cutting technical fields that formal standards bodies cannot cover quickly.
- Strategic planning: define consortium objectives, scope and expected outputs, and plan resource input and exit mechanisms.
- Management options: choose a suitable consortium management structure balancing member interests and decision efficiency.
2.1 Constitution and Governance
The document further specifies the consortium’s Constitution and Governance:
- Membership policies and models: determine membership eligibility, member types (e.g. full/observer/sponsor) and factors influencing membership composition.
- Participation and intellectual property (IPR) policy: clarify member participation and IPR disposal rules to avoid patent and copyright disputes.
- Management structure: set up leadership, working groups and voting mechanisms, with by-laws and voting rules.
- Openness and output availability: balance the consortium’s degree of openness with the accessibility of its outputs (standard documents).
A sound constitution and governance are the institutional basis of a consortium’s credibility and sustainability.
3. Suitability Assessment (Part II) ๐
Part II helps organisations judge whether their business/technical problem can be resolved through consortium participation, and provides a systematic assessment framework:
- Problem definition: judge whether the organisation’s problem can use “standards” as the answer.
- Route selection: compare a consortium with other standards-provision routes and judge whether a consortium is the most effective.
- Sustainability and defensibility: assess whether participation is sustainable and can be defended to stakeholders (management, regulators, members).
- Consortium selection: considering membership composition, openness, track record and influence, select a suitable consortium.
Annex A provides a Consortium Checklist for decision-makers to verify item by item during assessment; Annex B lists relevant resources. The framework helps organisations avoid blind participation, resource mismatch and later passivity.
๐ก Usage advice: first complete the “whether to participate” suitability assessment with Part II, then implement “how to establish and manage” with Part I. Used together, they turn consortium participation from opportunistic behaviour into evidence-based strategic decision-making.
4. Engineering Practice Points โ๏ธ
- ๐ Strategic fit: before joining, assess the fit between consortium objectives and your own strategy, avoiding participation for its own sake.
- ๐ง IPR management: review the consortium IPR policy before joining, clarifying ownership and licensing of background and foreground intellectual property.
- ๐ Resource budgeting: define the personnel, funding and time input to the consortium and match it with expected benefits.
- ๐ Governance participation: actively take working-group or voting roles in the consortium to ensure influence and output quality.
5. Frequently Asked Questions โ
โ Q: How do standards consortia differ from formal standards bodies (e.g. ISO, CEN)?
A: A consortium rapidly develops standards through collaboration of several organisations, often in emerging fields formal bodies cannot cover quickly; formal bodies follow open, consensus-based, balanced procedures. The two can complement each other, and consortium outputs are sometimes adopted by formal bodies.
A: A consortium rapidly develops standards through collaboration of several organisations, often in emerging fields formal bodies cannot cover quickly; formal bodies follow open, consensus-based, balanced procedures. The two can complement each other, and consortium outputs are sometimes adopted by formal bodies.
โ Q: Is every problem suitable for a consortium?
A: No. Part II requires first judging whether the problem can use standards and whether a consortium is the most effective route, and assessing sustainability and defensibility, avoiding inefficient or passive participation.
A: No. Part II requires first judging whether the problem can use standards and whether a consortium is the most effective route, and assessing sustainability and defensibility, avoiding inefficient or passive participation.
โ Q: Why is the IPR policy critical?
A: Member-contributed technology often contains patents and copyrights. A clear IPR policy defines members’ rights and licensing obligations over outputs (including background and foreground IP), preventing disputes and legal risk.
A: Member-contributed technology often contains patents and copyrights. A clear IPR policy defines members’ rights and licensing obligations over outputs (including background and foreground IP), preventing disputes and legal risk.
๐ Q: How should the two parts be used together?
A: First use Part II for suitability assessment to decide “whether to participate”; then use Part I to guide “how to establish and manage”. Together they form the complete decision chain.
A: First use Part II for suitability assessment to decide “whether to participate”; then use Part I to guide “how to establish and manage”. Together they form the complete decision chain.