|
|
Enron Mail |
Steve,
After the Napa meeting last December, I headed up a working group to look at coordinating EBS issues Internationally. Initially I spoke with most of the people who signed up for the group, and began gathering comments and suggestions for improved coordination. However, much of the need for a working group was reduced for two reasons; first, the addition of Donald Lassere provided a person within our group to focus exclusively on international coordination, and secondly, the Global Public Affairs reorganizations this year solved many of the jurisdictional questions that were highlighted by many in my working group. After the re-org, we saw little reason to continue the working group. The group did serve as a good sounding board for people to comment on communications strategies and better coordination within Government/Public Affairs. Many of these strategies (particularly more relationship building internally) were implemented. Additionally, the experience was a good one simply because it offered an opportunity to better educate other group members on EBS and telecommunications in general. I would not recommend re-forming the group at this time. I think many of the goals the group was initially formed for are actually being achieved now through better organizational structures and closer collaboration between EBS support personnel and International group members. Many of the EBS related topics that deserve a collaborative, cross-functional process are being examined through informal, ad-hoc working groups now. For instance, based on concerns raised at a recent EBS/Government Affairs off-site, we now have an international regulatory/tax/legal working group. This group is comprised of participants from Rick Shapiro's group, Mark Schroeder's group and EBS commercial support organizations. I am a little unclear on what personal feedback you want on group members. Please advise what format I should address this in, since I am not a reviewer for almost anyone who was in my group. Suffice to say, everyone was helpful during the brief time the working group was in effect. But I can give more detail on individuals if you would like. Thanks for the opportunity to lead a working group (even for such a short time!) and please let me know if I can provide any additional information. Best, Scott Steven J Kean@ENRON Sent by: Maureen McVicker@ENRON 11/20/00 08:12 AM To: Jose Bestard/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Scott Bolton/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Hap Boyd/EWC/Enron@Enron, Jeff Brown/NA/Enron@Enron, Ricardo Charvel/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Dawson/Govt. Affairs/LON/ECT@ECT, Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Nicholas O'Day/AP/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Marcia A Linton/NA/Enron@Enron, Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron, Lora Sullivan/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Rubena Buerger/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Tracy Cooper/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Beverley Ashcroft/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: WORKING GROUP PROGRESS Please provide me an update on the progress of the working group you have led this year. There are several things I would like you to cover in this regard. Did the working group function through the year or was it terminated (I recognize there may be good reasons for the latter, but would like to understand those reasons). What did the group accomplish? Would you recommend continuing it? Any changes? Are there other topics we should consider for working groups in the future? Any changes to the working group process itself? Please provide input on the individuals you worked with. You should be able to do this through the PEP system. If you cannot, please provide the feedback by confidential e-mail to me. Because the PRC is coming up soon, please provide the feedback by December 1.
|