Knowledge Management LO29156

From: Mark W. McElroy (
Date: 09/09/02

Replying to LO29151 --

Dear Alan:

Thank you for your clarifications. Very informative. While I can
appreciate the 'user pays' logic of how things happen in Australia, what I
see strikes me as more a case of 'provider exploits.' I can't think of any
circumstances under which a so-called independent producer of standards
should, in fact, be regarded as independent when they personally stand to
gain from the commercial exploitation of their products. I guess I can
only conclude that the process in Australia is not at all independent.

Also, for what it's worth, the obvious conflicts of interest that I speak
of should be made public, front and center, by any organization that
purports to be "independent," especially where standards are concerned.
It should not require this level of digging and inquiry to get to the
bottom of things.

Again, thank you for your comments.



Alan Cotterell wrote:

>Dear Mark, I believe Standards Australia International is relatively
>independent of commercial interest, however the Australian Government
>encourages a 'user pays' approach in its authorities and commissions. Thus
>SAI is expected to return a profit from standards development and
...snip by your host...


"Mark W. McElroy" <>

Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <>

"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.