Tag Archives: strategy

UCISA bursary winner presents at Lean in Higher Education conference

Marion Malcolm
Business Improvement Team Lead
University of Aberdeen

Australasian Lean HE Conference 2017, Macquarie University, NSW, Australia

Marion Malcolm was funded to attend this event as a 2017 UCISA bursary winner

The aim of my presentation, ‘Lean Training to Lean Projects’ (2.56MB) at the Australasian Lean HE Conference was to show why Business Improvement teams need to change their model of working during organisational change to ensure that they continue to deliver good lean practice in a relevant way. The Business Improvement (BI) Team at the University of Aberdeen in its initial stages were involved in a significant number of initiatives across the organisation. However, as the university entered a period of restructuring, it experienced a change in people’s availability and motivation to be involved in non-strategic initiatives.

The presentation summarised how the BI team at University of Aberdeen has used Lean training to train and support project teams on strategic programmes as well as kick-start other business improvement initiatives. As part of the presentation, I highlighted case studies to show the journey from the training to the project development and implementation e.g. Student Recruitment and Admissions (SRAS) have undertaken reviews of their key processes and have made changes:

  • to enhance the enquirer/applicant experience
  • to achieve better integration with other sections in the university (reducing duplication etc.)
  • to consolidate IT systems when various systems were used previously, allowing for much better planning and reporting, amongst other benefits.

Delegates’ feedback was that they found the practical examples in the session helpful and came away with some useful ideas on how to train across their organisations, and how to make Lean stick.

A wide variety of interesting and useful speaker talks from the conference are available here.

I had a key set of conference objectives to meet in attending the conference, and came away with some key learning from the event. I will be blogging further about my intended next steps following what I learnt at the conference.

Interested in finding out more about a UCISA bursary, then visit UCISA Bursary Scheme.

PPM, business operating systems and business strategy execution

Hina Taank
Programme and Projects Officer
Brunel University

Gartner Program and Portfolio Summit 2017 – Workshop

Hina Taank was funded to attend this event as a 2017 UCISA bursary winner

This blog post refers to my personal views and the learning that I experienced from attending the Program and Portfolio Summit 2017.

Track: Transformation Gets Real: Executing Against Strategy
How Business Operating Systems Can Guide PPM Leaders to Manage Business Strategy Execution (Advanced) by Marc Kerremans

This session was targeted towards Business leaders and PMOs. Marc spoke of his practical experiences of working with business operating systems and building a strategy around them.   Interestingly, Marc delivered the presentation using a navigator as a concept and the audience were the stakeholders.

There were some key takeaway points around planning and execution and Marc talked about ‘Required Practice’1He also addressed three terms:

  • Term A. ‘Visibility’2 – my understanding is that this refers to what is going on in the organisation and that there is visibility of information and whether benefits are being realised around methodology.
  • Term B. ‘Accountability3 – my opinion is that the person who is responsible is getting the things done and is accountable for it.
  • Finally, Term C. ‘Adaptability’4 – my view of adaptability is that we need to understand what is happening around the organisation and then manage the work priorities accordingly.

I will be blogging on specific Summit sessions such as this one, but information on some of the other keynotes and events can be found here.

Full details on the presentation contents or how to contact the analysts can be obtained from Gartner, Inc directly.

Disclaimer:

Gartner does not endorse any vendor, product or service depicted in its research publications, and does not advise technology users to select only those vendors with the highest ratings or other designation. Gartner research publications consist of the opinions of Gartner’s research organization and should not be construed as statements of fact. Gartner disclaims all warranties, expressed or implied, with respect to this research, including any warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.

References 1, 2, 3, 4:

Kerremans, M, (2017, p. 7), Gartner Program and Portfolio Management Summit 2017, Presentation: How Business Operating Systems can Guide PPM Leaders to Manage Business Strategy Execution (Advanced), Gartner, 12-13 June 2017

Interested in applying for a UCISA bursary? Then visit UCISA Bursary Scheme.

PPM in the digital age at Gartner’s Program and Portfolio Management Summit


Hina Taank
Programme and Projects Officer
Brunel University

 

Gartner Program and Portfolio Management Summit 2017 – Setting the scene

Hina Taank was funded to attend this event as a 2017 UCISA bursary winner

This blog post refers to my personal views and the learning that I experienced from attending the Program and Portfolio Management Summit 2017. The conference was titled ‘Driving Innovation at the Speed of Business’ and the agenda primarily focused on ‘Results-driven [Project Portfolio Management] PPM: Leading Change and Delivering Value in the Digital Age’. The attendees were from all business sectors both nationally and globally. I was surprised by the scale and the 106 sessions that were offered. These were based around four theme tracks: ‘Transformation Gets Real’, ‘Agile Business Impacts’, ‘The Changing Program & Portfolio Management Ecosystem’ and ‘Empowering People’, together with vendor run or assisted sessions. Throughout the event, I shared information with the community on #GartnerPPM, @UCISA, @bruneluni, @HinaTaank  and @UCISA_PCMG

I am grateful to Universities and Colleges Information Systems Association (UCISA) having successfully won and was awarded a bursary through their bursary scheme to attend the event. I am also grateful to Brunel University London and the Information Services for allowing me the time to attend the conference.

I had always wanted to attend a Gartner event as it is one of the world’s leading research and advisory companies. The event allowed me to learn about the trends around the Program Portfolio Management (PPM) space, together with lots of tips and actions on how I can make a difference in my job.  I am therefore grateful to Gartner for organising this event for like-minded people to learn and network.

 

 

 

 

 

I will be blogging on specific sessions, but some of the useful events outside the keynotes and workshops were as follows:

Orientation session for first-time attendees: how to get the most out of your conference attendance

Andrea White started the event for first timers to a Gartner event and briefed the group on how to make the most of the two days. Help was available via a helpdesk, appointments could be made to meet Gartner Analysts and the most useful was the Gartner Events Navigator. The Navigator app was widely used as it provided real-time information on all the sessions, (even those cancelled or replaced), session attendees, speakers and exhibitors. It also provided an area with personal agenda, notes and highlighted the exclusive sessions primarily for C-suit attendees.

Networking lunch

Over lunch, I really enjoyed networking with people with similar issues and problems, nationally and globally. It almost felt like a speed meeting.

Evening networking reception hosted by the showcase suppliers

The evening reception was hosted by the showcase suppliers and they did a grand job by providing a variety of food and drinks. I was treated to some lovely vegetarian food by one of the vendors. Importantly, it allowed me to further network and speak with the showcase suppliers and the attendees at the event. The key exhibitors were CA technologies, Changepoint, Clarizen, Microsoft and Planview.

Closing remarks

A really good and informative wrap round summary of the two days was provided by Donna Fitzgerald. She mentioned all the key messages that were addressed at the conference.  The artwork during many sessions by Axelle Vanquaille was absolutely fabulous, as she visually captured what the speakers relayed, for example, in the keynote ‘Trusting the Ensemble’ by the British conductor and music director, Charles Hazelwood. (This will be covered further in a future blog).

 

 

 

 

 

(Image by Axelle Vanquaille)

My two days sailed by. The Gartner team did an excellent job in the planning and running of this event, allowing all attendees to take away some action points.  Gartner provided a ‘save the date for 2018’  for the next event which I have added to my diary.   A truly valuable and thought-provoking event and one that I would not like to miss in the future.

Full details on presentation contents or how to contact the analysts can be obtained from Gartner, Inc directly.

Disclaimer:

Gartner does not endorse any vendor, product or service depicted in its research publications, and does not advise technology users to select only those vendors with the highest ratings or other designation. Gartner research publications consist of the opinions of Gartner’s research organization and should not be construed as statements of fact. Gartner disclaims all warranties, expressed or implied, with respect to this research, including any warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.

References:

Gartner Program and Portfolio Management Summit 2017, Presentation: Orientation Session for First-Time Attendees: How to Get the Most Out of Your Conference Attendance, Andrea White, Gartner, 12 – 13 June 2017

Gartner Program and Portfolio Management Summit 2017, Presentation: Closing Remarks, Donna Fitzgerald, 12-13 June 2017

Gartner Program and Portfolio Management Summit 2017, Presentation: Trusting the Ensemble, Charles Hazelwood, British conductor and music director

 Interested in finding out more about a UCISA bursary, then visit UCISA Bursary Scheme.

Perpetual Honeymoon: How to build the (almost) perfect business collaboration

Tim Banks
Faculty IT Manager
University of Leeds

I have just attended a really interesting session delivered by Bill Hogue, Director of IT (CIO) at South Carolina University. He started by telling us that in 2014, he received a phone call from the Vice Chancellor (President) of the University with news of a new initiative, partnering with IBM for delivery of some of the core University IT services. His exact words were “It’s a great opportunity and I know you’ll be excited by it”

Bill has been seeking new model for IT delivery at University of South Carolina since 2004 and was convinced that the future of IT was going to be about partnerships, not least because the world of IT was changing so fast and the staff and students at the University now had access to world-class IT services at commodity items in their everyday lives. On January 1st 2015, the University of South Carolina entered into a 10-year partnership valued at an estimated $100m dollars. The actual contract value is less than this figure, but Bill is sure that more opportunities to work with IBM will present themselves over the contract period. He summarised the whole 15 month contract negotiation period and the first 10 months of the partnership into two basic principles:

  1. Know yourself
  2. Know your collaborator

He also sounded a note of caution which was an idea commonly attributed to Peter Drucker, namely “Culture eats strategic planning for lunch”. In other words, no matter how much strategic planning you do, if you don’t have a grip on your organisational culture and haven’t prepared your organisation for change, then your strategy will fail.

http://www.strategy-business.com/blog/Strategy-or-Culture-Which-Is-More-Important

Assumptions

Bill then went on to list five assumptions about IT in Higher Education, as follows:

1: ‘Keeping the lights on’ is necessary but not sufficient on its own to deliver world class IT service. The important thing is how we serve the University and how we serve the Faculties. He told of the Director of Facilities at a University where he had previously worked who had a sign on the back of his door which he saw every time he left his office which read: “What have you done for the students today?” We should always remember why do we do what we do at the University.

2: Most of us are not receiving A+ grades from the staff and students at our institutions for our delivery of production services. It might be OK, but we are not doing a terrific job.

3: Our grades will get worse unless we do something different. Our expectations in IT are driven by consumer IT services; the challenge is only going to get harder. Currently there are 13 billion devices on the internet and this number is growing daily.

4: Running world class IT services is not a core competency of the University. The focus is teaching, learning, research and partnerships and we tend to be just ‘OK’ at delivering IT.

5: Most of us are in the early stages of transformation programs that promises to be disruptive. The IBM Institute for Business Value said in a recent report: “Demands on and in University IT Services continue to rise […] Both academic and industry leaders believe the current HE system is broken. We need a more practical and applied curriculum to exploit disruptive technologies and develop more partnerships.”

The Deal

Seventy three positions were transitioned from the University being the employer to IBM (without the individuals changing location / office etc.) Bill spoke about the need to handle this process very carefully and to ensure that all the University senior managers, including HR are on board with the process. The contract is mainly centred on delivery of Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems, as this is where it was felt that IBM could deliver the best value.

A brand new Centre for Applied Analytics and Innovation is being built. This will house IBM experts in this field alongside University researchers. There were many similarities with the recently launched Leeds Institute for Data Analytics (LIDA) http://www.lida.leeds.ac.uk  at my own University of Leeds.

There are also plans to launch several apprenticeships with both staff and students working closely with IBM to develop new skills at the leading (or possibly bleeding) edge of IT development. A key factor in the partnership is the University’s access to IBM’s Watson technology, which IBM describe as ‘Cognitive Computing Systems that understand natural language’. http://www.ibm.com/smarterplanet/us/en/ibmwatson/

One of Watson’s main benefits is undertaking large scale real-time data analytics to identify ways to improve operational efficiency in finance, purchasing, facilities management etc. If the University of South Carolina is able to save just 1% on its annual $1.5bn budget, then that is a lot of money that can be reinvested in core business. This also opens up new areas of research opportunity for both staff and students to work with the Watson technology.

Bill then went on to expand on his two core principles, as follows:

Know yourself

  • Why are we doing this?
  • We can’t assume that we have a unified agendas. He could think of at least a dozen potentially competing agenda for wanting to develop a partnership such as the one with IBM that include:

o    Economic development
o    The Leader’s Legacy
o    Getting free stuff from the partner
o    Wanting to improve services
o    The need to save money
o    Minimising or spreading risk associated with IT delivery

  • IT will continue to develop over time
  • It takes a firm commitment from the senior management at the University

o   Partnerships such as this can and most probably will be very disruptive
o   Needs total support from senior leadership team (Finance, HR, Student Education, VC, ProVCs etc.)

  • You need a comms strategy to manage the message that stakeholders are receiving
  • You need to be understanding towards affected employees. You can’t turn you back on staff who have worked at the University for many years and think of them as ‘IBM’s problem’

Things that can go wrong

  • Deals don’t always work out – you need an exit strategy
  • You need to get good at negotiating terms with the private sector with people who do this all day long for IBM
  • You need to recruit new ‘talent’ including people who love to read contracts
  • You are dealing with an organisation that is in this to make a profit and they will do this at your expense if they can get away with it.
  • That’s not a bad thing so long as you manage to negotiate fair terms and the University gets what it wants out of the deal too
  • There will always be ‘cave people’ who are always against everything. Be prepared for scrutiny and criticism.
  • Be prepared for inconvenient truths. You may find some things out about your organisation, staff and even yourself when your partner takes a long hard look at your with their world-class perspective. You may find out that some of your operations are not as world-class as you would like to believe.
  • Some of your customers will resist the new business model

o    Your customer base has to change as well. That can be a hard sell
o    They may not be interested in engaging in new processes “The old ones were just fine thank-you very much.”

  • The timing of introducing a change like this will never be right. You have to accept that it will be inconvenient and disruptive.
  • You must remember to have some fun, be creative and sustain a spirit of adventure.

o    Remember to keep talking about the 10-year strategy, not the 10 day problems.

Know your collaborator

  • They are not a 501C3 (US speak for non-profit organisation)
  • Understand their culture. The University is not going to go corporate and your partner is not going to become an academic institution. You must find your common ground.
  • Your collaborator will bring their very best people “the A-team” to the negotiating table. You have to be aware that the actual delivery may be by the B-team or the C-team. IBM has 435,000 employees worldwide. Not all of them are in the A-team. Make sure you retain the right quality of delivery once the contract has been signed.
  • Who are the champions? What are their strategies? You must understand their agenda.
  • Be prepared to receive help from a lot of different sources (not all of which will be helpful).
  • You need to be prepared to stay the course.

It was a fascinating account of a very ambitious project. I couldn’t help but think that we need to increasingly take a lead from organisations such as the University of South Carolina. There are of course challenges, technical, human and cultural but we shouldn’t let these alone prevent us from taking brave decisions to do the right thing for the future of IT in our institutions of learning and research.

Post-conference reflections from a bursary award winner

Allister-Homes-Profile-pic---small

 

 

Allister Homes
Senior Systems Architect
University of Lincoln

Gartner EA Summit – a week on

It’s been a week since I got back from the Gartner EA Summit in London, so I thought I would provide some reflections on the event. These are purely my opinions, and other people may well have a different take. If you’d like to see more of the detail of the event, have a look at my previous two posts (day 1 and day 2).

I think the focus was on larger organisations, and there was often an unvoiced assumption that there were significant numbers of architects and developers within the organisation (compared with what a typical university would have). It wasn’t unusual for suggestions to be made along the lines of ‘when you get back, why not assemble a small team of 5 people to go and investigate X, Y and Z’; having the capacity to do that sort of thing at short-notice sounds like quite a luxury.

Like many large conferences the non-keynote sessions were categorised into tracks, and at this summit they were A: Delivering Business Outcomes, B: Leveraging and Leading Practices in EA and C: Architecting the Digital Business. Rather than stick to a particular track I moved between them, going to the sessions that sounded most relevant to my work, organisation and sector. Sessions that were in the same stream contained common threads, as you would expect, and – in a couple of cases – some repetition.

I think directly applying what I learnt to day-to-day EA in HE will be more challenging than I initially thought it would be. This is because many of the sessions I attended were future-based (what changes to consider in the coming years) and either very strategic or focussed on large-scale IT development approaches (such as changing paradigms to one of micro-services and web-scale IT). It’s not an event that I would suggest attending every year, but would perhaps provide a useful background of EA direction every two or three years.

Being candid, the networking was not as useful as I had hoped. Conversations seemed to be mostly between people who already knew each other, which of course is only natural for any of us. I tried starting conversations with a number of attendees during breaks, but found that although everyone would give succinct answers to opening questions along the lines of where they were from, what they thought of the previous session, and so on, I couldn’t get a conversation going. I thought perhaps it was just me for a while, but then noticed the same thing happening to other people making such attempts too (which was something of a relief!).

As I mentioned, I selected the sessions that sounded most relevant rather than what sounded most intriguing or interesting from a personal rather than professional point of view – e.g. I went to ‘Business-Outcome-Driven Application Strategy’ rather than ‘Smart Machine Disruptions Will Dominate This Decade’, which ran at the same time. In hindsight the more extravagant sounding sessions may have contained relevant information too and perhaps provided some alternative ways of thinking about things.

The above may sound a little negative but that’s not my intention. It was an interesting and useful conference to attend, and I’m just trying to provide an honest and balanced opinion. I think the main topics and take-away points, based on the sessions I attended, in no particular order, were:

  • The Internet of Things (IoT) will become more important and will need more consideration, including by considering Things in the business domain, not just information systems or infrastructure domains. Also, computing everywhere is becoming the norm, but try to think people first rather than mobile devices.
  • Organisations need to operate in the digital world and interact digitally. Expect significant changes over the next 5-10 years, not just small increments – things you cannot yet imagine.
  • Large-scale application architecture is shifting towards an app and service approach, and a more extreme approach to Service Oriented Architecture (SOA). For new-style web-scale IT (but not enterprise scale core systems so far) there is a shift away from large systems and databases, including moving away from 3NF.
  • Software defined applications and infrastructure should be expected for networks, security, and other core elements to replace less flexible and less responsive infrastructure.
  • Business architecture is a critical element of EA (but we all know this already, don’t we?)
  • Attention needs to be paid to enabling technology to respond to business moments. It is often impossible to predict these business moments, so the approach must be to architect for agility instead.
  • Use the wisdom of the crowd: consider taking advantage of opportunities to crowd source solutions to problems, whether in the business or information systems domains.
  • Make good use of models, roadmaps, stories and personas to engage people, explore with them and explain to them. Use the right tools and techniques for the people in question.
  • Cloud offerings are becoming more complex, so architects need to understand what vendors are really offering, not just the fog and hype. Reasons for moving to cloud are not just cost (and in fact there is often no cost saving) – instead the drivers tend to be technology agility, business agility, offloading responsibilities, and advantages of security and scale. Most organisations are likely to use a hybrid of cloud services.

 

UCISA has an Enterprise Architecture community of practice which may be of interest.

Enterprise Architecture Trends and Strategies

Allister-Homes-Profile-pic---small

 

 

Allister Homes
Senior Systems Architect
University of Lincoln

Gartner EA Summit Day 2

I’ll take the same approach as the blog post for day 1, summarising the sessions I attended.

Top 10 strategic technology trends for 2015

top 10

I thought this session brought together some of yesterday’s themes quite nicely – I’m not sure if that’s how it was intended or whether it was a coincidence (or even just my interpretation), but that’s how it came across to me.

First of all the presenter explained the traits that the Vanguard Enterprise Architect – Gartner’s term for the architect of tomorrow – will need to have:

  • Futurist, trend spotter
  • Business visionary
  • Technology analyst
  • Strategist (social connector)
  • Educator, communicator
  • Vendor watcher
  • Leader, collaborator
  • Evangelist, catalyst
  • Salesman

We were told that if you see trends in a spectrum, the enterprise architect should consider adopting trends, and how they can help the organisation, during their growth phase – after the emerging phase (when disruption is uncertain) and before they become mainstream (when the disruption is happening or has happened).

The top strategic trends Gartner identified as being of greatest important to EA over the coming years are:

  • Merging Real World and Virtual World
    • 1 – Computing everywhere (think mobile people instead of mobile devices)
    • 2 – Internet of Things
    • 3 – 3D printing
  • Intelligence everywhere
    • 4 – Advanced, pervasive and invisible analytics
    • 5 – Context-rich systems
    • 6 – Smart machines
  • New IT reality emerges
    • 7 – Cloud/client computing
    • 8 – Software-defined application and infrastructure
    • 9 – Web-scale IT (our IT world will look more like Google)
    • 10 – Risk-based security and self-protection

Business outcome driven application strategy
The focus of this session was bimodal application strategies, particularly the use of mode 2. Most IT departments are generally seen as good at identifying savings and efficiencies that an organisation can make, but not necessarily as good at supporting new revenue opportunities and taking advantage of new opportunities. Organisations need to take advantage of business moments – that is, opportunities that arise suddenly and are transient – and if the IT department is not good at responding to those opportunities with the business then they will become marginalised and bypassed. We heard how business moments are human-centric, transient, ad-hoc and blur the physical and digital boundaries. The difficulty for enterprise architects is that it is hard to plan the target state for these business moments when we have no idea what the state will look like until the transient opportunity arises. Instead, we have to design the architecture to be able to respond to opportunities rapidly as they arise.

In bimodal IT, mode 1 is the more traditional way of doing things, is consistent, has steady governance controls and does things ‘the right way’; mode 2 on the other hand has no simple path, is flexible and adaptive. Mode 3 looks more chaotic but it doesn’t have to be. Mode 1 might use a waterfall methodology (but might use Agile) whereas mode 2 can only succeed with Agile methodologies.

It was suggested that when starting out with a bimodal approach, we should first pick a specific project or projects to experiment with. Use agile approaches, devops, create an innovation lab and use small vendors. Then, as competence with mode 2 and a more unstructured world grows, mode 2 can start to be applied in more situations. There are significant differences in characteristics between mode 1 and mode 2 approaches, including funding arrangements, which are less predictable but can be less risky with mode 2. In an Agile project it will be known much earlier whether a project is likely to fail than would be the case in a waterfall project (called failing fast), and much less of the budget would have been spent, meaning the financial risk can be lower. Organisations will probably always have some mode 1, but a bimodal approach will start to displace it to some extent.

This session was presented by the same person who presented Application Architecture for Digital Business yesterday, and the information about app and service style application architecture from that session was repeated in this one. It was suggested that the likes of Nginx and in-memory computing are used for scale and performance. There was also a comment that, for integration, don’t assume the ESB is centre of universe. It is still good for core systems, but gateways (e.g. with APIs) can be faster and easier for mode 2 applications.

Orchestrating Ideation: Creating Breakthrough Innovation Opportunities
The ‘nuts and bolts to drive innovation’ were presented in this session, which concentrated on thoughts for an innovation pipeline. Innovation in many large businesses used to be driven by a small group, perhaps a dedicated Research and Development team. Businesses need to, and are, changing this approach now, partly because it is increasingly possible for someone with a good idea to simply go out and build it with tools at their disposal (cloud-based services in the case of IT tools) without the involvement of specialist teams in the organisation and without any kind of governance or approval. The change of approach needs to move from the likes of R&D teams to the wisdom and diversity of the crowd, and from managing innovation to orchestrating, engaging and motivating the right set of people and guiding them through an innovation pipeline.

Gartner has come up with a way of categorising problems according to their nature and applying different methods to crowd-source solutions depending on that categorisation.

pic 2

Problems can be categorised as complicated (e.g. putting a man on the moon in 10 years), complex (e.g. climate change) or chaotic (e.g. traffic movement). For each categorisation there are different knowledge scopes, and also different approaches:

  • Analysis for complicated, breaking down the problem into smaller pieces
  • Synthesis for complex, aiming for the best outcome to a problem without a way of necessarily knowing if it is ‘solved’ (see yesterday’s blog post for a session that covered analysis vs synthesis)
  • Selection for chaotic, where the whole problem can’t necessarily be solved but solutions can be selected to solve incremental parts of it.

Stakeholders will also vary according to the problem type. This is all much easier to explain using a series of Gartner’s slides, but I don’t think I can reproduce that much copyright material without falling the wrong side of the rules.

When it comes to the type of crowd used to solve the different categories of problems, complicated problems are best solved with specialist teams, e.g. the DARPA robotics challenge; complex problems are solved best with community co-creation, starting with a goal rather than a problem and then selecting the best option, e.g. the way the city of Porto Alegre involves citizens in setting the use of the discretionary budget; and chaotic problems are best solved using the largest possible target audience and giving the community a broad space to get many different ideas rather than setting a specific goal, and then working through filters of selection, development and final launch, e.g. the Department of Work and Pensions’ staff ideas scheme.

All of this needs to be done by putting rules and recognition/reward around a process. Participants are motivated from having autonomy (being part of the change), mastery (developing skills) and purpose (having meaningful contribution). A pipeline provides creative constraints to encourage creativity, because if there are no boundaries or guidance at all it is harder to think of something to be creative with, and organisations should put in place a way of managing innovation portfolios to make the best of crowd sourced ideas.

Digital Business Architecture Fuels Digital Business
At the very beginning of this session, it was emphasised that if you are not doing business architecture you are not doing EA – you’re doing EITA (Enterprise IT Architecture) instead. It was also emphasised that business architects must be part of the EA team, and even if there are reasons why the reporting lines for personnel are different it is still important for business architects to sit with and work with the rest of the EA team in a virtual team. Gartner estimates that by 2017 60% of Global 1000 organisations will execute at least one revolutionary and unimaginable business transformation effort, and if business architects are not an intrinsic part of the EA team then the rest of the architecture will not be able to respond properly to these transformations.

pic 3

My interpretation of this session was that much of it was about what should already be taking place in the business domain of EA, with elements of how to take it a little further. One interesting point is that organisations, people and things (think Internet of Things) will all be equal peers when it comes to digital business designs in future. I thought other aspects, such as how business architects should work on business strategy and goals, fill the gap between strategy and execution, and so on, were what has been suggested for a long time. Business moments were talked about again (see earlier in the day) and likened to lightning strikes of opportunity. The suggestion was made that to gain an advantage and be able to respond more quickly than competitors, business modelling should not stop at the boundary of the organisation; instead, also model the business domain of partners, competitors and customers.

Finally, the presenter urged IT and EA departments NOT to think of, or refer to, the rest of the organisation as customers, because doing so makes IT and EA subservient to the rest of the organisation. IT is intrinsic to most modern organisations and crucial to their futures, and department staff should be thought of as peers.

Three Roadmaps to Guide and Drive Change in Your Organisation
As the title suggests, this session was about roadmaps. The first point was that not every roadmap suits every stakeholder – it’s no good giving a tube map to someone getting the bus. In some cases a particular roadmap might only be relevant to a few technical staff, and there is nothing wrong with that because those people need that roadmap, but it would be a mistake to give the same one to board members. The definition of a roadmap provided by the presenter is that it is graphical, illustrates milestones and deliverables, and shows transition from current to future over specified time. Time is the primary dimension, but additional influencing factors may be shown, and the level of abstraction must be appropriate to the audience and purpose. That leads to the first piece of critical information when creating a roadmap – who and what is it for? By understanding that, an appropriate roadmap can be developed that is fit for the people and for the purpose for which it is being created.

pic 4

At this point similar emphasis to that of the previous session was made about the importance of not thinking of the IT department as separate to the rest of the organisation. You wouldn’t typically talk of the finance department and its relationship to the business, for example, so don’t do it with the IT department.

It was also suggested that staff from within the organisation are sought out for how they can help with roadmaps – many organisations have a marketing department with staff who spend much of their time making things look as appealing as possible, so ask if they can help do the same with your roadmaps for example.

A topology of roadmaps was presented covering quadrants of operational planning, operational execution, strategic planning and strategic execution. Roadmaps tend to fit towards the strategic rather than tactical axis, but lifecycle roadmaps cover some of each because they cover the full life cycle of a capability or system over time. Evolution roadmaps show a specific target state and what components are introduced or removed to support the required business outcomes. An enterprise roadmap shows current and planned strategic change at a contextual level, again including the time dimension. It tracks high level business outcomes linked to KPIs, and indicates change across the whole enterprise rather than just one programme or area of it.