Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Enterprise Architecture’

Service Management in an as-a-service world – Part 2

August 6th, 2015 Comments off
Reading Time: 4 minutes

This is part 2 of a guest blog I was asked to create for the Service Management Conference. you can find the original here and where it was published completely in the July issue of the itSMF Bulletin.

Why business mapping is critical to effective Service Management and how to get started.

In Part 1 we looked at why the cloud can give IT service management team more control – not less. Now let’s look at how to use business mapping to provide control and visability in a world where applications are offered as subscription services, from a multitude of vendors.

Use Business Mapping To Ensure IT Truly Supports the Business

A map looks at the context of complex systems. We’re familiar with technology roadmaps that match short-term and long-term goals with specific technology solutions to help meet those goals, often presented in a diagram. They are designed to help customers (including internal customers) understand the technology, current and future, that is at work in their business. But the technology view is only one part of the puzzle.

In addition to addressing the business’ immediate and projected needs you need to have a larger view of the product/capability that your organisation provides and the market forces that may impact it. The external forces range from market segment growth, competitive situation and your distribution channels through to political, economic and environmental factors – and more. There are also internal forces including the company, customers, suppliers and other constituents. This view is known as a market audit.

A business map takes this to the next level. It starts with identifying the need that the organisation is addressing with its product or service, the evolution of that product/service from an idea through to a marketable product and eventually a commodity.

Business maps arm the technologist, and business professional, with information that can be used to understand the overall business’ direction and what factors influence the various capabilities that underpin the central need of the value chain. This holistic view of the business gives context for recommendations and decisions. Hint: Get it right and there will be less instances of Shadow IT, as you will be able to understand the emerging needs of the business as it relates to its strategy

Here are six questions to help you start the mapping process:

  1. Where are we now with the business capabilities, supporting processes and technologies?
  2. What is the visibility and value placed on each of these
  3. Where do we want or need to go with these? Ultimately the drive is to head toward commodity, however, that isn’t always the right answer as there are sometimes constraints
  4. How do we get to where we want or need to be?
  5. As the organisation moves from new and novel to commodity, what are your options for sourcing and delivering?
  6. How will we know that we are on track?

If you’d like to know more about business mapping read my blog or go see Simon Wardley’s blog

Transparency across multiple vendors

IDC predicts more than 65 percent of enterprise IT organisations globally will commit to hybrid cloud technologies before 2016. This hybrid environment encompasses everything from applications, to platforms to business services, providing the services the business needs dynamically.

So once you’ve mapped your organisation and selected your solutions how do you track and manage service delivery across multiple delivery modes and suppliers? How do you let the business know what is available to it? And how do you encourage the innovation through the adoption of new services?

Integrating the disparate IT and business systems and providing a clear view of what services are available to the business based on Persona allows everyone to know what is available. Most importantly this provides a way of tracking and measuring the services, both individually and holistically as they underpin key business capabilities.

So there’s no need to fear the cloud. Recognise it for what it is – a different way of delivering services that can actually give you more control, not less, provided you take the effort to jump into the driver’s seat and use your map.

NOTE: Original post included corporate product links, I’ve removed them from here and made specific reference to Simon’s blog (which was found through my blog link in the original)

Waves of innovation

July 25th, 2015 Comments off
Reading Time: 2 minutes

Today I’ve been reading about McNurlin and Sprague’s “Waves of innovation” model (2009) for the changing role of IT within an organisation. It’s essentially made up of 6 waves that have been observed over time, it looks like McNurlin started with 5 and the 6th was added somewhere in 2009.

Waves of Innovation

Wave 1 – Reducing Costs – began in the ’60s with a focus on automation

Wave 2 – Leveraging Investments – began in the ’70s with a focus on reusing corporate assets with systems justified on ROI and cashflow

Wave 3 – Enhancing Products and Services – began in the ’80s with the focus on IT being a revenue source through creating a strategic advantage

Wave 4 – Enhancing Executive Decision Making – began in the late ’80s with the emergence of real-time business management systems

Wave 5 – Reaching the Consumer  – began in the ’90s with using IT to communicate directly with users, completely changing the rules of engagement

Wave 6 – Partnership Supply-Chain Management – looks at integration of partners into the supply chain.

The premise is that these are observed waves and that IT is appearing to loosing some of it’s traditional responsibilities. I think that this is because the view painted treats IT capability as a uniform blob and not as discrete functions and capabilities. It doesn’t take into account that you have a spectrum of bleeding edge capabilities through to commoditised offerings at the far end and the value that each capability or service delivers sits somewhere on the “value” spectrum too.

Delivering value with IT systems requires clear understanding of the business, the services and capabilities that make it up and how IT can then support those individual pieces. This one dimensional view of IT is what holds business back from making smart decisions.

/rant

Bits or pieces?: An introduction to Wardley (Value Chain) Mapping

February 8th, 2015 Comments off
Reading Time: 2 minutes

15817131058_5acabc4677As those reading this blog will know, I’m a fan of the work of Simon Wardley, specifically his mapping technique for business landscape understanding. His most recent blog: Bits or pieces?: An introduction to Wardley (Value Chain) Mapping is the most concise step by step explanation to date.

I’ve watched as Simon’s model has matured of the years and it only gets better. When I think I’ve got a great tweak or variation on his work, he releases another explanation that has it and more.

The most recent of these are the aggregate view, overlay of provision or consumption and gameplay.

  • Aggregate view – when you take multiple views of the same map and overlay to get a holistic view of the organisation
  • Provision vs. consumption – are you consuming a service and as such what is it’s value, are you providing the services to higher-order components and are there smarter ways to obtain them.
  • Overlaying outsource/COTS/build your own with the provision/consumption to get a clear view of what you should be doing – working with market moves toward the right (commoditisation) when and where should you get the service you need.

My favourite is the use of the Kanban technique when implementing changes. I’ve been using this myself for several years (though I didn’t know it was called that) and found Trello to be an amazing tool to help.

I suggest you take the time to check out Simon’s blog, as it is well worth it to pick up on the concepts to develop your own tactics to strategy development.

Value of Enterprise-wide Risk Management: argument against maintaining the status quo

January 26th, 2015 Comments off
Reading Time: 8 minutes

B0IuYcJCUAAox9MToday is a based off several things colliding at the same time for me – discussions with friends, colleagues and some twitter banter.

Everywhere I’ve been, risk management is broken into discreet units and managed individually ostensibly due to it’s complexity, working on the assumption that what they have is enough. Even Enterprise Architecture Frameworks skip over how Risk Management is to be engaged and offer little to no support in understanding the holistic picture.

Despite the argument of organisations that they don’t believe enterprise risk management (ERM) is necessary or that the existing static, compliance based tools or technique employed are sufficient, there is a place for ERM. By assuming that the nature of the business will stay the same, as-good-as-it-gets is an arrogant disregard for the fact that environments change. There will always be a requirement to navigate risk in business, as to avoid risk is to avoid success.

  • How do you navigate risk in your business?
  • Do you use a spreadsheet compiled from compliance questions?
  • How about a pre-canned register provided by a consulting company?
  • Is risk management handled at a project or programme level without higher level visibility within the organisation?
  • Is there a single, unified view of risk management?

To disregard risks that may destroy value, you risk destroying the business; this is what static, disaggregated risk management techniques can cause. ERM, that is looking holistically at the organisation, provides a structured and disciplined process that aligns strategy, process, people and technology in order to maximise the desired outcomes and minimise the undesirable.

A holistic ERM approach allows the identification of various types of risks, providing the necessary visibility to the business. This visibility can provide the business with the ability to apply a measured and complete approach to the remediation or mitigation of risks, through tools and techniques, as well as identifying emergent risks to the organisation. As an example, a change in one area of the business’ policy due to legislative change, may have further implications though if handled in isolation, wouldn’t allow the business to be proactive.

Focusing on a single component of risk, such as looking to insure as a loss reduction technique for operational and financial risk, neglects the other risk types (of Technical, operational, financial, commercial or project-based/time based) and has the same affect as a business silo risk management model.

Read more…

Chief Enterprise Architect as Transformational and Transactional Leader

January 17th, 2015 Comments off
Reading Time: 1

medium_3488998147I recently read the article from Dr Gerald Gray (@SmartGridJer) on “Chief Enterprise Architect as Transformational and Transactional Leader“.

What I enjoyed most is that Dr. Gray succinctly captured the duality of the the day to day of the Chief Architect. The biggest challenge I face on a day-to-day is working at the transformational level with the CxO executives then jumping into the transactional aspects of a programme deployment and dealing with both the people vs. outcome focus which is overlaid with the situational leadership model that is presented.

Some day’s I’m successful in juggling these multiple, competing goals…. others not so much.

photo credit: wallyg via photopin cc