Anarchy is governance too - Oct 2013 - HartmanEVENT
•Transferir como PPTX, PDF•
0 gostou•606 visualizações
Slides from my presentation at HartmanEVENT, 10 Oct 2013
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Destaque
Destaque (10)
Semelhante a Anarchy is governance too - Oct 2013 - HartmanEVENT
Semelhante a Anarchy is governance too - Oct 2013 - HartmanEVENT (20)
Mais de Upside Energy Ltd
Mais de Upside Energy Ltd (6)
Último
Último (20)
Anarchy is governance too - Oct 2013 - HartmanEVENT
- 1. Anarchy is Governance Too Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 1
- 2. What happens when… … we ask “Who decides how we organise our forums and collaboration systems?” Project Managers say… Business Exec IT Exec Product Owner Project Manager Policy Unit Team Individual Other 16% 40% 0% 12% 24% 4% 4% 0% Executives say… Business Exec 10% IT Exec 19% Product Owner 0% Project Manager 33% Policy Unit/PMO 14% Team 19% Individual 5% Other 0% Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 3
- 3. Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 4 Tom Hilton
- 4. Who chooses the development process? Complex. Belongs to team plus PM. “Belongs to me” Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 5 Simple (“just do it”). Belongs to team plus exec
- 5. Who allocates resources? Project Manager “Belongs to me” Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 Anyone but me. 6
- 6. Is this story ready for implementation? Me Me Me Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 7
- 7. Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 9 polarjez
- 8. Most problems don’t arise due to lack of design skills, poor tools, etc. They happen because different groups make conflicting decisions. Anarchy is governance too This is the realm of governance. Oct 2013 11 Sarah G…
- 9. well-defined governance helps you work more effectively Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 12
- 10. Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 16 WordRidden
- 11. Institute on Governance (www.iog.ca) They follow an acceptable process (“due process”) We know which decisions matter Governance is the process whereby societies or organisations make important decisions, determine whom they involve and how they render account. They track outcomes & act to improve them The right people are involved in these decisions Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 17
- 12. Right Decision Understand context – how decisions affect objectives Prioritise – focus on decisions that matter Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 18 bertiemabootoo
- 13. Right People Don’t waste time - Deciding who to consult - Finding the right people - Politicking, disputing boundaries & authority levels, etc - Of people who can’t help Don’t get derailed from unexpected quarters People buy in to the outcomes Consider all relevant perspectives Bring appropriate expertise to bear Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 19 The US Army
- 14. Right Process People buy in to outcomes; avoid politicking Don’t get panicked in emergencies Don’t waste time define bespoke processes Know how to do it Know what to do Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 20 Elsie Esq.
- 15. Accountability Don’t make the same mistakes over and over Feed back to improve the decision making process Prepared to steer back on course / fix poor decisions Know how to recognise if off course Know how we’ll track outcomes Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 21 leateds
- 16. good well-defined governance helps you work more effectively Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 22
- 17. Stakeholder maps Process models & scenarios RACI models Policies & Standards Governance Models Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 23 Paul Schultz
- 18. Simple model: the key questions are: Who defines policies and standards? Who approves policies and standards? Who enforces policies and standards? Who implements policies and standards? Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 34
- 19. Typical Defining/Implementing Structures Devolved Implementation IM Centre of Excellence IM Council Anarchy IM CoE with Audit Central Processing Unit Central IM Unit Central Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 Definition 36 Devolved
- 20. Typical Approval Structures Devolved Implementation Executive IM Centre of (inside or Excellence outside unit) Devolved IM Council Executive (inside or outside unit) Devolved Anarchy Executive (e.g. IM Council) Executive IM CoE (inside or with Audit outside unit) Executive Central IMor (inside Unit outside unit) Central Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 Central Devolved Processing Unit Definition 37 Devolved
- 21. Enforcement Mechanisms Self – we trust people to follow policy Community – community drives behaviour Gate reviews – we check decisions before action Post hoc review – we adjust decisions later Audit Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 – independent team check compliance 38
- 22. In each case, we trade off… Speed of decision making (favours local) Situational awareness (favours local / social) Amount of buy-in (favours social) Organisational consistency (favours central) Efficiency of resource use Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 39 (favours central)
- 23. good well-defined governance helps you work more effectively Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 40
- 24. Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 41
- 25. We’d need to do an experiment or pilot/prototype Cynefin We’d assemble a team of experts If we need to think about this, we’re in Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 the wrong place I can just decide and do it Dave Snowden 42
- 26. What happens when… … we ask “Who decides how we organise our forums and collaboration systems?” Project Managers say… Business Exec IT Exec Product Owner Project Manager Policy Unit Team Individual Other 16% 40% 0% 12% 24% 4% 4% 0% Executives say… Programme Dir 10% IT Exec 19% Product Owner 0% Project Manager 33% Policy Unit/PMO 14% Team 19% Individual 5% Anarchy is governance too Other 0% Oct 2013 Project Managers say… Business Exec 10% IT Exec 19% Product Owner 0% Project Manager 33% Policy Unit/PMO 14% Team 19% Individual 5% Other 0% Executives say… Business Exec 10% IT Exec 19% Product Owner 0% Project Manager 33% Policy Unit/PMO 14% Team 19% Individual 5% 43 Other 0%
- 27. Final thoughts governance He who forgets history is condemned to repeat it. Good governance lets you focus energy on decisions, not process If you don’t define governance up front, you revisit it for every decision Policy, standards, guidelines support decisions – they’re not primary All forms of governance (even anarchy & bureaucracy) have a place But if you don’t actively address it, it decays to inappropriate forms The price of liberty is eternal vigilance. good decision making Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 44
- 28. Thank you graham@grahamoakes.co.uk @GrahamDOakes Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 45
- 29. Graham Oakes Ltd Making sense of technology… Many organisations are caught up in the complexity of technology and systems. This complexity may be inherent to the technology itself. It may be created by the pace of technology change. Or it may arise from the surrounding process, people and governance structures. We help untangle this complexity and define business strategies that both can be implemented and will be adopted by people throughout the organisation and its partner network. We then help assure delivery of implementation projects. Clients… Cisco Worldwide Education – Architecture and research for e-learning and educational systems Council of Europe – Systems for monitoring compliance with international treaties; e-learning systems Dover Harbour Board – Systems and architecture review Intel – Product Lifecycle & team organisation for mobile device development MessageLabs – Architecture and assurance for partner management portal National Savings & Investments – Helped NS&I and BPO partner develop joint IS strategy The Open University – Enterprise architecture, CRM and product development strategies Oxfam – Content management, CRM, e-Commerce, Cloud strategy and procurement Thames Valley Police – Internet Consultancy Sony Computer Entertainment – Global process definition Amnesty International, Endemol, Skype, tsoosayLabs, Vodafone, … Anarchy is governance too Oct 2013 46
Notas do Editor
- Start out with a caveat – governance has come on the scene as a new buzzword, which means it’s been captured by a lot of agendas – tool-selling & corporate political
- We get a lot offingerpointing – “why aren’t you doing what you’re supposed to do / why are you so slow”. Leads to politicking and blaming.
- This isn’t an isolated example. I’ve been doing some research with teams, especially in the Agile community. Looking at how perceptions of governance vary across their teams, and how this relates to the perceived complexity of the issues they’re dealing with. Still very preliminary.Developer group saw it as complex and a joint responsibility between them and the project manager. Project Managers saw it as simple and not their problem — they left it for the team & IT exec to decide. in an organisation, that'd be a recipe for the developers to want to plan some experimentation and expect their PM to support them in doing this, while the PM would just expect the team to make a choice & get on with it
- Fingerpointing between project manager & devs, with dev managers having a totally different view again…?
- Inconsistency in decisions – teams go their own way.
- Get decision vacuums – decisions just don’t get made. Lots of orgs say they’ve got a problem with making decisions. Often it’s actually a problem of not making decisions!NB having a lot of governance bodies could be a sign of weak governance – lots of groups fighting for their piece of the action, lots of overlaps and gaps…
- Who’s seen a website like this?Poorly defined governance is pervasive – the results show it, my research shows it.We see it all the time – divergent navigation structures, contradictory content, user flows the recapture the same information, …This is problem of conflicting decisions. Poor decisions also increase costs (e.g. due to fragmentation of resources, rework, etc), divert management attention, are expensive in their own right (cost of making decisions). I want to talk about how to improve it. That’s what I call governance.Government is particularly “good” at this – lots of stakeholders with conflicting agendas.
- Well defined governance creates competitive advantage – less waste, better user experience, …
- Wastes timePut effort into unimportant decisionsCreating bespoke decision-making processesBring people into decisions that don’t concern themPoliticking and boundary disputesRevisiting decisions that don’t stickLeads to poor decisionsDon’t involve key stakeholdersOverlook key information and criteriaLack of timePanic in emergenciesNo steering
- The concept of governance has been clouded by vendor hype, organisational blaming, etc
- Focus on the right decisions
- Appropriate expertise is brought to bearConsider the relevant perspectivesPeople buy-in to the outcomesDon’t waste time deciding who to consultDon’t waste time finding the right peopleDon’t waste time agreeing authority levelsDon’t get caught up in politicking & boundary disputesDon’t get derailed from unexpected quarters
- Know what to do – info to gather, criteria to use, etcKnow how to do it – training, systems, etcPeople buy-in to outcomesDon’t spend time defining bespoke process & criteriaDon’t get panicked in emergenciesDon’t get caught up in politicking
- Know how we’ll track outcomesKnow how we’ll recognise if we’re off courseKnow how we’ll steer back onto courseHave process, systems, etc, in place to do thisWill feed back in to the decision making processDon’t leave poor decisions uncorrectedDon’t repeat the same mistakes over and over
- Will draw a lot of this rather than try to go through slides – it makes more sense when you build it up & in response to discussionsPower versus interest stakeholder dimensionsProcess model & decision pointsDitto for scenariosRACI diagrams x 2 styles
- Who I amIndependent consultantDo 2 things – help set up project (untangle complexity); help keep in touch with what’s going onUnusual perspective on assurancePortfolio of mid-size projects rather than single large programmeDifferent twists, but aligns to where many organisations are at, so will share experienceAgenda