Mark your calendars for the 2011 Great Lakes Software Excellence Conference in Grand Rapids, MI on Saturday 2011-APR-16. (www.GLSEC.org)!
I invite you and your colleagues to the 2011 GLSEC. This year’s conference focuses on Competitive Innovation. Come learn from top business and IT thought-leaders from all over the Midwest as they address critical aspects for attaining software excellence, from business strategy and enterprise architecture, and from hiring practices to test-driven development and embedded engineering.
Noted consultants and authors Johanna Rothman and Rex Black are the keynote speakers:
Johanna Rothman is a management consultant for software managers and leaders. She helps clients identify and solve the problems that prevent them from releasing systems, hiring the right people, or even deciding which project to work on next. She takes a pragmatic approach and customizes a solution that will work best for you and your organization. Her keynote is titled “Thriving in a Competitive Marketplace”.
Rex Black has over a quarter-century of software and systems engineering experience. He is the president and principal consultant of RBCS, Inc and is a leader in software, hardware, and systems testing. His popular book, “Managing the Testing Process”, has sold over 40,000 copies around the world, including Japanese, Chinese, and Indian releases. His keynote is titled “The Future of Test Management”.
I will present “Attaining Business-Oriented Software Excellence”:
ABSTRACT:
Software excellence goes beyond mere technical ideals and measures. Software, as with all information technology (IT), must serve and enable the business, and must do so cost effectively. This establishes the context, boundaries, and rationale for any meaningful definition and measure of software excellence. But how do companies attain such business-oriented software excellence?
Framed in the context of global change, market forces, and technology advance, this presentation explores our understanding and misconceptions regarding the role of software in enabling and automating business. It examines case study successes and failures in creating software solutions.
This presentation describes how enterprise architecture aligns IT with the business strategy and optimizes IT investments; translating and demarcating the context, rationale, and boundaries for software excellence. It explains the essential enterprise architecture mechanisms for achieving alignment, and attaining business-oriented software excellence. The provided checklist allows you to gauge how well your company utilizes enterprise architecture, and recommends specific action steps you can take to help your company attain business-oriented software excellence.
Conference Details:
2011 Great Lakes Software Excellence Conference
Saturday, April 16, 2011 8:00 AM - 4:30 PM (Eastern Time)
Prince Conference Center at Calvin College
1800 E. Beltline SE
Grand Rapids, MI 49546 USA
www.GLSEC.org
Finally, I invite you to share this message with your colleagues and contacts; especially those business professionals who are directors, executives, managers, and supervisors. This conference will help them get more business value from their IT investments and software portfolios.
I look forward to seeing you at the 2011 Great Lakes Software Excellence Conference.
Showing posts with label business. Show all posts
Showing posts with label business. Show all posts
Friday, March 11, 2011
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
Finding Value in Cloud Computing – Part 4: Resource Leverage
People and organizations have formed alliances and partnerships with others for centuries. The strengths and advantages of each member in the value chain facilitate creating and delivering products and services to customers at competitive prices.
The Cloud Computing paradigm provides another platform for establishing alliances and partnerships and building value chains. Its service-orientation makes it flexible to changing demands and new opportunities. Membership within the value chain can change quickly to incorporate new members and leverage their strengths and advantages.
Organizations can use the Cloud computing paradigm to build and evolve value chains in which they focus on enabling and automating their ‘Core’ and ‘Differentiating’ business capabilities and processes. These organizations invite partners to participate in those functions where the partners bring strengths. The partner organizations deliver, what is for them, ‘Core’ and ‘Differentiating’.
This allows each organization to more sharply focus its professional and technical resources on creating and delivering products and services, serving customers, and generating revenue.
__ Joseph Starwood ( www.linkedin.com/in/JosephStarwood )
The Cloud Computing paradigm provides another platform for establishing alliances and partnerships and building value chains. Its service-orientation makes it flexible to changing demands and new opportunities. Membership within the value chain can change quickly to incorporate new members and leverage their strengths and advantages.
Organizations can use the Cloud computing paradigm to build and evolve value chains in which they focus on enabling and automating their ‘Core’ and ‘Differentiating’ business capabilities and processes. These organizations invite partners to participate in those functions where the partners bring strengths. The partner organizations deliver, what is for them, ‘Core’ and ‘Differentiating’.
This allows each organization to more sharply focus its professional and technical resources on creating and delivering products and services, serving customers, and generating revenue.
__ Joseph Starwood ( www.linkedin.com/in/JosephStarwood )
Monday, January 31, 2011
Finding Value in Cloud Computing – Part 3: Business Focus
Most business and IT executives would rather invest in those business capabilities and processes that are essential to serving their customers and that differentiate them from the competition. They are focused on enabling and automating their ‘Core’ and ‘Differentiating’ business capabilities and processes.
The Cloud Computing paradigm allows organizations to focus their professional and technical resources on building and delivering functionality that provides business value. This minimizes investment in business capabilities and processes that are not ‘Core’ or ‘Differentiating’.
Whether in the form of a Public Cloud, Hybrid Cloud, or Private Cloud, organizations can leverage the service-orientation within the Cloud computing paradigm to focus IT investments on solving business problems and enabling business capabilities rather than technical details.
__ Joseph Starwood (www.linkedin.com/in/JosephStarwood)
The Cloud Computing paradigm allows organizations to focus their professional and technical resources on building and delivering functionality that provides business value. This minimizes investment in business capabilities and processes that are not ‘Core’ or ‘Differentiating’.
Whether in the form of a Public Cloud, Hybrid Cloud, or Private Cloud, organizations can leverage the service-orientation within the Cloud computing paradigm to focus IT investments on solving business problems and enabling business capabilities rather than technical details.
__ Joseph Starwood (www.linkedin.com/in/JosephStarwood)
Friday, January 28, 2011
Finding Value in Cloud Computing – Part 2: Business-IT Alignment
Increasingly, business are insisting that the information technology (IT) function lead innovation of business practices and contribute to increased revenue generation. “If IT still thinks of itself as something that keeps the lights on, it is limiting its potential. Today, business wants IT to lead the way and show how to: Acquire more customers, enhance customer experience and keep employees happy.” __CIO.com, ‘2011 Non-tech Prediction: Business-IT Alignment’, 2011_JAN-19, (http://www.cio.in/article/2011-non-tech-prediction-business-it-alignment)
The Cloud computing paradigm can help organizations transform the role of the IT function and ensure that it meets these goals. Many organizations are using Cloud computing to deliver services to their customer in ways not previously practical. Additionally, the Cloud computing paradigm is enabling organizations to offer new services and improved pricing to their customers. General Electric (GE), for example, leveraged Cloud computing to greatly improve its global supply chain and e-procurement capabilities. __CIO.com, ‘GE CIO Gets His Head in the Cloud for New SaaS Supply Chain App’, 2009-JAN-22, (http://www.cio.com/article/477499/GE_CIO_Gets_His_Head_in_the_Cloud_for_New_SaaS_Supply_Chain_App)
__ Joseph Starwood (www.linkedin.com/in/JosephStarwood)
The Cloud computing paradigm can help organizations transform the role of the IT function and ensure that it meets these goals. Many organizations are using Cloud computing to deliver services to their customer in ways not previously practical. Additionally, the Cloud computing paradigm is enabling organizations to offer new services and improved pricing to their customers. General Electric (GE), for example, leveraged Cloud computing to greatly improve its global supply chain and e-procurement capabilities. __CIO.com, ‘GE CIO Gets His Head in the Cloud for New SaaS Supply Chain App’, 2009-JAN-22, (http://www.cio.com/article/477499/GE_CIO_Gets_His_Head_in_the_Cloud_for_New_SaaS_Supply_Chain_App)
__ Joseph Starwood (www.linkedin.com/in/JosephStarwood)
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Finding Value in Cloud Computing – Part 1: Introduction
Businesses, under increasing market and competitive pressures, are seeking new ways to improve business operations, enhance value propositions, meet variable demands, reduce costs, and manage risks. Cloud computing presents a viable option for many organizations.
Interest in Cloud computing has grown over the past few years. Today, it is the investment option most on the minds of these executives. “A report just published claims to show that cloud computing has shot up to the top of the agenda in most corporates, as the number one investment priority in the IT stakes for the year ahead.” __InfoSecurity.com (UK), ‘Cloud computing is top investment priority for 2011’,2011-JAN-27, (http://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/view/15480/cloud-computing-is-top-investment-priority-for-2011/)
Cloud computing has captured the attention of Business and IT executives around the world; especially those in emerging market economies. “Don't be surprised if the growth rates of cloud computing in emerging economies far outstrips that in more developed nations.” __CIO.com, ‘Cloud Computing: 2011 Predictions’2010-DEC-09, (http://www.cio.com/article/645763/Cloud_Computing_2011_Predictions?page=2&taxonomyId=3112)
An Enterprise may obtain several benefits from the Cloud computing paradigm. These include:
Interest in Cloud computing has grown over the past few years. Today, it is the investment option most on the minds of these executives. “A report just published claims to show that cloud computing has shot up to the top of the agenda in most corporates, as the number one investment priority in the IT stakes for the year ahead.” __InfoSecurity.com (UK), ‘Cloud computing is top investment priority for 2011’,2011-JAN-27, (http://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/view/15480/cloud-computing-is-top-investment-priority-for-2011/)
Cloud computing has captured the attention of Business and IT executives around the world; especially those in emerging market economies. “Don't be surprised if the growth rates of cloud computing in emerging economies far outstrips that in more developed nations.” __CIO.com, ‘Cloud Computing: 2011 Predictions’2010-DEC-09, (http://www.cio.com/article/645763/Cloud_Computing_2011_Predictions?page=2&taxonomyId=3112)
An Enterprise may obtain several benefits from the Cloud computing paradigm. These include:
- Business-IT Alignment
- Business Focus
- Resource Leverage
- Time-To-Market
- Elastic Capacity
- CapEx Management
- OpEx Management
- Green Initiatives
This is the first in a series of articles in which we will explore the benefits of Cloud Computing.
__ Joseph Starwood (www.linkedin.com/in/JosephStarwood)
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Does your company need an IT Department? Really?
What if your company built its factories and offices the way they build IT solutions?
Say that your company needs a new factory or office. It would form several subsidiary companies and a department to oversee them. One subsidiary would provide architectural services, one would serve as general contractor, and others would provide concrete, electrical, plumbing, and carpentry services. Still others would be formed to provide interior design services, and equip the offices and cubicles. Through these subsidiaries, your company would hire architects, managers, engineers, concrete workers, plumbers, electricians, carpenters, bricklayers, interior designers, and other laborers. None of these actually make the products or provide the services your company sells to its customers!
These subsidiaries would then create their respective processes and standards. These would differ from industry accepted processes and standards because ‘your company does things differently’. Finalizing the architecture and designs for the new factory or office would be a real challenge. The carpenters would have one set of requirements, while the managers would have another set; and so on across the subsidiaries. After reworking the requirements, the managers would solve the problem by creating a new role, the ‘Relationship Manager’. The Relationship Managers would be the points-of-contact for gathering the requirements from your business executives and managers. When a requirement appears too difficult, it is the Relationship Manager’s job to tell the business why the factory or office can’t have the required feature; such a double door or an escalator. Finally your company’s new factory or office would be delivered – late and over budget; assuming that the project did not fail – an all too frequent outcome!
When the factory or office was complete, your company would form another subsidiary company to run the facility. The workers in this ‘Operations’ subsidiary would spend most of their time compensating for and patching significant building defects just to keep the building running. Disasters would be common. After such disasters, the workers would restore the electricity following an ‘Uninterruptible Power Supply’ (UPS) failure, brace walls and floors when they ‘Went Down’, rebuild the elevator system following a ‘Crash’, or spray large quantities of toxic chemicals for ‘Bug’ infestations. Security breaches would be common as well. Intruders would enter the factory or building; some brought in as guests by careless employees. They would install viruses, worms, and Trojan horses to spy on your company, steal its secrets, and damage its ability to conduct business. Workers in both the ‘Security’ and ‘Operations’ subsidiaries would apply still more patches to prevent intrusion as well as detect and neutralize the viruses, worms, and Trojan horses. None of which actually make the products or provide the services your company sells to its customers!
Finally, your company would seek to make changes to the factory or office, or even build more factories and offices. This is necessary to keep the workers in the various subsidiaries busy. Remember, your company just made a large investment creating these subsidiaries!
So how do companies really get their factories and offices?
In the real world, there are two common approaches.
In the first case, your company would recognize the need for a new factory or office. It would engage an architectural firm specializing in the type of factory or office required. The architectural firm would present a few options that meet the business requirements. After some revisions, the selected option would be placed out to general contractors for bid. These general contactors likewise specialize in the type of factory or office required. The general contactor with the winning bid would then engage subcontractors for the concrete, plumbing, electrical, and so on. Your company would also engage a firm to design the interior, and layout the production lines, offices, cubicles, and other equipment. As planned, the new factory would be delivered ready for move-in. Your company would have contracts in place for janitorial services, and other routine maintenance. In this case, your company owns the facility but not the means to create it. In IT, this is referred to as ‘Out-Sourcing’.
In the second case, your company would lease the capability and capacity from a provider. If a factory is needed, a contract manufacturer is engaged. If an office is needed, a commercial space is leased. In this case, your company owns neither the facility nor the means to create it. In IT, this is referred to as the ‘Cloud’.
Does your company need its own IT Department?
Your company already trusts architects, contractors, and providers for the factories that produce millions, even billions, of dollars in products each year; or, for offices that safely support your workers and encourage their productivity. So why does your company insist on owning the computing as well as the means of creating it? Unless your company actually sells IT products and/or services, the IT is not a core business capability.
It’s time to bring in the professionals!
__Joseph Starwood (www.JosephStarwood.com)
Say that your company needs a new factory or office. It would form several subsidiary companies and a department to oversee them. One subsidiary would provide architectural services, one would serve as general contractor, and others would provide concrete, electrical, plumbing, and carpentry services. Still others would be formed to provide interior design services, and equip the offices and cubicles. Through these subsidiaries, your company would hire architects, managers, engineers, concrete workers, plumbers, electricians, carpenters, bricklayers, interior designers, and other laborers. None of these actually make the products or provide the services your company sells to its customers!
These subsidiaries would then create their respective processes and standards. These would differ from industry accepted processes and standards because ‘your company does things differently’. Finalizing the architecture and designs for the new factory or office would be a real challenge. The carpenters would have one set of requirements, while the managers would have another set; and so on across the subsidiaries. After reworking the requirements, the managers would solve the problem by creating a new role, the ‘Relationship Manager’. The Relationship Managers would be the points-of-contact for gathering the requirements from your business executives and managers. When a requirement appears too difficult, it is the Relationship Manager’s job to tell the business why the factory or office can’t have the required feature; such a double door or an escalator. Finally your company’s new factory or office would be delivered – late and over budget; assuming that the project did not fail – an all too frequent outcome!
When the factory or office was complete, your company would form another subsidiary company to run the facility. The workers in this ‘Operations’ subsidiary would spend most of their time compensating for and patching significant building defects just to keep the building running. Disasters would be common. After such disasters, the workers would restore the electricity following an ‘Uninterruptible Power Supply’ (UPS) failure, brace walls and floors when they ‘Went Down’, rebuild the elevator system following a ‘Crash’, or spray large quantities of toxic chemicals for ‘Bug’ infestations. Security breaches would be common as well. Intruders would enter the factory or building; some brought in as guests by careless employees. They would install viruses, worms, and Trojan horses to spy on your company, steal its secrets, and damage its ability to conduct business. Workers in both the ‘Security’ and ‘Operations’ subsidiaries would apply still more patches to prevent intrusion as well as detect and neutralize the viruses, worms, and Trojan horses. None of which actually make the products or provide the services your company sells to its customers!
Finally, your company would seek to make changes to the factory or office, or even build more factories and offices. This is necessary to keep the workers in the various subsidiaries busy. Remember, your company just made a large investment creating these subsidiaries!
So how do companies really get their factories and offices?
In the real world, there are two common approaches.
In the first case, your company would recognize the need for a new factory or office. It would engage an architectural firm specializing in the type of factory or office required. The architectural firm would present a few options that meet the business requirements. After some revisions, the selected option would be placed out to general contractors for bid. These general contactors likewise specialize in the type of factory or office required. The general contactor with the winning bid would then engage subcontractors for the concrete, plumbing, electrical, and so on. Your company would also engage a firm to design the interior, and layout the production lines, offices, cubicles, and other equipment. As planned, the new factory would be delivered ready for move-in. Your company would have contracts in place for janitorial services, and other routine maintenance. In this case, your company owns the facility but not the means to create it. In IT, this is referred to as ‘Out-Sourcing’.
In the second case, your company would lease the capability and capacity from a provider. If a factory is needed, a contract manufacturer is engaged. If an office is needed, a commercial space is leased. In this case, your company owns neither the facility nor the means to create it. In IT, this is referred to as the ‘Cloud’.
Does your company need its own IT Department?
Your company already trusts architects, contractors, and providers for the factories that produce millions, even billions, of dollars in products each year; or, for offices that safely support your workers and encourage their productivity. So why does your company insist on owning the computing as well as the means of creating it? Unless your company actually sells IT products and/or services, the IT is not a core business capability.
It’s time to bring in the professionals!
__Joseph Starwood (www.JosephStarwood.com)
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
An Approach to Business-IT Alignment
There are many methods and models for establishing and maturing Business-IT alignment as well as unifying IT disciplines – at least as many as consulting companies offering business and IT products and services!
Unfortunately, theses methods and models have limitations. Some are more applicable to one industry or another. Some are more applicable at the strategic level. Most emphasize the tactical level where IT products and services can be sold.
There is an opportunity to bridge the gaps between Business and IT, between strategy and tactics, and between development and operation of IT solutions. This opportunity and its challenges can be approached along three lines of reasoning: 1) Business-IT Alignment; 2) Financial-Execution Alignment; and, 3) Governance Alignment. Think of these as ‘Three Pillars’ extending from the Business through Enterprise Architecture to IT.
Enterprise Architecture bridges the Business Operating Model to the IT Operating Model. It establishes Business-IT alignment. IT Management and its many supporting IT disciplines bridge business objectives to IT automation and controls. These establish Financial-Execution alignment. Architecture Governance bridges Corporate Governance to IT Governance. It establishes Governance alignment. (Many organization place Enterprise Architecture team within the IT department. This may contribute to viewing Architecture Governance as a subset of IT Governance. However, Enterprise Architecture is primarily a strategic business discipline at the nexus of business and technology.)
There is good reason to utilize a ‘Three Pillar’ view. Some organizations are moving their Chief Architecture Officer (CAO) or Chief Enterprise Architect (CEA) under the COO in their executive structures. This is being done to ensure alignment between the Business Operating Model and the IT Operating Model. Some organizations are moving their CIO or CTO under the CFO in their executive structures. The CIO or CTO reports on matters of IT cost, risk, and performance. Recently, many organizations added a Chief Governance Officer (CGO) role to their executive structures in response to new regulatory requirements. The CGO reports to the CEO on matters of corporate governance and regulatory compliance.
__ Joseph Starwood (www.JosephStarwood.com)
Unfortunately, theses methods and models have limitations. Some are more applicable to one industry or another. Some are more applicable at the strategic level. Most emphasize the tactical level where IT products and services can be sold.
There is an opportunity to bridge the gaps between Business and IT, between strategy and tactics, and between development and operation of IT solutions. This opportunity and its challenges can be approached along three lines of reasoning: 1) Business-IT Alignment; 2) Financial-Execution Alignment; and, 3) Governance Alignment. Think of these as ‘Three Pillars’ extending from the Business through Enterprise Architecture to IT.
Enterprise Architecture bridges the Business Operating Model to the IT Operating Model. It establishes Business-IT alignment. IT Management and its many supporting IT disciplines bridge business objectives to IT automation and controls. These establish Financial-Execution alignment. Architecture Governance bridges Corporate Governance to IT Governance. It establishes Governance alignment. (Many organization place Enterprise Architecture team within the IT department. This may contribute to viewing Architecture Governance as a subset of IT Governance. However, Enterprise Architecture is primarily a strategic business discipline at the nexus of business and technology.)
There is good reason to utilize a ‘Three Pillar’ view. Some organizations are moving their Chief Architecture Officer (CAO) or Chief Enterprise Architect (CEA) under the COO in their executive structures. This is being done to ensure alignment between the Business Operating Model and the IT Operating Model. Some organizations are moving their CIO or CTO under the CFO in their executive structures. The CIO or CTO reports on matters of IT cost, risk, and performance. Recently, many organizations added a Chief Governance Officer (CGO) role to their executive structures in response to new regulatory requirements. The CGO reports to the CEO on matters of corporate governance and regulatory compliance.
__ Joseph Starwood (www.JosephStarwood.com)
Governance & Business-IT Alignment
Many organizations struggle to build synergy across their IT departments. They turn to consultants for expertise on unifying IT; obtaining assessments of their current IT alignment and maturity as well as recommendations for improvements. The organizations apply some of the recommendations, and adopt various methods and standards as a basis for aligning IT disciplines. Yet, in the end, they must ask themselves, “Did we get the results we expected?”
Governance is essential to establishing and maturing the interfaces between IT disciplines; thereby reducing and eliminating ‘IT Silos’. Governance verifies that we conduct each discipline and exchange information across each inter-discipline interface as we intended. It also validates that what we intended is actually correct. Governance provides management of IT disciplines during their normal operation. It also provides control for these disciplines when issues are encountered and exceptions (exemptions) are required.
Architecture Governance plays a key role in establishing IT alignment with the business. This is critical to validating that what IT intended is actually the correct thing to do for the business. It ensures that the Enterprise Architecture and Roadmaps conform to the business strategy and plans. The strategic alignment establishes a solid foundation for unifying IT.
Architecture Governance further contributes to IT unity through its integrations with other IT disciplines. It ensures that each Target Architecture, a milestone along the Enterprise Architecture Roadmap, furthers the strategic alignment while balancing short-term and long-term objectives. The resulting models and documents provide direction for the subsequent IT disciplines that develop and operate IT solutions.
Through Architecture Governance, professionals executing the IT disciplines are assured that their efforts are focused on doing the right things for the right reasons.
__ Joseph Starwood (www.JosephStarwood.com)
Governance is essential to establishing and maturing the interfaces between IT disciplines; thereby reducing and eliminating ‘IT Silos’. Governance verifies that we conduct each discipline and exchange information across each inter-discipline interface as we intended. It also validates that what we intended is actually correct. Governance provides management of IT disciplines during their normal operation. It also provides control for these disciplines when issues are encountered and exceptions (exemptions) are required.
Architecture Governance plays a key role in establishing IT alignment with the business. This is critical to validating that what IT intended is actually the correct thing to do for the business. It ensures that the Enterprise Architecture and Roadmaps conform to the business strategy and plans. The strategic alignment establishes a solid foundation for unifying IT.
Architecture Governance further contributes to IT unity through its integrations with other IT disciplines. It ensures that each Target Architecture, a milestone along the Enterprise Architecture Roadmap, furthers the strategic alignment while balancing short-term and long-term objectives. The resulting models and documents provide direction for the subsequent IT disciplines that develop and operate IT solutions.
Through Architecture Governance, professionals executing the IT disciplines are assured that their efforts are focused on doing the right things for the right reasons.
__ Joseph Starwood (www.JosephStarwood.com)
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
The Times They Are a-Changin' __ Bob Dylan
Are you an ‘IT professional’? Are you sure about that?
In We’re Not in IT Anymore, an executive survey results analysis, the Corporate Executive Board “…predicts that three out of every four IT roles will either migrate to business services, evolve into business roles, or will be externalized by 2015.” (http://www.executiveboard.com/it/pdf/The_Future_of_Corporate_IT.pdf)
Those who have followed my postings know my position: professionals in the IT department are business professionals who know and apply information technology for the benefit of the business! So the results from this survey come as no surprise.
However, the implications are profound. The pace of change will be rapid and far-reaching. According to the Corporate Executive Board “…we are embarking on one of the most significant changes to corporate IT in years.” Some challenges are predictable. Organizational change will place great stress on change management functions and maturity, on Human Resource services, and on individual professionals in existing IT departments.
The Enterprise Architectures within these changing organizations will also be under great stress; testing the robustness, flexibility, and maturity. As Enterprise Architects, we must aid our executives in preparing for this significant change. Our efforts to achieve Business-IT Alignment, between the Business Operating Model and the IT Operating Model (IT Vision), will support a smoother transition.
At “Integrate 2010: Uniting the World of IT”, a two-day conference in Cleveland, Benku Thomas, Nour Laaroubi, and I will present a model for establishing Business-IT Alignment through Enterprise Architecture. (http://gcle.itsmfusa.org/?q=content/integrate-2010) We also show how to bridge the chasm between strategic and tactical; that is between the Enterprise Architecture and the IT initiatives (Portfolio projects and Asset enhancements).
__ Joseph Starwood (www.JosephStarwood.com)
In We’re Not in IT Anymore, an executive survey results analysis, the Corporate Executive Board “…predicts that three out of every four IT roles will either migrate to business services, evolve into business roles, or will be externalized by 2015.” (http://www.executiveboard.com/it/pdf/The_Future_of_Corporate_IT.pdf)
Those who have followed my postings know my position: professionals in the IT department are business professionals who know and apply information technology for the benefit of the business! So the results from this survey come as no surprise.
However, the implications are profound. The pace of change will be rapid and far-reaching. According to the Corporate Executive Board “…we are embarking on one of the most significant changes to corporate IT in years.” Some challenges are predictable. Organizational change will place great stress on change management functions and maturity, on Human Resource services, and on individual professionals in existing IT departments.
The Enterprise Architectures within these changing organizations will also be under great stress; testing the robustness, flexibility, and maturity. As Enterprise Architects, we must aid our executives in preparing for this significant change. Our efforts to achieve Business-IT Alignment, between the Business Operating Model and the IT Operating Model (IT Vision), will support a smoother transition.
At “Integrate 2010: Uniting the World of IT”, a two-day conference in Cleveland, Benku Thomas, Nour Laaroubi, and I will present a model for establishing Business-IT Alignment through Enterprise Architecture. (http://gcle.itsmfusa.org/?q=content/integrate-2010) We also show how to bridge the chasm between strategic and tactical; that is between the Enterprise Architecture and the IT initiatives (Portfolio projects and Asset enhancements).
__ Joseph Starwood (www.JosephStarwood.com)
Friday, January 8, 2010
Social Tapestry: Enabling business multi-dimensionally
Dear Nexus Muses:
Happy New Year!
I am sure that many of you made some resolutions for the New Year. Perhaps you want to improve your health, get more exercise, or spend more quality time with family and friends. The point is that you make changes this year to be different than you were in prior years.
Change is the subject of this posting. Technology changes the ways companies can and do conduct business. I will examine one way in which technology is changing the business world.
Social media is very popular topic in business circles today. Companies are trying to figure out if and how to use it, and what policies to set around it. A recent search for "Social Media" on Google returned more than 37,500,000 entries, and on Forbes returned more than 470 stories, most written since 2007. [Google.com; Accession 2010JAN08] [Forbes.com; Accession 2010JAN08]
Social media disseminates information through social interactions. For businesses, this means that word-of-mouth, for better or worse, moves at the speed of light.
Most of these interactions are outside the control of the company. A company posting a communication through social media controls only the release. For example, your company “Tweets” about a new product feature or special offer to its Twitter followers. Some followers may “Re-Tweet” the message to their followers, and so on. Other interactions are completely outside the company’s control. For example, a customer posts a comment about an excellent service experience with your company on Facebook.
Social media interactions between a company and its suppliers, partners, intermediaries, and customers are the simplest to consider. Other social media interactions must be considered; among the suppliers, intermediaries, and customers; among candidates and employees; and, outward to the global online community. Collectively, the web of social media interactions form a tapestry
Last August, I introduced the term “Social Tapestry”. It describes the multi-dimensional interactions with customers, intermediaries, partners, suppliers, employees, candidates, and the online world. Social media enables multidimensional interactions. It also enhances and amplifies the business capabilities of other channels including portal, call center, telephony, fax, e-mail, business intelligence, and direct in-person contact.
Successful businesses must adopt a multi-dimensional integrated approach to social media. They must effectively communicate their message into the social media space. They must effectively monitor and respond to other messages about their products and services. The most important thing that companies can and must control is their reputation; the quality of their products, services, and relationships. Even if a company does not communicate through social media, others surely will.
__Joseph Starwood (http://www.linkedin.com/in/JosephStarwood)
Happy New Year!
I am sure that many of you made some resolutions for the New Year. Perhaps you want to improve your health, get more exercise, or spend more quality time with family and friends. The point is that you make changes this year to be different than you were in prior years.
Change is the subject of this posting. Technology changes the ways companies can and do conduct business. I will examine one way in which technology is changing the business world.
Social media is very popular topic in business circles today. Companies are trying to figure out if and how to use it, and what policies to set around it. A recent search for "Social Media" on Google returned more than 37,500,000 entries, and on Forbes returned more than 470 stories, most written since 2007. [Google.com; Accession 2010JAN08] [Forbes.com; Accession 2010JAN08]
Social media disseminates information through social interactions. For businesses, this means that word-of-mouth, for better or worse, moves at the speed of light.
Most of these interactions are outside the control of the company. A company posting a communication through social media controls only the release. For example, your company “Tweets” about a new product feature or special offer to its Twitter followers. Some followers may “Re-Tweet” the message to their followers, and so on. Other interactions are completely outside the company’s control. For example, a customer posts a comment about an excellent service experience with your company on Facebook.
Social media interactions between a company and its suppliers, partners, intermediaries, and customers are the simplest to consider. Other social media interactions must be considered; among the suppliers, intermediaries, and customers; among candidates and employees; and, outward to the global online community. Collectively, the web of social media interactions form a tapestry
Last August, I introduced the term “Social Tapestry”. It describes the multi-dimensional interactions with customers, intermediaries, partners, suppliers, employees, candidates, and the online world. Social media enables multidimensional interactions. It also enhances and amplifies the business capabilities of other channels including portal, call center, telephony, fax, e-mail, business intelligence, and direct in-person contact.
Successful businesses must adopt a multi-dimensional integrated approach to social media. They must effectively communicate their message into the social media space. They must effectively monitor and respond to other messages about their products and services. The most important thing that companies can and must control is their reputation; the quality of their products, services, and relationships. Even if a company does not communicate through social media, others surely will.
__Joseph Starwood (http://www.linkedin.com/in/JosephStarwood)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
