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 )
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
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)
Monday, January 10, 2011
Executive Seminar – Enabling IT Value Through EA – Prof. Jeanne Ross
Executive Seminar – Enabling IT Value Through EA – Prof. Jeanne Ross
Location: Weatherhead School of Management, Case Western Reserve University, Peter B. Lewis Building Room 201, 11119 Bellflower Road, Cleveland OH 44106
Date: 2011-02-18 / Time: 12 Noon
Price: Free
Spaces Available: Limited Space Remaining
Description
This premier half-day seminar is brought to Northeast Ohio collaboratively by the Case Western Reserve University Weatherhead School of Management, the Northeast Ohio IT and Enterprise Architects (NEO-ITEA), and the Northeast Ohio Chapter of the Society for Information Management (SIM). It provides an opportunity to engage with recognized experts and local IT executives to identify the roadblocks standing in the way of realizing the full value of IT investments. Discover how enterprise architecture can overcome roadblocks, enabling corporate strategies and turning IT from a liability to a strategic asset.
This event is essential for business and IT executives and leaders, enterprise and IT architects, and others with a stake in enabling IT value and driving business–IT alignment.
Registration is free and does not require NEO-ITEA membership.
About Prof. Jeanne Ross
Dr Jeanne W. Ross, Director and Principal Research Scientist at the MIT Sloan School’s Center for Information Systems Research is our keynote speaker. Dr Ross is a nationally recognized authority on leveraging Enterprise Architecture to enable business strategies and corporate operating models, and is the co-author of several widely read books: 1) Enterprise Architecture as Strategy: Creating a Foundation for Business Execution; 2) IT Savvy: What Top Executives Must Know to Go from Pain to Gain; and, 3) IT Governance: How Top Performers Manage IT Decision Rights for Superior Results.
Special Features
In addition to Dr. Ross’ keynote, Case Western Reserve University will present their research on the impact of enterprise architecture on the performance of Federal Government Agencies, IBM will present on the impact of enterprise architecture on financial companies, and there will be a Panel discussion with Dr Ross, corporate IT executives and IBM speaker on opportunities and challenges in leveraging Enterprise Architecture to gain IT value.
Space is limited. Register now! http://www.neoitea.com/ea-seminar/
__ Joseph Starwood, NEO-ITEA Co-Founder & Past-Secretary (www.linkedin.com/in/JosephStarwood)
Location: Weatherhead School of Management, Case Western Reserve University, Peter B. Lewis Building Room 201, 11119 Bellflower Road, Cleveland OH 44106
Date: 2011-02-18 / Time: 12 Noon
Price: Free
Spaces Available: Limited Space Remaining
Description
This premier half-day seminar is brought to Northeast Ohio collaboratively by the Case Western Reserve University Weatherhead School of Management, the Northeast Ohio IT and Enterprise Architects (NEO-ITEA), and the Northeast Ohio Chapter of the Society for Information Management (SIM). It provides an opportunity to engage with recognized experts and local IT executives to identify the roadblocks standing in the way of realizing the full value of IT investments. Discover how enterprise architecture can overcome roadblocks, enabling corporate strategies and turning IT from a liability to a strategic asset.
This event is essential for business and IT executives and leaders, enterprise and IT architects, and others with a stake in enabling IT value and driving business–IT alignment.
Registration is free and does not require NEO-ITEA membership.
About Prof. Jeanne Ross
Dr Jeanne W. Ross, Director and Principal Research Scientist at the MIT Sloan School’s Center for Information Systems Research is our keynote speaker. Dr Ross is a nationally recognized authority on leveraging Enterprise Architecture to enable business strategies and corporate operating models, and is the co-author of several widely read books: 1) Enterprise Architecture as Strategy: Creating a Foundation for Business Execution; 2) IT Savvy: What Top Executives Must Know to Go from Pain to Gain; and, 3) IT Governance: How Top Performers Manage IT Decision Rights for Superior Results.
Special Features
In addition to Dr. Ross’ keynote, Case Western Reserve University will present their research on the impact of enterprise architecture on the performance of Federal Government Agencies, IBM will present on the impact of enterprise architecture on financial companies, and there will be a Panel discussion with Dr Ross, corporate IT executives and IBM speaker on opportunities and challenges in leveraging Enterprise Architecture to gain IT value.
Space is limited. Register now! http://www.neoitea.com/ea-seminar/
__ Joseph Starwood, NEO-ITEA Co-Founder & Past-Secretary (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
Enterprise Architecture Roadmaps & Milestones
The Enterprise Architecture defines essential business and IT capabilities. The Enterprise Architecture Roadmap specifies the dependency-order among these capabilities. Realizing the Enterprise Architecture Roadmap requires that each milestone be implemented as changes to the IT Environment through IT Portfolio Projects and/or IT Asset Initiatives.
Whether separate or combined, most organizations perform IT Portfolio Planning and IT Asset Planning. This planning involves developing a business case and estimates to support prioritization and investment.
Enterprise Architecture provides the Technical Approach for each IT Portfolio Project and IT Asset Initiative. The Technical Approach, a directional document, identifies describes the Enterprise Architecture Roadmap milestone associated with the project or initiative. The description includes the general technical direction, risks, assumptions, dependencies, and benefits. The Technical Approach establishes a rational basis for prioritizing and estimating the project or initiative.
As each IT Portfolio Project or IT Asset Initiative begins, Enterprise Architecture provisions a Project Start Architecture [Cutter Consortium, 2010], also referred to as a Target Architecture [TOGAF Version 9, 2009]. The Project Start Architecture conforms to the established Technical Approach, and may add new Enterprise Architecture requirements or constraints defined since the planning stage. It presents the Conceptual Architecture for the intended IT solution, and may also include Logical and Physical Architecture aspects when providing specific direction to the project or initiative.
Architecture Governance is applied consistently. Milestone reviews (a.k.a.: Gate reviews) are conducted for the Technical Approach and the Project Start Architecture as well as the subsequent Software Architecture Document (SAD). When Architecture Issues arise, the Architecture Review Board (ARB) engages with the project or initiative to provide a resolution. In some cases, the ARB grants an Architecture Exception (Exemption) that may specify a future remedy.
__ Joseph Starwood (www.JosephStarwood.com)
Whether separate or combined, most organizations perform IT Portfolio Planning and IT Asset Planning. This planning involves developing a business case and estimates to support prioritization and investment.
Enterprise Architecture provides the Technical Approach for each IT Portfolio Project and IT Asset Initiative. The Technical Approach, a directional document, identifies describes the Enterprise Architecture Roadmap milestone associated with the project or initiative. The description includes the general technical direction, risks, assumptions, dependencies, and benefits. The Technical Approach establishes a rational basis for prioritizing and estimating the project or initiative.
As each IT Portfolio Project or IT Asset Initiative begins, Enterprise Architecture provisions a Project Start Architecture [Cutter Consortium, 2010], also referred to as a Target Architecture [TOGAF Version 9, 2009]. The Project Start Architecture conforms to the established Technical Approach, and may add new Enterprise Architecture requirements or constraints defined since the planning stage. It presents the Conceptual Architecture for the intended IT solution, and may also include Logical and Physical Architecture aspects when providing specific direction to the project or initiative.
Architecture Governance is applied consistently. Milestone reviews (a.k.a.: Gate reviews) are conducted for the Technical Approach and the Project Start Architecture as well as the subsequent Software Architecture Document (SAD). When Architecture Issues arise, the Architecture Review Board (ARB) engages with the project or initiative to provide a resolution. In some cases, the ARB grants an Architecture Exception (Exemption) that may specify a future remedy.
__ Joseph Starwood (www.JosephStarwood.com)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
