I recently read an article in the Australian Financial Review. It suggested that there is a split in one of the Australian political parties. The rationale given was that a decision made by leadership could jeopardise future elections. This read to … Continue reading →
Filed under: Agility, Business Technology, Governance, Project Management, Remote Management
Filed under: Agility, Business Technology, Enterprise Services Management, Governance, Project Management
Filed under: Agility, Digital Transformation, Enterprise Services Management, Governance
Please take a look at this video to give the rest of this post a bit of context:
Can we look to the Unicorns for inspiration? I recall a discussion I had with a few Silicon Valley types at OSCON London recently. I asked a very genuine question:
“How do the likes of Netflix, Paypal, Uber etc. approach Governance?”
The answer: “We don’t use that word, in Silicon Valley!”
This got me thinking; surely things must be driven towards some sort of order? And then, maybe my mental model was wrong. Maybe if I put on my “Complex Adaptive” hat (ref. Cynefin), I will see that the architecture must evolve, in chunks of context specific outcomes, over time. And in this approach, is “Goodness” ( a la Dan Ward above) the key measure of alignment with the outcome?; in a Complex system, the bad are attenuated, and the good amplified – this is how, useful (fit-for-purpose), solutions evolve. So, maybe, it’s not about driving things to a predetermined outcome; maybe instead, it’s about orchestrating and encouraging adoption of practice that delivers context-specific “goodness” (in Dan Ward’s sense of the word).
It strikes me that there appears to be a close relationship between Dand Ward’s Complexity/Goodness model (describe in the video above) to this one:
Although ‘User Happiness” is only one context: a Value System. Another might be ‘The Regulator’. Is it true, however, that focusing on simplicity, and context-specific “Goodness”, are we more likely to satisfy both?
Hence my question – Should “GOODNESS” replace “GOVERNANCE”? Or, indeed, is this what they already do in Silicon Valley? I’m sure there’s much more to understand – but I think it’s a good question for debate!
I believe we need rethink the Enterprise Architecture practice. I favour starting from a ‘Systems Thinking’ foundation, and therefore go back to John Boyd’s OODA loop: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OODA_loopand Dan Ward’s Simplicity Cycle. Please take…
With proper governance, life will improve for all. Benigno Aquino…
Of all the imperatives of digital transformation, the one success factor on which there is consensus is “enterprise-wide agility”. Agility not limited to IT services alone, but all enterprise services working together. Be it the “software development process” or the … Continue reading →
Published in Outsource Magazine As the media never tires of pointing out, the axis of world economic power is speedily shifting to the East, both in terms of working-age population and GDP. As many of our SME-sized IT service provider clients … Continue reading →
Published in ComputerWeekly The UK government’s recently announced cyber security threat information sharing partnership serves to underline the level of cyber risk organisations are facing. For those responsible for public and private sector IT services, it is of further concern … Continue reading →
How often is an established Enterprise Architecture approach used to create a Target Operating Model? If the answer is not often, then why not? If the answer is yes all the time, then how should we go about creating one ? Are traditional consultancy approaches to target operating models good enough? What is an Operating […]
Values not practiced just pull the wool over the eyes of our stakeholders.
To make the Values happen, we should cascade them hierarchically, top down, from conceptual to practical, to Policies and Procedures. As a …