#eavoices

Can you afford microservices?

by

Much has been written about the potential benefits of designing applications using microservices. A fair amount has also been written about the potential pitfalls. On this blog, there’s been a combination of both. As I noted in “Are Microservices the Next Big Thing?”: It’s not the technique itself that makes or breaks a design, it’s […]

Using SCORE to reframe the business-model

by

He turned up with a copy of the Business Model Canvas template, printed on a large table-sized sheet of paper. “But where do we start?” he said. Good question… A bit of background first. I am, as usual, still rethinking…

Overestimation on your and others to control ourself

by

Architecture is a profession that tends toward a certain impulsive behaviour as it is all about governance and setting directions.  Once you enter any field where the actors have a tendency for impulsive behaviour you will end up with addiction through the restraint behaviour. As a result we overestimate the ability to control our behaviour … Continue reading Overestimation on your and others to control ourself →

Enterprise Investment Infograhic

by

SignalAll the analysts agree:
It’s all about Digital.Enterprise InvestmentInvesting in Change.CertificationGet training in Enterprise Investment.ToolsInvestment Culture Diagnosis. Goals Portfolio.ReadingsChris Potts has written three books (busin…

The Quantum Organization

by

In road traffic, says my friend @antlerboy, the one with the most momentum has the most responsibility. Perhaps that’s true in other fields too?

Meanwhile, in a hierarchical organization, the one with the highest position has the highest authority. This is known as positional power. Unfortunately, responsibility and authority are not the same thing.

According to Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, the more precisely the position is determined, the less precisely the momentum can be determined, and vice versa. This is one of the central principles of quantum mechanics.

An analogous problem in most organizations is that responsibility and authority are poorly aligned. In other words, the person who pulls the strings isn’t always the one who gets the blame when something goes wrong. And similarly, the person who does the work isn’t always the person who actually knows how to do it properly. Position versus momentum.

There is a useful technique for organizational analysis known as RAEW (responsibility, authority, expertise and work), which was described by Roger Crane in the 1980s and adopted in some versions of Information Systems Planning. Unlike better-known techniques for responsibility assignment such as RACI, which describe how responsibilities ought to be distributed in an ideal (linear, clockwork) organization, the RAEW technique allows us to analyse how (badly) responsibilities are distributed in a real (chaotic, quantum, snakepit) organization.

And maybe fix some of the problems?

Related Posts: Clockwork or Snakepit? (June 2010)

Wikipedia: Responsibility Assignment Matrix, Uncertainty Principle.

Open University: Handy’s four types of organisational cultures

The vast majority of business tools that I see in use, fail to give you position and movement. I find them useless for context or learning.

— swardley (@swardley) April 8, 2016

Updated 8 April 2016

The Quantum Organization

by

In road traffic, says my friend @antlerboy, the one with the most momentum has the most responsibility. Perhaps that’s true in other fields too?

Meanwhile, in a hierarchical organization, the one with the highest position has the highest authority. This is known as positional power. Unfortunately, responsibility and authority are not the same thing.

According to Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, the more precisely the position is determined, the less precisely the momentum can be determined, and vice versa. This is one of the central principles of quantum mechanics.

An analogous problem in most organizations is that responsibility and authority are poorly aligned. In other words, the person who pulls the strings isn’t always the one who gets the blame when something goes wrong. And similarly, the person who does the work isn’t always the person who actually knows how to do it properly. Position versus momentum.

There is a useful technique for organizational analysis known as RAEW (responsibility, authority, expertise and work), which was described by Roger Crane in the 1980s and adopted in some versions of Information Systems Planning. Unlike better-known techniques for responsibility assignment such as RACI, which describe how responsibilities ought to be distributed in an ideal (linear, clockwork) organization, the RAEW technique allows us to analyse how (badly) responsibilities are distributed in a real (chaotic, quantum, snakepit) organization.

And maybe fix some of the problems?

Related Posts: Clockwork or Snakepit? (June 2010)

Wikipedia: Responsibility Assignment Matrix, Uncertainty Principle.

Open University: Handy’s four types of organisational cultures

The vast majority of business tools that I see in use, fail to give you position and movement. I find them useless for context or learning.

— swardley (@swardley) April 8, 2016

Updated 8 April 2016