The team is excited about the news that they can go ahead with fleshing out the target architecture. They are particularly enthusiastic about going for a combination of best-of-breed systems mixed with an MDM solution. There is still some caution as Brenda has made it very clear that there was some ‘glazing over’ during the presentation. As before, the team decides to work in two sub teams: one team will do a “road show” to illustrate the concept of MDM to increase management buy-in, while the other team fleshes out the technical details.
As we have described before, few organizations have a systematic and reliable way of translating a business strategy into action. This requires aligning various disciplines along the same desired business outcomes, to point them in the same direction. This is the core of BiZZdesign’s approach to business change.
Tags: archimate modeling
Early in the week, the baseline team announces that they are almost done with their work. There are a few more points to flesh out, but overall the structure is there. The team has brought along the following diagram to illustrate their way of working:
Brenda’s “target team” feels like they’re in a tight spot. It’s great that management has given some direction for the IT/ sourcing / product strategies, but it doesn’t seem to fit with what they had in mind for the target architecture. In the meantime, the pressure is on as Brenda has been asked to present her thoughts on the strategies in the light of the target architecture.
In our previous blog we discussed the Waste Scan. We learned that making ‘deadly wastes’ visible in our processes, shows what activities can be optimized.There are several techniques that can be used in the Analysis phase of the DMAIC cycle. In this blog we will find out in what way processes add value. Previous blogs discussed different techniques of the Measure and Define Phase, and next posts will elaborate on other Analysis techniques.
Before and during the weekend, Brenda’s team worked hard to come up with an analysis for management.
Earlier today, Brenda presented their findings to the management team, who were more than pleased with the results. During the meeting they decided to follow the recommendations by Brenda’s team and they tasked James with the appropriate actions.
In the meantime, her “target architecture team” may need an additional push to get going again. They have been researching policy documents, attending management meetings and researching modern EA strategies by industry analysts such as Gartner. The output has been minimal, but Brenda isn’t worried too much yet. They’ll get there, some extra “thinking time” might be a good thing as the most crazy ideas will have faded to the background.
It does not take long to extend Brenda’s team: since she had such “good press” in the last few weeks, people are eager to join in. Management is a bit careful though, given that:
The three weeks since the sessions with management are almost up, and Brenda has heard via her sponsor that the teams are well under way on the strategy work and that the expectation is that all teams will finish in time for the next workshop as agreed. As usual, Brenda is expected to handle the agenda for the workshops and she now has been assigned a management assistant for handling room reservations, meeting invitations, arranging drinks etcetera.
Many organizations with large legacy application landscapes can no longer postpone a major overhaul of their IT. But how do you avoid creating tomorrow’s legacy today all over again? And how do you spend your IT dollars/euros in the most sensible way? Next to appropriate design and development practices (e.g. enterprise architecture, agile and DevOps, as we addressed in our previous blog) you need to manage your application portfolio as a whole, to decide where it is most important to invest.