More Related Content
Similar to Tooling-up Portfolio & Programme Lifecycles (20)
Tooling-up Portfolio & Programme Lifecycles
- 1. TOOLS FOR CHANGE PRACTITIONERS: The Triple Cycle • Evaluate change capability • Monitor uncertainty factors • Identify impacting events • Interpret events’ outcomes • Identify points of re- focus • Evaluate alternative scenarios • Choose option & plan for re-shaping • Modify portfolio structure • Programme scope • Project scope • Re-allocate resources • Re-map inter- dependencies • Analyse landscape • Seek alternatives • Compare options • Negotiate choices Change-initiatives typically involve hundreds if not thousands of points-of-change, that may be distributed both in terms of geographic locations and cross business-boundaries. In general as a change-initiative increases in complexity or size, its overall outcome becomes less certain and at the same its overall goals seem more ambiguous. Uncertainty and ambiguity are the root causes in most instances of execution failures. Successful delivery of change-initiatives is linked to having the capability to utilise the “differential gearing” afforded by portfolio, programme and project cycles to structure and orchestrate inter-relationships. Portfolio Lifecycle Cycle “m” (Re) focus Sense Formulate Plan Implement Evaluate Dissolve cycle “n+1” (Re) shape Programme Lifecycle Inception Elaboration Transition “Agile” Project Lifespan Construction Por$olio Programmes Projects Change Initiative Programme Projects Portfolio Projects (Sub) Program Programme Portfolio Change initiatives are actively designed into portfolios and programmes that enclose delivery projects. The resulting structure reflects the initiative’s complexity, size and distribution as well as boundary and other organisational factors. Project Programme Portfolio Goals Fixed Ongoing unfolding Sense changes Duration Short Longer Open or ongoing Priorities Pre-agreed Negotiated with stakeholders Shifting with events Sign-off Binding, contractual Multiple, dispersed sign-offs Oversight, governance Stakeholders Few or concentrated Large number or dispersed Top level, steering Method Mature “agile” practice More ad hoc/multiple schools Undeveloped practice Dependencies Few, (at activity level) Project inter-dependencies Multi-factorial Host culture Mono culture Multiple or complex cultures Global culture mix Main Focus Discrete delivery Coordinated deliveries Uncertainty management Employed in Incremental change Multi-point change Global optimization Outcome Capability enhancement Transform business area Best practice dissemination Differentiators for the 3-cycles • Prioritise goals • Select projects • Analyse dependencies Projects • Decommission applications • Migrate data & resources • Scale up operations • Plan tasks • Sequence projects • Implement • projects • Assess benefits • Review capability • Scorecard implementation • Re-pace delivery ProgrammeProject Change Initiative • Projects are the primary delivery engines of a change initiative. “Agile” type approaches can deliver a “continuous chain” of incremental change • Programmes are mechanisms to coordinate collections of projects, steering them through impacting events and maintain their momentum • Portfolios provide a framework for re-balancing across multiple programmes or on a change-initiative wide scale Copyrighted material 2014 Operating Model Granularity 0 high low + ++ + ++ E: [email protected] | Skype: royvarug
- 2. TOOLS FOR CHANGE PRACTITIONERS: Tool Value Chain Mastery in delivering “Agile” projects is relatively common. Competency at the programme and portfolio levels is less evident. Successful delivery of change initiatives is associated with pro-actively undertaking actions to identify emerging conditions capable of derailing execution, and to find and apply solutions before delivery is compromised. The graphic below is marked with common “ameliorative” actions that are applied at the programme and portfolio (cycle) levels : 1 On-going negotiation with actors & stakeholders 2 Cyclic assessment of delivered value / benefits 3 Cyclic evaluation of emergent synergies 4 Cyclic identification of weaknesses and threats 5 Re-pacing of deployment speed 6 Sensing the changes in actors and their relationships 7 Tracking intra-programme dependencies 8 Cyclic review of strategies for initiative-wide scaling 9 Cyclic review of strategies for incremental change 10 Cyclic identification of failure patterns 11 Validation of conformance to guiding principles 12 Initiative wide communication strategies 13 Initiative wide surveying and prioritisation 14 Differential cost analysis of architectural options 15 Assessing capability to undertake change Achieving consistency in actions across multiple change-points, and across multiple portfolio/programme cycle-points requires standardised methods and knowledge to use them being diffused” through the whole change-volume. Introducing tools and mechanisms to provide new inputs into existing practices is a known technique for accelerating maturity. The graphic below shows a value-chain used to classify tools that can provide capability-enhancing inputs. Survey Model Normalise Design Analyse Control Leverage increasing value to change initiative Mapping the breadth & depth of the change initiative, Visualising capability to execute and sustain the change. Capturing networks of relationships of critical actors Reference models to map pre and post change positions. Standards & principles to underpin the change initiative globally. Templates & meta-models o capture domain information Homogenise the visualisation of complex or abstract information spaces. Generate specialised viewpoints of the change plans to enrich communication. Aggregate information across boundaries Tools for qualitative analysis of key domains involved in the change initiative. Model- driven analysis of delivery & options costing. Evaluation of delivery landscapes. Document-based artefacts to communicate changes from an architectural perspective. Process driven approaches to bring develop design-level clarity in change areas Process-driven approaches for control and governance, applied at key points in the “triple cycles” delivering a change initiative Leverage of assets and capabilities generated, at any point, across the change initiative. Introduce as potential innovations to “outside the initiative” where relevant Copyrighted material 2014 Portfolio Lifecycle “m” (Re) focus Sense Formulate Plan Implement Evaluate Dissolve (Re) shape Program Lifecycle “m+1” “n” “n+1” 1 2 3 4 5 6 4 8 3 9 7 3 10 10 11 3 11 14 13 15 4 4 Phase iteration 15 14 E: [email protected] | Skype: royvarug
- 3. TOOLS FOR CHANGE PRACTITIONERS: Toolkit to Capability Copyrighted material 2014 A change practitioner’s toolkit is likely to include the discrete tools shown in the graphic below. Tools are typically used in their initial adoption only for the duration of a change initiative. In dynamic industries where “change is a constant” individuals’ with skills using specific tools may get re-formed into a competency group, on an as-needed basis, to undertake new change initiatives. The toolkit is valid as a course module for teaching advanced change practices and also in developing internal core competencies by vendors that aid organizational transformation. Survey Analyse Normalise Design Control Model Leverage Update reference models Refresh meta-models Validation of change state Distribute meta-models Distribute reference Update training Normalised/ aggregated results Captured results Raw results Results in Strategy, Blueprint Reference points for critical reviews Opportunities A tool based capability becomes evident when tool adoption in a consuming context graduates from discrete & ad hoc to chained & procedural. At the latter level results from one tool feed in as inputs to other tools within a more formal framework. Such “”virtuous loops” supercharge change- capability maturity. An essential aspect of maturity involves output artefacts of tool usage being persisted for providing baselines for future cycles of change or for use by related initiatives. By the same token, models, templates and survey questionnaires developed in a change initiative are intellectual assets that are storable for future use. Trigger study Update: Strategy Blueprint Roadmap Trigger opportunity study S1.Business Capability S2. Business Coupling S3. Change Actors S4. Change Volume S5. Buy/build Options S6. Technical Integration Survey Model Normalise Design Analyse Control Leverage D1. Change Blueprint D2. Change Roadmap D3. Change Strategy D4. Feasibility Study D5. Opportunities Study C1. Architectural Review C2. Asset Screening C3. Building-permit Review C4.Bad-Asset Valuation C5. Pre-deployment Review C6. Procurement Review M1. Change Capabilities M2. Change Costing M3. Change Scorecard M4. Data Lifecycles M5. Functional Domain M6. Technical Domain N1. Business Models N2. Operating Models N3. Change Principles N4. Business Strategies N5. Business Use Cases L1. Change Process Automation L2. Architectural Ensembles L3. Change Adoption Networks L4. Change Management Office A6. Delivery Costing A7. Functional Domain A8. Process Domain A9. Project Landscape A10. Technical Domain A1. Actor Network A2. Application Landscape A3. Architectural Capability A4. Change Volume A5. Data Domain E: [email protected] | Skype: royvarug
- 4. Portfolio Lifecycle “m” (Re) focus Sense Formulate Plan Implement Evaluate Dissolve (Re) shape Programme Lifecycle “m+1” “n” “n+1” Survey Tools Analysis Tools Control Tools S1 Business capability survey A1 Actor network analysis C1 Architectural review S2 Business coupling survey A2 Application landscape analysis C2 Asset screening S3 Change actor-networks survey A3 Architectural capability analysis C3 Building permit review S4 Change volume survey A4 Change volume analysis C4 Bad asset valuation S5 Build/buy option survey A5 Data domain analysis C5 Pre-deployment review S6 Technical integration survey A6 Delivery costing analysis C6 Procurement review Modelling Tools A7 Functional domain analysis Leverage Tools M1 Change capability modelling A8 Process domain analysis L1 Change Process Automation M2 Change cost modelling A9 Project landscape analysis L2 Architectural Ensembles M3 Change scorecard modelling A10 Technical domain analysis L3 Change Adoption Networks M4 Data lifecycles modelling Design Tools L4 Change Management Office M5 Functional domain modelling D1 Change Blueprint M6 Technical domain modelling D2 Change Roadmap Normalisation Tools D3 Change Strategy N1 Business model normalisation D4 Feasibility study N2 Operating model normalisation D5 Opportunities study N3 Change principles normalisation N4 Business strategies normalisation N5 Business use cases normalisation C E I T TOOLS FOR CHANGE PRACTITIONERS: Summary Tool Map and Curves S1 The primary value proposition in “tools for change practitioners” is that discrete tools can be introduced into existing delivery methodologies to improve their outcomes. Trajectories from this initial point include building a change capability. A non-exhaustive mapping of tools to portfolio and programmes cycles is shown in the 2-cycle graphic below, as are key properties tools need to have to enable traction with practitioners and to improve the chances of their adoption into a range of change delivery scenarios. formulate plan implement evaluate dissolve Changethebusinesscosts|Runthebusinesscosts| Δtp Δti Δte Δtd Δcc Δcr Steady state region at post- delivery for an “incremental unit of change” “n” Programme Cycle “n+1” The operational benefits of adopting tools for delivering a change initiative is reflected in the altered cost-time curve (graphic below): Reducing time taken( Δtp ,Δti , ) and reducing change & run costs (Δcc & Δcr). A third advantage is gained from the “pattern-effect” where “repetitive costs” are lowered at subsequent portfolio cycles and at successive change-points. “Without-tools” curve (used as reference) “With-tools” curve for one programme cycle S2 S2 Phase iteration Project-level iteration S1 S3 Programme exit Programme level iteration Programme portfolio synch point S5 S6 Tool properties that are conducive to adoption in change contexts include: 1 Low cost of acquisition and free at point of use 2 Easy to understand/ learn from principles 3 Ease of dissemination & training across borders 4 Modifiable & extensible for evolving usage contexts 5 Results from single points can be aggregated to “wholes” 6 Results are largely graphical in representation 7 Results can be persisted for future reference S4 Programme- level iteration S4 D4 D5 D1 D2 D3 C1 C1 C2 C2 C3 C3 C4 C4 C5 C6 C1 C2 C6 C2 C4 L1 L2 L1 L4 L4 L3 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 L4 N1 N2 N4 N5 N3 N3 A1 A2 A3 A4 A4 A5 A6 A7 A7 A7 A9 A8 A9 A10 A9 Copyrighted material 2014E: [email protected] | Skype: royvarug