Tag Archives: business transformation
This is an age of technology disruption and digitization. Winners will be those organizations that can adapt quickly and drive business transformation on an ongoing basis.
When I first met John Schmidt Vice President of Global Integration Services at Informatica, he asked me to visualize Business Transformation as “A modern tool like the internet and Google Maps, with which planning a road trip from New York to San Francisco with a number of stops along the way to visit friends or see some sights takes just minutes. So you’re halfway through the trip and a friend calls to say he has suddenly been called out of town, you get on your mobile phone and within a few minutes, you have a new roadmap and a new plan.”
So, why is it that creating a roadmap for an enterprise initiative takes months or even years, and upon development of such a plan, it is nearly impossible to change even when new information or external events invalidate the plan? A single transformation is useful, but what you really want is the ability to transform our business on an ongoing basis. You need to be agile in planning of the transformation initiative itself. Is it even feasible to achieve a planning capability for complex enterprise initiatives that could approach the speed and agility of cross-country road-trip planning?
The short answer is YES; you can get much faster if you do three things:
First, throw out old notions of how planning in complex corporate environments is done, while keeping in mind that planning an enterprise transformation is fundamentally different than planning a focused departmental initiative.
Second, invest in tools equivalent to Google Maps for building the enterprise roadmap. Google Maps works because it leverages a database of information about roads, rules of the roads, related local services, and points of interest. In short, Google Map the enterprise, which is not as onerous as it sounds.
Third, develop a team of Enterprise Architects and planners with the skills and discipline to use the BOST™ Framework to maintain the underlying reference data about the business, its operations, the systems that support it, and the technologies that they are based on. This will provide the execution framework for your organization to deliver the data to fuel your business initiatives and digital strategy.
The results in a closer alignment of your business and IT organizations, there will be fewer errors due to communication issues, and because your business plans are linked directly to the underlying technical implementation, your business value will be delivered quicker.
This is not some “pie in the sky” theory or a futuristic dream. What you need is a tool like Google Maps for Business Transformation. The tool is the BOST™ Toolkit leverages the BOST™ Framework, which through models, elements, and associated relationships built around an underlying Metamodel, interprets enterprise processes using a 4-dimensional view driven by business, operations, systems, and technology. Informatica in collaboration with certified partners built The BOST™ Framework. It provides an Architecture-led Planning approach to for business transformation.
Benefits of Architecture-led Planning
The Architecture-led Planning approach is effective when applied with governance and oversight. The following four features describe the benefits:
Enablement of Business and IT Collaboration – Uses a common reference model to facilitate cross-functional business alignment, as well as alignment between business and IT. The model gets everyone on the same page, regardless of line of business, location, or IT function. This model explicitly and dynamically starts with business strategy and links from there to the technical implementation.
Data-driven Planning – Being able to capture data in a structured repository helps with rapid planning. A data-driven plan makes it dynamic and adaptable to changing circumstances. When the plan changes, rather than updating dozens of documents, simply apply the change to the relevant components in the enterprise model repository and all business and technical model views that reference that component update automatically.
Cross-Functional Decision Making – Cross-functional decision-making is facilitated in several ways. First, by showing interdependencies between functions, business operations, and systems, the holistic view helps each department or team to understand the big-picture and its role in the overall process. Second, the future state architectural models are based on a view of how business operations will change. This provides the foundation to determine the business value of the initiative, measure your progress, and ultimately report the achievement of the goals. Quantifiable metrics help decision makers look beyond the subjective perspectives and agree on fact-based success metrics.
Reduced Execution Risk – Reduced execution risk results from having a robust and holistic plan based on a rigorous analysis of all the dependent enterprise components in the business, operations, systems and technology view. Risk is reduced with an effective governance discipline both from a program management as well as from an architectural change perspective.
Business Transformation with Informatica
Integrated Program Planning is for organizations that need large or complex Change Management assistance. Examples of candidates for Integrated Program Planning include:
Enterprise Initiatives: Large-scale mergers or acquisitions, switching from a product-centric operating model to more customer-centric operations, restructuring channel or supplier relationships, rationalizing the company’s product or service portfolio, or streamlining end-to-end processes such as order-to-cash, procure-to-pay, hire-to-retire or customer on-boarding.
Top-level Directives: Examples include board-mandated data governance, regulatory compliance initiatives that have broad organizational impacts such as data privacy or security, or risk management initiatives.
Expanding Departmental Solutions into Enterprise Solutions: Successful solutions in specific business areas can often be scaled-up to become cross-functional enterprise-wide initiatives. For example, expanding a successful customer master data initiative in marketing to an enterprise-wide Customer Information Management solution used by sales, product development, and customer service for an Omni-channel customer experience.
|The BOST™ Framework identifies and defines enterprise capabilities. These capabilities are modularized as reconfigurable and scalable business services. These enterprise capabilities are independent of organizational silos and politics, which provide strategists, architects, and planners the means to drive for high performance across the enterprise, regardless of the shifting set of strategic business drivers.The BOST™ Toolkit facilitates building and implementing new or improved capabilities, adjusting business volumes, and integrating with new partners or acquisitions through common views of these building blocks and through reusing solution components. In other words, Better, Faster, Cheaper projects.
The BOST™ View creates a visual understanding of the relationship between business functions, data, and systems. It helps with the identification of relevant operational capabilities and underlying support systems that need to change in order to achieve the organization’s strategic objectives. The result will be a more flexible business process with greater visibility and the ability to adjust to change without error.
In my previous blog, I talked about how a business-led approach can displace technology-led projects. Historically IT-led projects have invested significant capital while returning minimal business value. It further talks about how transformation roadmap execution is sustainable because the business is driving the effort where initiative investments are directly traceable to priority business goals.
For example, an insurance company wants to improve the overall customer experience. Mature business architecture will perform an assessment to highlight all customer touch points. It requires a detailed capability map, fully formed, customer-triggered value streams, value stream/ capability cross-mappings and stakeholder/ value stream cross-mappings. These business blueprints allow architects and analysts to pinpoint customer trigger points, customer interaction points and participating stakeholders engaged in value delivery.
One must understand that value streams and capabilities are not tied to business unit or other structural boundaries. This means that while the analysis performed in our customer experience example may have been initiated by a given business unit, the analysis may be universally applied to all business units, product lines and customer segments. Using the business architecture to provide a representative cross-business perspective requires incorporating organization mapping into the mix.
Incorporating the application architecture into the analysis and proposed solution is simply an extension of business architecture mapping that incorporates the IT architecture. Robust business architecture is readily mapped to the application architecture, highlighting enterprise software solutions that automate various capabilities, which in turn enable value delivery. Bear in mind, however, that many of the issues highlighted through a business architecture assessment may not have corresponding software deployments since significant interactions across the business tend to be manual or desktop-enabled. This opens the door to new automation opportunities and new ways to think about business design solutions.
Building and prioritizing the transformation strategy and roadmap is dramatically simplified once all business perspectives needed to enhance customer experience are fully exposed. For example, if customer service is a top priority, then that value stream becomes the number one target, with each stage prioritized based on business value and return on investment. Stakeholder mapping further refines design approaches for optimizing stakeholder engagement, particularly where work is sub-optimized and lacks automation.
Capability mapping to underlying application systems and services provides the basis for establishing a corresponding IT deployment program, where the creation and reuse of standardized services becomes a focal point. In certain cases, a comprehensive application and data architecture transformation becomes a consideration, but in all cases, any action taken will be business and not technology driven.
Once this occurs, everyone will focus on achieving the same goals, tied to the same business perspectives, regardless of the technology involved.
Transformation roadmaps in many businesses tend to have a heavy technology focus, to the point where organizations invest millions of dollars in initiatives with no clear business value. In addition, numerous tactical projects funded each year have little understanding of how or even if, they align from a business perspective. Management often fall victim to the latest technology buzzwords, while stakeholder value, business issues, and strategic considerations take a backseat. When this happens, executives who should be focused on business scenarios to improve stakeholder value fall victim to technology’s promise of the next big thing.
I recently participated in the writing and reviewing a series of whitepapers on Business-led transformation at Informatica’s Strategic Services Group. These whitepapers discusses how executives can leverage business architecture to reclaim their ability to drive a comprehensive transformation strategy and roadmap. I will try to summarize them into this blog.
Consider the nature of most initiatives found within a corporate program office. They generally focus on enhancing one system or another, or in more extreme cases a complete rebuild. The scope of work is bounded by a given system, not by the business focal point, whether that is a particular business capability, stakeholder, or value delivery perspective. These initiatives generally originate within the IT organization, not the business, and launched in response to a specific business need quickly translated into a software enhancement, rewrite, or database project. Too often, however, these projects have myopia and lack an understanding of cross-impacts to other projects, business units, stakeholders, or products. Their scope is constrained, not by a given customer or business focus, but by technology.
Business led transformation delivers a value centric perspective and provides the underlying framework for envisioning and crafting a more comprehensive solution. In some cases, this may begin with a quick fix if that is essential, but this must be accompanied by a roadmap for a more transformative solution. It provides a more comprehensive issue analysis and planning perspective because it offers business specific, business first viewpoints that enable issue analysis and resolution through business transparency.
ERP systems were a true competitive advantage 20+ years ago, but not so today. ERP systems are a tool that gave people the best view into their business, but that is when there really were only ERP systems and Databases, but today that critical data resides in so many other areas. There are several reasons why ERP systems act as a data trap: technical factors, out of date management theory, and big data trends. First, let’s talk about management theory.
There are two fundamental concepts that have been driving much of the strategic planning in modern organizations in recent decades. The idea of economies of scale is deeply embedded in our thinking. The concept was first introduced by Adam Smith in the 18th century and reinforced throughout the 20th century by contemporaries such as Bruce Henderson. In 1968 Henderson wrote “”Costs characteristically decline by 20-30% in real terms each time accumulated experience doubles.” The basic idea is that bigger is better. (more…)
Collaborative learning is essential for transforming work activities that involve a high degree of uncertainty and creativity into a lean value stream. These characteristics are common in enterprise integration initiatives due to unclear and inconsistent data definitions across multiple silos, rapidly changing requirements and lack of perfect knowledge around end-to-end processes. Traditional approaches generally end up propagating the integration hairball which is inefficient and wasteful – and certainly not Lean. You could say that these value streams are simply immature processes that lack standards and metrics, which is true, but the practitioners that are involved in the process don’t see it that way. They see themselves as highly skilled professionals solving complex unique problems and delivering customized solutions that fit like a glove. But yet, the outside observer who looks at the end-to-end process at the macro level sees patterns that are repeated over and over again and what appears to be a great deal of “reinventing the wheel.” (more…)