Pulling It All Together - CLAP + PMLC

In a series of previous posts, we took a look at various frameworks for bringing valuable IT Services to an Enterprise. Starting with the CLAP Framework, we saw took a look at a basic way of starting with Business Activities and building the necessary Conceptual, Logical & Physical Infrastructures to deliver valuable IT Services.

Next, we saw how to use a tool like the ERRC Canvas to achieve the Enterprise Strategy, by mapping the strategy to goals & objectives. The key function of the canvas is to separate the objectives into four areas: Eliminate, Reduce, Raise & Create. 

Once divided, metric for success are applied, and plans can be created. These plans can be prioritized and dependencies mapped. Getting from Business Strategy to IT Execution is no easy feat - so this post describes a method of execution.

Of course, understanding goals as they relate to Strategy is also very important. We took a look at how to create SMART Goals.

Illustration: CLAP and PMLC Together on One Page

We are now in a position to pull all of those concepts into one diagram, shown above. I have attempted to layer the various concepts together, and embellished them with some extra information, such as when a project can expect to need to engage various roles within the RACI.

Finally, we see three vertical lines which describe a form of IT Governance. In a future post, I will describe the make-up of the ARB/TRB and explain the importance of the Architectural Validation Plan.

Business Service Model for IT

IT exists for one purpose: to provide the tools necessary to enable Business Activities. Like we saw in the CLAP Framework, Business Capabilities are made up of a number of discrete Business Activities. But it is in the delivery of the Business Capabilties as a Service that IT provides value to the Enterprise.

The model for a Business Service is clearly defined by the ITIL framework. In short, it is composed of People, Process and Technology. Certainly, the framework also describes the meta-data, which includes the Service Owner, the Service Consumer and the Service Provider.

Once the functional and non-functional requirements of the Business Capabilities are mapped out, the application and its underlying infrastructure become straightforward to build out. As I have posted about previously, the Project Management Life Cycle can be easily applied to deliver these capabilities to the Enterprise. Of course, more than one capability can be provided by a single service. Often many services get grouped together to form a broader service.

There is also another relationship hidden in a simple model like this one. The degree to which a process is repeatable (and can therefore be automated) has implications to the People part of the equation. The more highly repeatable and automated a process is, the lower the required skill-set for the labour, which should in turn lower the cost of the Service to the Enterprise.

Posted with Blogsy

Project Management Life Cycle

Illustration: Project Management Life Cycle

We all know that IT projects don't just happen. They usually start with an idea that gets socialized internally, until somebody decides it is interesting enough to write a business case, justifying why the idea might be good for the Enterprise. The Project Management Life Cycle (PMLC) walks the reader, from left to right, through all the components of a project. It assumes the project has been instantiated and has executive sponsorship. Other activities prior to the project itself include the Opportunity Assessment, a Cost/Benefit Analysis, and likely ROI and TCO studies.

The PMLC illustration above is designed to show three things at each stage: the roles that contribute to the project, their responsibility and their deliverable. Starting on the left, the Stakeholders typically sit on a Steering committee, and provide budgetary approvals for the project.

The project is run by the Project Manager, who is responsible for budget, timeline & resources. They usually draft the Project Charter, which defines the objectives and scope of the project. They are responsible for reporting back to, and taking direction from the steering committee. It is their responsibility to deliver the project to successful completion.

The Business Analyst does a lot of leg-work, dealing with the stakeholders to understand requirements, both functional and non-functional. They will take raw data they have collected, and produce information which is valuable to the project, and consumable by all members of the project team.

Now that you have a general idea of the flow, you can interpret the rest of the illustration for yourself. Other information that will later become key is called the RACI. It is an artifact that names all of the roles (as seen in the illustration), and determines who is Responsible, who is Accountable, who is Consulted and who is Informed when a project decision has to be made.

This is a general look at how IT projects move through their life cycle. In a future post, I'll overlay the CLAP Framework, to pull together all of the concepts into a single view.

Posted with Blogsy

CLAP Framework for IT

Many Enterprises struggle with IT frameworks. These frameworks are meant to help turn Business strategy into executable plans. Some frameworks, such as TOGAF or Zachmann will help an Enterprise IT group understand WHAT it needs to do to achieve its goals. Other frameworks, like COBIT or ITIL will further explain HOW to achieve those goals. When an Enterprise does not follow any of the established frameworks, they will often try to devise their own. The diagram above illustrates one such framework - the "CLP" framework (the "A" was added later, after missing information was identified).

Conceptual - this stage of the framework takes the Business Activities into account. Each discrete activity can be mapped out as a few elements in a process, describing a single activity. An example might be "calculate price".

Logical - this stage maps the discrete activities required. To calculate price, we need some information from a number of sources, such as the gross price, a taxation rate, a discount and a profit margin. Further, architectural governance (standards) are applied, such as use of a Linux operating system, or mandating a particular security framework. Finally, Non-Functional Requirements (NFRs) are described, such as how quickly a system must respond or how many transactions per minute the system must satisfy.

Application - this stage is where we begin to apply some business logic about what to do with the information. It maps out what the information should be expected to look like, such as expressing numbers in Currency notation, with two decimal points of precision. It will also describe any user interfaces and other means of accessing information. It specifically maps business activities to Functional Requirements.

Physical - this final stage helps identify all of systems that are required. Items such as CPU utilization and storage requirements are calculated to determine how best to implement the system into a computing environment. It describes systems interactions in terms of protocols and transports.

This is not an exhaustive look at frameworks, and many Enterprise Architects will keenly assess missing elements from this simplistic framework. But, executed properly, a framework such as this one could be sufficient for an Enterprise to begin taking advantage of IT to realize their business strategy.

Posted with Blogsy

P.O.W.E.R.

Lately I've been building a lot of models. As many may know, my role at my company is a mix of Enterprise Architecture and Technology Strategist, with project work to keep me busy. I spend the majority of my days working out how improving various technology systems relate to real business goals. I like to think my work provides information that supports good business decisions.

Sure, there are many different frameworks one can apply, such as TOGAF or Zachmann. But in the real world, few organizations adopt the entire framework. They take a smattering of TOGAF and a little of ITIL, then build out projects based on Waterfall or Agile project management methodologies. Finally, they bundle all that up & call it their "process". In my many roles in this industry I have seen how well this works - or doesn't !

 

A friend of mine has challenged me to write about how I have been successful using an adapted model, and how to re-apply that model to other Enterprises. I sought his counsel on how to go about doing that and he introduced me to a very simple (hence very elegant) writing method: P.O.W.E.R.

P - Plan: what are you writing about ? Who would the target audience be ? What style of book should it be ?

O - Outline: build out an imaginary table of contents. What should be included ? In what order ?

W - Write: simply go about the business of collecting your ideas on your word-processing application.

E - Edit: word-smith. Play with sentence structure. Play with the order of your ideas. Hack & slash as needed.

R - Release: it'll never be "perfect", so when it is good enough, stop. Publish. Think about the next book !

It's a simple yet powerful (you see what I did there ?) way to begin the process.I think I'm going to take a stab at it, and see what happens. But don't expect to see my name on the NYT Best-Seller list - it'll be a technical/architectural manual, so it might only appeal to a limited audience.

 

Posted with Blogsy

The Importance of Process

 

I haven't blogged in some time. Seems life can get overwhelmingly busy at times, and well - it has been some of those times ! I've been spending a lot of time lately working on things that are process-oriented. Seems that when organizations want to define the products and services they sell, they ignore the industry-accepted definition.

According to ITIL, a Service is made up of people, process and technology. All too often, the organization believes that they can simply purchase and implement a tool, and all of their problems will miraculously disappear. I am working with two clients, who are approaching their delivery of a Service differently.

The first client is a large player in the Energy sector. To date, they have eschewed the use of ITIL terms to define their IT Service, as it doesn't readily fit their model for doing business. How could they let IT tell them how to run their business ?

When this client wanted to clean up their IT monitoring systems, they chose to segment the work into business-identifiable Services. They presumed they could buy a tool, and their visibility into their IT Operations would magically improve. They have been profitably in business for decades, so surely their processes and people were fine ?

In examining the first Service, it became apparent that the technology they were employing was actually satisfying 90% of their needs. It seemed the issues came up after the monitoring system alerted to a problem. Multiple service tickets were generated, usually causing a firestorm of activity - usually within the wrong groups ! To exacerbate the issue, the groups weren't communicating. This meant there was almost always a large duplication of troubleshooting effort.

In the case of the first client, the processes which were initiated were the root-cause of their issues. The technology did what it was supposed to do: send an alert when a problem arose. The people simply followed the process and reacted to the alert in a timely fashion. Unfortunately the process didn't allow for communication and co-ordination of their efforts, leading to delays and confusion in the IT personnel.

The second client is a small services company. They are re-building the company from the ground up; I call it going back into startup mode. In so doing, they are examining the services they provide to their clients. From the very basest levels, they want to be able to create repeatable, sustainable & desirable solutions for their clients.

This is being achieved by turning everything they do into a "project", with somebody responsible for managing that project at the helm. Project Management 101 would tell us that the Project Manager is responsible for Resources, Timeline and Budget - does this sound like what a Management Team should be concerned about ? So whether it is a team which is conducting Research and Development on a new physical product, or the Marketing guy working on building a new web-site, everything is a project. This provides visibility into "who ?", "when ?" and "how much ?" questions.

What this also means is that the second client can begin to normalize their Operations. By treating everything like a project, they have a repeatable framework to follow. The standard body of documentation required for every project (Charter, Cost/Benefit Analysis, Project Plan, Work Breakdown Structure and Closeout Report) allows for repeatability. Need a tower built ? Here's the required artifacts. Need a portable antenna installed ? Heres the project plan.

This will allow the client to have very tight control over their operations. This leads to increased productivity of the resources, as well as predictability in their Finance department, in terms of budget and revenue. The Sales and Business Development people can look at an exisiting Project Plan and estimate for themselves roughly how long it should take to complete a project. Further, if they are simply repeating a pre-exisiting project, they can likely provide a pricing quotation on their own.

So in both cases, we are seeing how these two very different clients are approaching their issues by examining the Services they provide. And in so doing, they are recognizing the importance of having well-documented procedures for their people to follow. The technologies they employ are all but irrelevant.

Posted with Blogsy

Open Source Frameworks

I will immediately start by saying that I have shamelessly stolen the idea for this blog. Massimo Banzi is one of the original creators of the Open-Source hardware platform, called the Arduino. It allows an inventor to program the microcontroller to control whatever mechanical system in whatever fashion they want. Imagine budding tinkerers building their own stop-lights, or fashioning their own motor-control systems ! 

In his Ted Talk (found here: How Arduino is Open Sourcing Imagination ), Massimo discusses how the Arduino gives inventors and tinkerers alike the ability to build with their imagination, pretty much free from the constraints of having to know very much about the hardware. Whether its the Arduino or one of the other new platforms, inventors and imaginers are free to explore the creative side, without getting too bogged down in the nuts & bolts of the hardware.

 

I'm going to make a leap here, so follow along... Another one of my Blogs describes my IT Service Management project, and briefly describes the use of the ITIL Framework. The purpose of the ITIL Framework, and more importantly the ITIL Dictionary, is to provide a common language for IT people to discuss the work that they do, and the services they provide.

 

Here's the leap: Arduino provides a common platform for tinkerers, inventors and imaginers to develop & share their ideas. Be they heliostats or stop lights. Just like the Global Village Construction Set describes plans for building the 50 commonly-used tools for building a society, Arduino provides a common platform for building the tools that society needs to control things.

 

Are you seeing the theme ? Open Source projects are providing the "Common Platform" required to get big, important things done. Like controlling mechanical devices, or building a society, or defining how we look at computer systems. This is why Open Source is so important.

 

Posted with Blogsy

Chasing Shiny Objects

Shiny Objects

As my ITSM project continues, I am once again forced to have a series of uncomfortable conversations with my client. It seems that a smooth-talking sales rep has convinced an Operational Manager that they can solve all of their "monitoring and alerting" problems by simply ripping out what they currently have, and implementing a shiny new solution !

Shiny Services

Another Operational Manager has been consorting with a local Services Provider, who promises that if my client simply outsources their monitoring & alerting to them, all the problems will go away. For a low monthly fee ! Just sign a PO Mr Customer, and we can get started right away !

What's a Service ?

Now remember that the ITIL definition of a Service indicates that it is comprised as People, Process and Technology. In the first instance above, it appears that Manager believes he can buy a shiny new object, and all of his problems will go away ! That might speak to the Technology, but delivers nothing for the people or processes. In the second instance, the Manager is hoping to be able to outsource to the Services company, thereby dealing with the people aspect. But the Technology, and possibly the Processes are not being addressed. As such, neither solution deals with the underlying desire to take a "service-oriented" view of the IT Operation.

So in order to address this project properly, we will need to address all three facets of a service: Technology, Processes and People. I have re-ordered them because that is the most logical to me. I see the steps as:

1. Interview the Executive Sponsors to determine what their objectives are. In essence, I like to ask "What business problem are we trying to solve ?"
2. Interview the Operations Managers to determine what they see as being success criteria for the project.
3. Interview the Operations Team Leads. They will provide deep knowledge of the environment, the tools, and the current processes.

Technology

These three sets on interviews will provide the information required for the first phase of the project : Information Gathering & Gap Analysis. The Gap Analysis artifact is the first real Deliverable of the project. Once complete the Gap Analysis will help define what Technology is suited for the overall monitoring needs.

Process

I am in the middle of developing a series of Process Diagrams. These are visual representations of the processes that Operations personnel must go through when a specific condition is detected and alerted upon. There are two diagrams per alert - current state, and desired state. Any gaps between the two are highlighted and root-cause analysis is applied. Typically, these types of exercises uncover communications errors, and/or inefficiencies in the processes.

People

Finally, the thorniest part of the project is examining the People on the various Operations teams. This gets sticky, because the objective is to examine whether or not the team members have the correct skills to perform the Future-State processes, with the tools highlighted in the Technology section. It is never intended as a criticism, but many teams feel threatened by this step.

Summary

So as you can see, an ITSM Project is a lot more than a discussion of how to monitor IT Infrastructure. It involves examining the People and Processes as well as the Technologies. Simply buying and implementing a shiny new technology won't adequately satisfy the objectives of delivering Service-oriented IT.

What's Next ?

In a future BLOG, I will examine the second phase of this project, which involves classifying the collected information into alerts and data-sets, with an eye to event correlation & reporting.