• Explore More Strategy Topics

  Agile Agility Alignment Architecture Benchmark Business Cost Decision-Making Definition EA Enterprise Architecture Enterprise Archuitecture Execution Framework Good Enough Governance GTD Heuristic IEEE 1457 IT IT Governance ITIL Management Measurement Methodology Performance Planning Planninig Principle Principles Process Project Reference Architecture Research Security Simple Small Wins SOA Social Architecture Software Architecture Solution Standards Strategy Technology Thinking TOGAF Trends Zachman

• Blogroll

  • Enterprise Architecture: From Incite comes Insight…
  • Pragmatic Enterprise Architecture
  • Serge Thorn’s IT Blog
  • Smart (Enough) Systems
  • Technology Architecture & Projects
  • The Practice of Leadership
  • Todd Biske: Outside the Box
  • User-Centric Enterprise Architecture

“Time after time, we have found that in the midst of profound and complex change, more than one significant aspect of the enterprise is changing at once. Often key leaders or team members don’t see the whole system in the same way - each sees a different portion of the overall picture. They generally do not agree on the range of forces affecting their business or on their importance. They often do not have shared views on the key strategies the business should use to respond to these forces, what the business must become, where they currently stand, or how they will go about the change or development that is needed to survive in the changing environment. Even when different members see parts of the system from a common perspective, key elements in the system are often “invisible” to any particular group, and their disagreements often lie in just these invisible areas. Conflicts arise because not everyone is on the same page regarding the key elements of the enterprise as a whole.” - Friedman & Gyr “The Dynamic Enterprise”

Silo-based systems are developed due to a lack of seeing the whole or the big picture. Seeing the whole is a collaborative rather than individual effort as each stakeholder helps us to gain an important insight into the whole. This can be likened to the parable of the "Blind Men and the Elephant", where, “Knowing in part may make a fine tale, but wisdom comes from seeing the whole.” See the whole is analogy to effort of blind men and the elephant: In a sense, each individual is blind to the invisible big picture.

The capability to address the enterprise as a whole, distinguishes the enterprise architecture paradigm from the others. Enterprise architecture is about “seeing the whole”, as such there can only be one enterprise view of the organisation….

 

 

The value of enterprise architecture is it’s role in identifying the big picture of the enterprise and to provide the enterprise definition for each architectural domain, so architects can design the IT architecture from an enterprise consideration. Enterprise architecture can be distinguished from other styles of architecture by it’s enterprise perspective. Enterprise architecture is the discipline of seeing the whole, of seeing the big picture.

 

"The enterprise architecture is the organizing logic for business processes and IT infrastructure, reflecting the integration and standardization requirements of the company’s operating model (where the operating model is defined as the necessary level of business process integration and standardization for delivering goods and services to customers). The enterprise architecture provides a long-term view of a company’s processes, systems, and technologies so that individual projects can build capabilities - not just fulfill immediate needs." - Jeanne W. Ross, Peter Weill, David C. Robertson, Enterprise Architecture As Strategy, Harvard Business School Press, 2006.

 

Technorati Tags: EA, Enterprise Architecture, Definition, Architecture

Photo by stilllearninghowtofly - W W Tribe Psychiatrist

 

Nothing happens until we plan and a good plans have goals and objectives. Setting goals and objectives correctly goes a long way towards the achievement of them. Before we dive into how to go about setting SMART objectives, it’s important to be aware of the difference between goals and objectives.

• Goals relate to our aspirations, purpose and vision. For example, I have a goal of becoming financially independent, this is a goal.
• Objectives is the battle plan, the stepping stones on the path towards the achievement of my goal.

 

Thus, a goal may consist of one or many objectives need to fulfilled to achieve the goal. For example, to become financially independent I would need to 1) get out of debt, 2) improve my savings and perhaps 3) start a business.

A well known method for setting meaningful objectives is through the use of the S.M.A.R.T. approach. Although the SMART approach seems to be well understood amongst managers, but I’ve found poorly practiced. S.M.A.R.T refers to the acronym that describes the key characteristics of meaningful objectives, these are:

• Specific (concrete, detailed, well defined)
• Measurable (numbers, quantity, comparison)
• Achievable (feasible, actionable)
• Realistic (considering resources)
• Time-Bound (a defined time line)

Lets look at each these characteristics in more detail…

Specific

Specific means that the objective is concrete, detailed, focused and well defined. Specific means that it’s results and action-orientated. Objective must be clear, emphasize action and describe the required outcome. Objectives need to communicate what you would like to see happen in concrete terms. To help set specific objectives it helps to ask:

• WHAT am I going to do? This are best written using strong, action verbs such as conduct, develop, build, plan, execute, etc. This helps your objective to be action-orientated and focuses on what’s most important.
• WHY is this important for me to do?
• WHO is going to do what? Who else need to be involved?
• WHEN do I want this to be completed?
• HOW am I going to do this?

“The successful man is the average man, focused.” - Unknown

Diagnostic Questions

• What exactly are we going to do, with or for whom?
• What strategies will be used?
• Is the objective well understood?
• Is the objective described with action verbs?
• Is it clear who is involved?
• Is it clear where this will happen?
• Is it clear what needs to happen?
• Is the outcome clear?
• Will this objective lead to the desired results?

Achievable

Objectives need to be achievable, if the objective is too far in the future, you’ll find it difficult to keep motivated and to strive to attain it. Objectives, unlike your aspirations and visions, need to be achievable to keep you motivated. I do feel that objectives need to stretch you, but not so far that you become frustrated and lose motivation.

Diagnostic Questions

• Can we get it done in the proposed timeframe?
• Do I understand the limitations and constraints?
• Can we do this with the resources we have?
• Has anyone else done this successfully?
• Is this possible?

Realistic

Objectives that are achievable, may not be realistic….. however, realistic does not mean easy. Realistic means that you have the resources to get it done. The achievement of an objective requires resources, such as, skills, money, equipment, etc. to the task required to achieve the objective. Whilst keeping objectives realistic, ensure that they stretch you. Most objectives are achievable but, may require a change in your priorities to make them happen.

Diagnostic Questions

• Do you have the resources available to achieve this objective?
• Do I need to revisit priorities in my life to make this happen?
• Is it possible to achieve this objective?

Measurable

If the objective is measurable, it means that the measurement source is identified and we are able to track the actions as we progress towards the objective. Measurement is the standard used for comparison. For example, what financially independence means to me, may be totally different compared to what is means for you. As it’s so often said if you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it! It’s important to have measures that will encourage and motivate you on the way as you see the change occurring, this may require interim measures. Measurements go along way to help us to know when we have achieved our objective.

Diagnostic Questions

• How will I know that the change has occurred?
• Can these measurements be obtained?

Time-Bound

Time-bound means setting a deadlines for the achievement of the objective. Deadlines need to be both achievable and realistic. If you don’t set a time you will reduce the motivation and urgency required to execute the tasks. Time frames create the necessary urgency and prompts action.

Diagnostic Questions

• When will this objective be accomplished?
• Is there a stated deadline?

“There’s a difference between interest and commitment. When you’re interested in doing something, you do it only when circumstance permit. When you’re committed to something, you accept no excuses, only results.” - Unknown

Technorati Tags: Goal-setting, Leadership, Management, Objectives, Goals, Planning, Strategy, Business

The phrase "Strong Opinions, Weakly Held" from a post by Bob Sutton describes an important philosophy for architects, Bob Sutton describes the importance of this idea as:

"….the virtues of wise people – those who have the courage to act on their knowledge, but the humility to doubt what they know…to deal with an uncertain future and still move forward – they advise people to have ’strong opinions, which are weakly held.’ …… Bob explained that weak opinions are problematic because people aren’t inspired to develop the best arguments possible for them, or to put forth the energy required to test them. Bob explained that it was just as important, however, to not be too attached to what you believe because, otherwise, it undermines your ability to ’see’ and ‘hear’ evidence that clashes with your opinions. This is what psychologists sometimes call the problem of ‘confirmation bias.’"

When dealing with complex and uncertain futures having strong opinions, weakly held is an important philosophy in how to approach the development of strategy.

 

Strong Opinions…

 

Strong opinions encourage you to develop strong arguments that support your point of view. Consider the alternative, weak opinions, when we have weak opinions:

1. We generally don’t develop robust arguments to support a weak opinion.
2. Weak opinions don’t challenge other people to debate and test the validity of the supporting argument.

Take a strong stand, if you’re wrong, acknowledge it and be open to learning along the way. By taking a strong stand, rather than a weak one, will invite the opposition, debate and dialogue necessary to test that validity of the supporting argument.

 

Weakly Held….

 

Much of the opinions we hold today, are based on what we see today. While strong opinions encourage you to develop strong arguments supporting your point of view, if those opinions are strongly held we often fail to change in response to other people’s ideas and fail to change in response to new information. Considering the human tendency to actively seek information and evidence that supports our existing point of view. People with strongly held opinions invest way too much time and energy, supporting their existing opinions and fail to observe and respond to new information and feedback.

 

Having strong opinions, weakly held enables us to observe and rapidly respond to the changing world. Taking a position and developing a supporting argument, then rapidly testing your point of view, whilst being open to learning is a crucial skill required for success in complex and uncertain situations.

 

Try the following when you’re next faced with a complex issue to resolve:

• What strong opinions do you have about the issue you’re working on?
• Do you have a clear argument to support your opinion?
• Share your opinion with a number people on both sides of the issue.
• Consider how you can incorporate some of the ideas and feedback to strengthen your argument. Or, alternatively should you be changing your opinion?

 

Technorati Tags: Principles, Philosophy, Management, Strategy, Business, Opinions, Decisions

A post “Why Most People Are Wrong About What’s Strategy?” from the blog Innovation Playground, provides some interesting insights from a McKinsey interview with Prof Richard Rumelt of UCLA’s Anderson:

• Most corporate strategic plans have little to do with strategy. They are simply three-year or five-year rolling resource budgets and some sort of market share projection. Calling this strategic planning creates false expectations that the exercise will somehow produce a coherent strategy.
• Plans are essential management tools….. plan coordinates the deployment of resources—but it’s not strategy. These resource budgets simply cannot deliver what senior managers want: a pathway to substantially higher performance.
• There are only two ways to get that. One, you can invent your way to success. Unfortunately, you can’t count on that. The second path is to exploit some change in your environment—in technology, consumer tastes, laws, resource prices, or competitive behavior—and ride that change with quickness and skill. This second path is how most successful companies make it. Changes, however, don’t come along in nice annual packages, so the need for strategy work is episodic, not necessarily annual.
• Many people think the solution to the strategic-planning problem is to inject more strategy into the annual process. But I disagree. I think the annual rolling resource budget should be separate from strategy work. So my basic recommendation is to do two things: avoid the label “strategic plan”—call those budgets “long-term resource plans”—and start a separate, non-annual, opportunity-driven process for strategy work.
• Any strategy starts with identifying change. Here’s an example. Right now, the advent of 3G cellular technology makes it possible to deliver streaming video over mobile phones. Cell phone makers, cellular carriers, and media companies all need to develop strategies for exploiting this change. Even though these changes have long-term consequences, companies need to take a position now. By “take a position” I mean invest in resources that will be made more valuable by the changes that are happening.
• Strategic thinking helps us take positions in a world that is confusing and uncertain. You can’t get rid of ambiguity and uncertainty—they are the flip side of opportunity. If you want certainty and clarity, wait for others to take a position and see how they do. Then you’ll know what works, but it will be too late to profit from the knowledge.
• So how does a company take a good position? One big factor is a predatory posture focused on going after changes. I saw an interesting pattern. Most executives easily explained how companies became market leaders: some sort of window of opportunity opened, and the leader was the company that was the first to successfully jump through that window. Not exactly the first mover but the first to get it right. But when I asked these same executives about their own strategies, I heard a lot about doorknob polishing. They were doing 360-degree feedback, forming alliances, outsourcing, cutting costs, and so on. None of them even mentioned taking a good position quickly when the industry changes.

“Key takeaway, strategy is about the big opportunity and how well you are prepared for it.”

Technorati Tags: Strategy, Leadership, Management, Change, Trends

• Search for:

• Welcome

  Welcome to Architecture and Change. You can subscribe to my blog using RSS or you can subscribe by e-mail

• Contact

  
  
  

• Busy Reading...

• Interesting Blog Stats

• Show of Support