4. Marketing Agent
Input
Ideas
IT Metrics Industry &
Function Competitive
Metrics IS Project Analysis & Cost Estimation
Routine Systems
Project
IT Industry Develop.
Benchmark Exec.
Metrics IT R&D Non- Project Spec IT
Routine with Ball Project Summary
Function IS Steering
Project
Business Park Estimate Sponsor Committee
Technical Opportunities Analysts
AVL
Exec Mgmt
Enterprise- Aligned
OSR with Level IS
Office of Project
Business Value Portfolio
Business PMO
the CIO
Units
Business
AVL
Technical IS
Technical Alternatives Project
Strategic Plan Alternatives TP&T
IS
Business Project
Aligned: Closure
• Business priorities Analysts Document
• IT goals (e.g. building Project Controller
inhouse OO ability by 1/01) Analysis
Data
Historical
Results IT Metrics IT Value
Database Process
3
25. SOA Program Plan (High-Level), v0.3 Black lines are complete
Grey are not yet started
Project Start Date
End Date
Red dotted line
represents 1/22/09
Continues beyond 2009 date of report
..PHASE 1: EXPLORING (Early Learning / Ad Hoc Services).. ..PHASE 2: EXPANDING (Standard Services & Processes)..
Oct 2008 Nov Dec Jan 2009 Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
Projects
..EII, Phase 1..
.. ..EII, Phase 2.. ?
..Ring-Back Tones.. ?
..Others ?..
SGB (startup)
SGB (ongoing)
Governance
SOA Customized SOA Strategy
Roadmap
SOA Biz Case
Org Assessment EST (startup)
EST (ongoing)
Capability Plan
Biz & Leadership Communications
Biz Partner Engagement
Technical Training
(as needed)
Skills Tracking & Mgmt
Technical Training (formalized)
Customized SOA
Service Mgmt
Ref Architecture Service Design Standards
SOA Security Planning
Run-Time Security (in Production)
Service Data Model Exploration (SID)
Catalog
v.1 Service Catalog, v.2
Registry / Repository Implementation (Excel)
BPM
PAID Diagrams for RBT
Scrum Pilot
Scrum Enablement
Dev/Support
Templates for EII
Ad Hoc / Agile SDLC for Services
Finalize SDLC for Services
Testing Lab Requirements
Testing Lab Prototype
Testing Lab (in Production)
Testing Tools Selection & Trials
Final Tools Selection
Tools Standardization & Training
Infra/Ops
ESB (in Production & operationally ready)
Ops/Monitoring Tools Selection & Trials
Final Tools Implementation
Oct 2008 Nov Dec Jan 2009 Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
S:Information ServicesIS PlanningIS CapabilitiesCapability DevelopmentSOASOA-Program-Plan-vx.vsd
24
31. Disaster Recovery Swim Lane
Event Assessment Notification Decision/Declaration Communication Mobilization Communication Recovery Status Updates Business Ops
Authorities, etc.
Stores, Police,
Fire, Civil
Provide Receive Receive Restart
Onsite Commun- Commun- Business
Update ication ication Functionality
Building Is Normal
Assess Safe to Y
Inspect Computer Y Incident
Incident Building Room
Incident Mgmt Team
Enter? mgmt
Usable? Commun-
icate
N
Decision
Timing
Threshold
Exceeded?
Notify CM Recommend
N N Team & D/R
Wait 4 Hours Leadership Go/No-Go
& Request
Update
from Site
Crisis Mgmt
Commun- Commun-
Activate Confirm icate
Team
Stand Receive Recovery Meet at icate
Go on D/R Location Command Status Recovery
Unplanned Event
Standby Down Command of Hot to Biz
Decision Center Center Status
Site Liaison
Recovery Team
Confirm Assemble
Disaster
Review Receive Confirm Perform
Go on Stand D/R Location at RPO & Recovery
Standby Current of Hot Recovery
DR Plan Down Decision RTO & Validate
Site Site
• UNIX/Oracle
• Tuxedo
Stand • Cares
• Cares Apps
Down
Leadership
• Batch Jobs
Review Recovery • 3rd-Parties Receive
Receive Meet at
Senior
Team
No • Stores
Go on Options, Implement teams D/R Command • Agents Commun-
Standby Risks & D/R? Decision Center • Call Ctrs ication
Costs Yes Declare
Disaster
Liaison Team
Business
Go on Stand Receive Forward Forward
Standby Down D/R Status Status
Decision to Biz to Biz
Third Parties
Go on Stand Receive Work with
Standby Down D/R Recovery
Decision Teams
30
37. Solution AQM
Project Project Require- 3rd Party Develop Delivery Project
Architecture Test
Initiation Launch ments Planning (Code/Test) (Deployment) Close
(Design)
3rd Party Party Solicitation,
3rd Solicitation,
Evaluation, Selection
Evaluation, Selection 3rd Party Communication Process
SOW 3rd Party Issue Resolution Process
3rd Party Change Management Process
RFP
(or RFI / RFQ) 3rd Party Deliverables 3rd Party 3rd Party
Inspections/Review Acceptance Turnover
Vendor
Proposal
Vendor
Selection
Contract Negotiation
Joint SDLC
Approach Plan 3rd Party/USC Source Code Control
On / Off Site & Configuration Management
Considerations Environments Management
2-Way (USC Look-Alike)
SLA’s
3rd Party Contract Management (VM)
Contract (VM)
3rd Party Accounting and Payment Process (VM)
Detailed 3rd Party
3rd Party Performance Management Process (VM)
Work Plan Feedback
Project Planning and Project Control
Project Performance Metrics and Earned Value
Resource Capacity Planning 36
38. Request Central
Work Complete
Non-Routine Requests Routine Requests Queues
EXAMPLES: EXAMPLES:
• New Functionality Requests • Service Requests
• Strategic Initiatives • Break/Fix Repair
• Enhancements • Maintenance
• Quick Hits Project
Assess-
ment &
Review
Sunset Approved
& Replace- Requests
Retire / ment Plans
Renew Initiation
Aging Scoped &
Solutions
IS Resourced
Project
Support
&
Solutions Analysis/
Business
Operations
Life Cycle Req’ts
Approved,
Solution in Detailed
Production Requirements
Implement Design
Certified Approved,
System or Feasible
Upgrade Design
Build
& Test
37
39. ISSLC: Gates & Accuracy of Estimates
• Cost of Getting There (Stages 2-6): +/- 50%
STAGE 1 Gate • Cost of Living There (Stage 7): +/- 50%
PAR • Cost of Stage 2: +/- 10%
• Management Decision: Go/No-Go
STAGE 8 STAGE 2
Retire Initiation
Gate • Cost of Getting There: +/- 30%
• Cost of Living There: +/- 30%
• Cost of Stage 3: +/- 10%
• Management Decision: Go/No-Go
STAGE 7 Cost of STAGE 3
Support Living Require-
& Ops There ments
Cost of
Getting
There Gate
• Operations • Cost of Getting There: +/- 20%
Decision: • Cost of Living There: +/- 20%
Ready for Gate • Cost of Stage 4: +/- 10%
Acceptance • Business Unit Decision: Go/No-Go
or Not STAGE 6 STAGE 4
Implement Design
Gate
Gate STAGE 5 • Cost of Getting There: +/- 10%
Build • Cost of Living There: +/- 10%
• Cost of Stage 5: +/- 10%
• Business Unit Decision: Go/No-Go
• Business Unit Decision: Go/No-Go
38
43. IS Capability Initiative Brief: Implementing SOA as an IS Capability
Statement of Opportunity
One of the key leading practices in the IT industry is the concept of Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA).
• The primary value proposition of SOA lies in business agility – “increasing the reuse of services and business rules, by allowing internal processes to be driven from
established and trusted business data, resulting in nimble response to changing conditions” (Corp Exec Board).
• IS has embarked upon the SOA journey with a number of initiatives by various IS groups. We can benefit by ensuring that all these efforts are aligned and
building in concert toward a mature IS SOA capability.
People Process Technology
IS The links and interfaces among SOA, eTom, BPM, After analysis of SOA approaches and alternatives
ITIL and other disciplines are defined * (such as WOA) our near-term architectural
is leading the business in the governance of SOA
approach is adjusted to enhance results and
Leading practices for service development are
is promptly developing robust services implemented throughout IS
minimize risk
is effectively deploying services A long-range Roadmap for SOA implementation,
Service Repository processes are in place integration, and adoption is created and placed
is efficiently monitoring services & resolving issues
Technical training resources are finalized for IS under change control
Business partners associates, and made available as needed
Existing templates used in the IS SDLC are tweaked
are trained on the concept and impact of SOA Training processes and materials are identified for to support service development
business partner training
are providing leadership and governance Appropriate tools will be selected and rolled out
All related process documentation is updated and
are acting as SMEs for new service definitions The Services Catalog is updated and rolled out
communicated appropriately
are thinking with a service mindset and envisioning The Services Repository is updated and rolled out
new solutions that capitalize on SOA opportunities * Abbreviations
eTom: Enhanced Telecom Operations Map (TMForum) Appropriate metrics are defined, collected,
BPM: Business Process Mgmt/Modeling reported and operated on
ITIL: IT Infrastructure Library
Dream Statement
Imagine the business agility that could result if IS could deliver robust business services in a matter of days or weeks instead of months. Imagine further, if some
business solutions could be built and implemented by our business partners without any IS involvement. And imagine business interruptions no longer occurring, as
self-healing networks and systems resolve incidents transparently to our customers and business partners through automated monitoring and recovery processes.
Finally, imagine the cost of IT decreasing 20% (per Gartner Group). SOA promises faster, cheaper, better, more business-aligned, and more customer-focused IT.
These capabilities would give a significant competitive advantage in the wireless telecom space.
42
44. Impacted Area, ISLT SOA Program SOA Service Mgmt / Business Enterprise Infrastructure / Worker
Process, or Manager Governance Architecture Process Mgmt Services Operations Bees
Capability Board ("SGB") Team ("EST")
Analysis
What is the source Overseeing of Developing, Governing the Maintaining the Thinking in Coordinating New New tools &
of the change? the SOA maintaining & major SOA SOA terms of the responsibilities processes
initiative communicating decisions Reference services, ser- development & tools
the SOA Architecture vice of services;
Roadmap (RA) ownership, & New SDLC &
shared Tools
services
Is the impact large or Big Huge Huge Big Huge Huge Huge Big
small in size?
Is the impact positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive
or negative?
How does the ISLT will need Champion the Set SOA Maintain the Standardize Provide first A new Move from
source of the to periodically SOA initiative, direction for RA; ensure biz line analysis of dimension of waterfall to
change impact the review driving the governance standards terminology; shared service managing run- agile
end product of the progress; strategy with and adherance, Document, needs. time activities methods, to
process or provide the SGB & technology. and provide analyze, & Manage the document
capability? strategic informing the Prioritize service design improve biz service and develop
direction to the ISLT of service patterns. processes; catalog. services,
SGB; direction. requests and Educate the Provide SMEs and align to
authorize Ensuring IS their resource biz; to SOA the RA;
resources for readiness and allocation. Arbitrate projects as A new range
SOA; and training. tradeoffs needed. of testing
resolve concepts &
escalated activities.
issues.
What benefits and Enhanced Identification Identification Better chance Identification Identification Chance to be Enhanced
rewards might we project of of better to blend EA of of more involved skills
expect with the throughput & opportunities project direction into opportunities opportunities in business
implementation of business for org alignment & IS Roadmap for biz process for reuse operations
this change? alignment improvement sequencing improvement 43
45. Impacted Area, ISLT SOA Program SOA Service Mgmt / Business Enterprise Infrastructure / Worker
Process, or Manager Governance Architecture Process Mgmt Services Operations Bees
Capability Board ("SGB") Team ("EST")
What challenges and Complex Coordinating Normal start- Biz resistance Developing Operational Learning
difficulties might we technical and aligning all up issues with to costs/delays resources just complexity curve for
expect with the issues may the various any new board needed by in time for leads to more new
implementation of not be fully active threads shared project needs potential technologies
this change? appreciated services failures
Are the process or Yes Yes Yes Yes IS-Yes; Some ? Some
capability owners Biz-No
aware of the planned
changes?
What are the Continued (N/A) (N/A) Diminished Continued high (N/A) (N/A) Diminished
consequences of not delivery issues skill integration skill
making the change? and resource competencies costs & time to competencie
contention market s
What expectations Commit to Coordinate the Make timely Maintain & Biz take time Proactively Build & Build &
do we have of the SOA and overall decisions and explain the Ref to learn SOA plan and maintain skills; maintain
process or capability demand the program and communicate Arch as concepts, and communicate Follow any skills; Follow
owners in helping same from monitor them needed see bigger what needs to documented any
drive the changes so their teams progress picture be done tasks established
that they are standards
successful and
sustainable?
Will there be impacts (N/A) (N/A) (N/A) (N/A) Reusable (N/A) (N/A) (N/A)
to costs for this services take
change? longer to
develop
/1/.What, if any, risks (N/A) 1/. IS Groups (N/A) ? 1/. Biz 1/. ? 1/. Mistakes
are associated with may mature at resistance Vendor/Produc while
the impact to this different rates 2/. User ed t changes (e.g. learning
area, process, or 2/. Close 3/. Yes, Oracle-BEA 2/. Build time
capability? follow up including high- ESB) in plans
/2/.How will the risk 3/. Yes level "arm- 2/. Close 3/. No
be mitigated? twisting" when monitoring
/3/.Will the risk necessary 3/. Yes
require the attention
of your Leadership &
Sponsorship?
How will the (N/A) Relation Relation (N/A) Time to Relation (N/A) (N/A)
proposed change between SOA between SOA document between SOA
affect the sequence, and ITIL is to and EII/RBBT processes & and BSS/OSS
dependencies, be determined will be services is to be
effort, or duration of managed carefully (e.g. determined
any other PAIDs)
implementation tasks
to be executed?
List the tasks, 1.) Review (Numerous) 1.) Define role 1.) Review 1.) Focus 1.) Define role 1.) Review 1.) Review
reviews, and or plans & docs & charter plans & group & charter readiness readiness
action items that are periodically 2.) Clarify suggest education & 2.) Clarify assessment assessment
required to be 2.) Set members improvements brainstorming members 2.) Identify 2.) Identify
carried out in order priorities 3.) Begin with selected 3.) Begin tasks tasks
to fully assess and 3.) Fund & meeting biz partners meeting 3.) Plan for 3.) Plan for
confirm the identified staff as readiness readiness
impact. necessary 4.) Get ready 4.) Get
ready
44
57. Architectural Principles
Categories Principles Results
A1. Primacy of Principle
General A3. Maximized
Principles Enterprise Contribution
A2. IT Responsibility
B1. Technology Independence B2. Ease of Use
B3. Integration Friendly B4. Design for Performance
Applications B8. Common Use
B5. Minimal B6. Diversity of Vendors
Package Customization
B7. Single Business Owner
C2. Common C3. Single Point
C1. Information Vocabulary of Data Entry C7. Secured Data
Data Mgmt – C4. Shared C5. Accessible
Everyone’s Data Data C8. Protected
Responsibility Intellectual Property
C6. Data Trustees
D4. Business Continuity
D1. Balanced Level of Security
Security D5. Enhanced Monitoring
D2. Defense in Depth D3. No Single Point
of Vulnerability D6. Compliance to
Law & Regulation
E1. Proven Technologies E2. Interoperable E5. Standardized Platforms
Managed Components
Technologies E4. Controlled
E3. Proof of Concept Technological Diversity E6. Adaptive Architectures
F1. Requirements-based Changes F2. Responsive Changes
F3. Minimized F4. No Wholesale
Business Disruption Turnkey Solutions
Change F5. Marketplace Decision Logic F6. 80/20 Rule F11. Enhanced Monitoring
Management
F7. Think Big; F8. Fewer Components
Execute Incrementally
F9. Stick to the Roadmap F10. Build Competencies
56
71. Strength Comments Weakness Comments
Projects kept small & consistently No mgmt philosophy; No mgmt
done per plan (this is outstanding development process; Little skills
Project management compared to industry benchmarks) People management management or career support.
We take appropriate risks in project- We sometimes avoid reasonable
related matters, e.g. InterTrans people risks, letting problems fester
Limited management ability or
Recognition & reward systems encouragement to recognize
Hard working & When needed, staff puts in long hours, outstanding performance
dedicated personnel works through weekends, etc.
Productivity is not measured or Productivity is not achieved by
improving osmosis; it must be engineered in
Inputs
Quality technical training available
Tools training & support just-in-time in today’s IT world requires
more attention than we give it
Need to finalize & agree to the (pro-
MS Office, Visual Studio, NT Tools acquisition process posed) standard so point-solution tools
Good development tools do not become de facto IS standards
workstations, Endevor, etc.
Excessive periods of time I had to support staff using Word 6.0
to implement upgrades for over 2 years after I got Word 97
Pulling the plug sometimes done
Tools sunset process
without valid cost/benefit analysis
No one appears responsible to
Implementation of vision monitor the progress toward the goals
we’ve set, e.g. CBD skills
Where are the plans for re-tooling, and
Personnel factors appear what will we do with those who cannot
under-addressed learn new skills? What’s our overall
Assisting AVL in defining its business philosophy?
values, its network roles, and web Communication of vision & its Suggest a regular agenda item at IS
Good strategic direction implications to IS staff meetings be an update on this
enabling AVL systems are major
contributions Need more visionary leadership on an
Processes Lack of actionable plan,
ongoing basis, for people issues as
with visible progress charts
well as technical
Peoplesoft database decision;
Capacity planning
Supra/DB2 backout
IS security & disaster recovery A number of gaps were identified in a
plans 1996 study
PMO & Business Analyst Role Strengthens user/IS ties Agreement on user R&R Should be addressed soon
We’re a small shop; let’s proactively
Appropriate use of promotion Limited promotion
address how we can ameliorate the
from within opportunities
downsides of this
70
72. Improvement of software Progress in this area is too slow,
engineering and tools slighted especially in regard to OO/CBD
A visible commitment to QA & Need stronger commitment to Managers need to take ownership of
Standards quality by managers standards enforcement
Insufficient attention on Suggest key personnel work through
Processes
organizational development the OD binder I’ve drafted
(continued) Has improved some Can improve yet, especially as it
Teamwork Teamwork
(but gains have plateaud) relates to internal support groups
Need a standard IS group distribution
Project boards, staff meetings, list maintained on Outlook; project
Communication Outlook email, PMO status report are Communication boards for all areas; PMO & other
items that are helping director’s reports posted or made
available
We need to step up to the plate &
Availability of user-oriented
create easy-to-access-and-use
systems overviews
systems documentation for users
We need better documentation tools,
Quality of systems
and a long-term commitment to
documentation
maintaining documentation
We need to develop doc to
standardize responses to help desk
Generally low failure Help Desk documentation
Quality of delivered systems calls; Also a FAQ facility to let users
& defect rates
look up their own answers
Little peer-review and Instituting walkthroughs is a
cross-training “low-hanging fruit” option
Testing process Needs to be re-engineered
Outputs We don’t know which processes to
Need a formal defect analysis improve if we don’t know where & how
process bugs originate
No one seems to be given time &
Responsibility for innovation responsibility to sit back and think of
in system processes creative process changes
New network systems; IS is gaining a new level
proactive technology solutions of confidence from the agents No one seems to have much time for
Little formal research of monitoring the industry for promising
enabling technologies new technology
Do have reference library & skills
AVL bragging rights “Family”-feel; casual dress; etc. IS bragging rights database (in SD), but less so for new
technology, training, opportunities, etc.
Proves we’re doing more good than
Generally low turnover bad; Krohn’s longevity brings a much-
needed stability
71
