Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Agile governance
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Introducing the official SlideShare app

Stunning, full-screen experience for iPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Agile governance

711
views

Published on


0 Comments
3 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
711
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
59
Comments
0
Likes
3
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Agile Governance Charlie Rudd SollutionsIQ Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 2. Speaker Introduction: Charlie Rudd CEO of SolutionsIQ, an Agile company that provides Agile services including consulting, training, software development and recruiting throughout the world
  • 3. Agile governance: what could this mean?1. Governance is evil and is Agile is good2. Governance is a necessary evil3. Agile provides a lighter-weight means to achieve corporate governance aims4. Agile is a superior governance framework Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 4. What is this governance thing? Corporate Stewardship• Internal – Clarity of corporate purpose – Viable strategy & plan – Necessary resources & environment• External – Government & industry regulation – Legality – Shareholder expectations – Public relations• Risk management Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 5. Intended outcomes of governance• Proper investment decisions are made• Investments perform as expected• Work is authorized• Demonstrable progress is made• Quality objectives are achieved Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 6. Successful portfolio management Do the right work Do the work rightInvestment decisionInvestment performanceWork competencyQuality standardsRisk management Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 7. How is governance applied?• Articulate Intentions – Policies & practices• Verification (or enforcement) – External reporting – Oversight (Approvals & supervision) – Documentation (proof) – Audit (inspection) Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 8. Which part is evil (maybe)?• Corporate stewardship?• Successful portfolio management?• That leaves how its applied – Policies and practices – Verification procedures – A mismatch between the two Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 9. Governance by function Government & industry regulation Board Corporate Business unit 3 Finance Finance Legal HR IT Business unit 2 Business unit 1 Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 10. Governance stakeholders Board regulators Corporateshareholders Business unit 3 Finance Finance Legal HR IT Business unit 2 Business unit 1 Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 11. IT or Local GovernanceTechnology infrastructureProduction operationsBusiness solutions IT Project management Quality Assurance Development practices Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 12. Lots of diverse stakeholders• Shareholders• Regulators• Corporate functions• Business units• IT functions Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 13. Governance success criteria1. The diverse interests of many stakeholders must be satisfied Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 14. Governance fit No worries+ Wrong Integrated governance governance applicatoin Chaotic No governance Hidden governance- Intended Outcome - + Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 15. Governance success criteria1. If the diverse interests of many stakeholders are to be satisfied they must… Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 16. Governance success criteria1. If the diverse interests of many stakeholders are to be satisfied they must... Be aligned (somehow) Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 17. Mis-alignment breeds conflict • Frustration • Anger • Fear • Discontentment • Anxiety Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 18. Alignment produces harmony • Satisfaction • Confidence • Contentment • Happiness Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 19. Good governance requires high alignment+ Misalignment High alignment applicatoin No alignment Misalignment- Intended Outcome - + Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 20. Forces working against alignment Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 21. Forces working against alignment Functional diversity • Different objectives • Different backgrounds Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 22. Forces working against alignment Operational diversity • Different priorities • Different time horizons Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 23. Forces working against alignment Globalization • Different time zones • Spatial separation • Different languages Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 24. Forces working against alignment Complicated mechanisms • Overloaded controls • Governance “debt” • Lots of moving parts Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 25. When good governance goes bad Corp functionsTechnology infrastructureProduction operations Quality gatesBusiness solutions IT Project management Quality Assurance Business units Development practices Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 26. Forces working against alignment Corporate culture clashes • Different management principles • Different values and assumptions • Different views on people Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 27. Different management cultures Scope If you believe there is zero sum tradeoff between scope, schedule & resources it may seem counter- intuitive that: By reducing resources youSchedule Resources sometimes can speed things up and improve quality Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 28. Forces working against alignment Dynamic business conditions • Rate of technology change • Increasing uncertainty • Competitive pressures Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 29. Root causes of misalignment Forces Lack ofFunctional diversity sharedOperational diversity objectivesGlobalizationComplicatedness CommunicationCorporate culture Barriersclash Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 30. Increasing rate of alignment decay Forces Lack ofFunctional diversity sharedOperational diversity objectivesGlobalizationComplicatedness CommunicationCorporate culture Barriersclash Dynamics business conditions Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 31. Getting aligned Lack of shared• Establish shared objectives objectives• Break down communication barriers Communication BarriersHow do you do that? Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 32. Where you wont find the answer • Governance controls – Designed as fixed constraints – not to auto-align • Technology • Institutional governance – Operate in different jurisdictions – First mission often enforcement Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 33. IT governance authorities • Part of the solution for sure, but also part of PMO the problem • The trick is knowing Architecture how to tell one from & Standards the other & get stakeholders to agree! Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 34. IT Governance frameworks• Institutional – PMO – Architecture & standards• Technology• Industry – CMMI – PMI – Gartner Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 35. IT Maturity models (my apologies to Gartner)Technology infrastructure Our focus is businessProduction operations solutionsBusiness solutions IT Project management Maturity theme: Quality Assurance “Business alignment” Development practices Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 36. Low & high IT maturity (apologies to Gartner) Purpose Function Role Solution Maturity Order Contractor Point Cost center taker Solutions LOW Commercial Solution Partner Product,Profit center architect Colleague Integrated HI architecture Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 37. Forces moving IT to solution partner role Public internet platform • Consumer experience sets standard for business apps • Mash-ups with 3rd party commercial products raises expectations • Easy to compare competitive offering (low barriers to exit) • More high profile IT solutions • Release cycle time needs to be fast Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 38. Different IT roles suggest differentgovernance styles Purpose Function Role Solution Maturity Order Contractor Point Cost center taker Solutions LOW Commercial Solution Partner Product,Profit center architect Colleague Integrated HI architecture Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 39. Traditional business principles Do it right the 1- first time Best 2 – Centralized Centralized Solution planning evaluation 3 - Production Facts FactsOptimizeAlgorithmicExternal constraints
  • 40. Traditional governance Detailed spec & 1 - Business plan Project 2 – Centralized case charter planning decision 3 – Follow orders Facts Facts Big bangOptimize releaseAlgorithmicExternal constraints
  • 41. Traditional governance Detailed spec &1 - Business plan Project 2 – Centralized case charter planning decision 3 – Follow orders Facts Big bang release
  • 42. When good governance goes bad1. Identify a potential opportunity2. Gather facts, make assumptions, run scenarios3. Stop before business case is proved4. What’s riskier? Doing nothing or something? Business case shaky because I?? ? instability of key variables I I I ?
  • 43. Questionable governance controlsShaky business case leads to:• Incomplete, flawed specification• Flawed implementation plan ? $6 m $1.5 m $1.5 m $1.5 m $1.5 m I? ?? I I? .5 years 1 year 1.5 years 2 years
  • 44. Traditional governance makes things worse1. Spec and plan insufficient as compliance controls2. No good way to modify spec or plan or respond to emerging conditions3. No easy way to revise contracts and agreements Yet all the money is spent $0.0 m $1.5 m $1.5 m $1.5 m $1.5 m .5 year 1 year 1.5 years 2 years
  • 45. Why Agilists find governance is evil1. Out of time and out of money2. Key features missing3. Delivered features not desired (waste built in)4. Desired technical quality not delivered
  • 46. If not the traditional, then what? Purpose Function Role Solution Maturity Order Contractor Point Cost center taker Solutions LOW CommercialProfit center Solution architect Partner Colleague Product, Integrated architecture ? Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 47. IT Governance frameworks• Institutional• Technology• Industry• Agile frameworks Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 48. Why Agile governance frameworks maybe superior• They have built-in alignment features – Establish shared objectives – Break down communication barriers• They auto re-align Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 49. Built-in alignment features• Iterative progress• Feedback-driven adaption• Share information• Empower knowledge workers• Self-organization & collaboration• Deliver early and frequently
  • 50. Traditional governance Detailed spec &1 - Business plan Project 2 – Centralized case charter planning decision 3 – Follow orders Facts Big bang release
  • 51. Agile governance principles Evaluation planning Production
  • 52. Agile governance principles Solution prototype (vision) Evaluation Iterative planning progress Production Production increment feedbackInnovativeHeuristic Early &Internal constraints frequent delivery
  • 53. Agile governance style good fit for thepartner role Purpose Function Role Solution Maturity Order Contractor Point Cost center taker Solutions LOW Commercial Solution Partner Product,Profit center architect Colleague Integrated HI architecture Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 54. Agile scope of influence Maturity Objective Strategy Impact on Governance1 Grass roots Sponsorship Do no none harm2 Co-existence Legitimacy Show New value procedure3 Strategic Full partner Skin in the New game goals Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 55. Agile governance maturityinfluence Maturity Alignment Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 56. Strategy to gain influence• Treat stakeholders like customers – Break down communication barriers: Invite, share success, take initiative to determine needs and requirements• Convert to partners – Establish shared objective (customer)• Repeat Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 57. Strategy to gain influence Corporate Business unit IT Team Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 58. Grass roots: Governance is a necessary evil• Objective: Formal sponsorship• Requirements – Ability to work fulltime on a project – Agile knowledge – Ability to assign work as a team (self-organize) – Ability to comply with governance policies – Build control• Span of shared objective – The development team Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 59. Grass roots: Governance is a necessary evil• What you can accomplish – Develop agile skills – Start to Improve technical quality – Begin building a case for broader use• What you cant accomplish – Change or replace governance policy – Exploit agile dynamic scope management• What the org expects – you don’t exist Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 60. Grassroots: governance is a necessary evil• Breaking down communication barriers – Make progress visible – Do demos (even without a stakeholder), invite people – Reach out to PMO, architects, key analysts – Confer with project managers – Don’t over-reach• Do simulations Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 61. Grassroots: governance is a necessary evil The simulated Product Owner Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 62. Co-existence: Agile provides a lighterweight governance alternative• Objective: – Full legitimacy – Agile established as a recognized alternative to meet governance objectives• Requirements – Formal sponsorship – History of success in terms of delivery & meeting governance requirements – Support from multiple stakeholders• Span of influence – Development organization Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 63. Co-existence: Agile provides a lighterweight governance alternative• What you can do – Introduce alternative governance verification mechanisms – Establish systemic quality and delivery improvement – Sustain persistent teams• What you cant do – Apply agile portfolio management – Change governance policies• What the org expects – That there is an agile alternative equivalent to traditional practice Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 64. Co-existence: Agile provides a lighterweight governance alternative• Breaking down communication barriers – Quantify success and improvement – Establish common objectives with IT stakeholders (Architecture, QA, PMO) – Establish common objectives with business stakeholders – Turn remote stakeholders into new customers Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 65. Co-existence: Agile provides a lighterweight governance alternative The value stream analysis The proof of code analytics Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 66. Strategic: Agile is a superior governanceframework• Objective: – New governance objectives – Broad collaboration with business including strategy and solution development – Highlighted at a Gartner conference• Requirements – Solid trust basis with key business sponsors as outcome of successful collaboration – Full engagement of business in Agile methods – IT org wide adoption of agile Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 67. Strategic: Agile is a superior governanceframework• Span of influence – Business unit via active collaborative partnership• What you can do – Become profit center – Develop strategy – Change IT governance policies – Influence corporate governance policies• What the org expects – That IT and rest of business are collaborating partners Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 68. Strategic: Agile is a superior governanceframework The collaborating auditor Courtesy of Dan Greening dan@greening.org Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 69. DOs• Exploit PM knowledge to break the code of hidden governance• Worry about side effects• Promise what’s already in the bag• Set the right expectations for yourself and your stakeholders• Begin what will be a long conversation• Begin building a case (gather evidence, line up supporters)• Identify & court allies (business, PMO, architects)• Extend invitations (sprint reviews) (dont force what you don’t have the authority to enforce)• Choose total victory on small, low risk “wins” rather than partial or doubtful victory on high stakes gambles• Simulate new roles (proxy product owner, internal scrum master) Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 70. Don’ts• Don’t beat up customer with Agile values• Don’t assume that a governance policy that is no use to you is of no use to anyone• Don’t invite failure by committing beyond your span of control• don’t change governance strategy unilaterally• Don’t provide more information than is asked for (do encourage the request for more information)• Don’t upset the applecart• Don’t create more work for governance authority• Don’t talk about improving until you can demonstrate compliance with status quo• Don’t assume that executive sponsorship eliminates governance conflicts Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.
  • 71. QuestionsCrudd@solutionsIQ.com Copyright © 2011 SolutionsIQ. All rights reserved.