Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Wat is management commitment?
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Saving this for later?

Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime - even offline.

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Wat is management commitment?

3,494
views

Published on

Management commitment wordt altijd genoemd als dé bepalende factor in procesverbetering. Echter, er wordt meestal niet bij verteld wat management commitment nu precies is. Deze presentatie maakt dat …

Management commitment wordt altijd genoemd als dé bepalende factor in procesverbetering. Echter, er wordt meestal niet bij verteld wat management commitment nu precies is. Deze presentatie maakt dat heel helder, en biedt een eenvoudig mechanisme om management commitment te meten.

Published in: Business, Education

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

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
3,494
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
60
Comments
0
Likes
0
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. Presentation Title 9/10/07 IMPROVEMENTFOCUS Initiating process improvement – how to gain management commitment André Heijstek, Improvement Focus Jan Jaap Cannegieter, SysQA Agenda 1. Background - what inspired us 2. Our Workshop 3. Assessing Management Commitment 4. Two Case Studies 5. Questions & Answers © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University 1
  • 2. Presentation Title 9/10/07 Agenda 1. Background - what inspired us 2. Our Workshop 3. Assessing Management Commitment 4. Two Case Studies 5. Questions & Answers Background - What Inspired Us? ESEPG ‘06 – SEI Presentation: A Roadmap for Planning Process Improvement – Borland Presentation: The Executive Role in Process Improvement © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University 2
  • 3. Presentation Title 9/10/07 Workshop Overview General planning/scheduling What are you of workshops trying to do? Are you ready What are your current and strengths able to do this? (reinforce) and weaknesses (improve)? Go/No Go decision Who, What, When, How Realistic, achievable improvement: Staff, Tasks Milestones, …. CMMI Getting Started Roadmap process flow w/outputs Preparatory Initiating Preparing Tailoring Planning for Launching Planning CMMI for CMMI CMMI CMMI the CMMI Adoption Adoption Adoption Adoption • Workshop • Mapping • Organizational • Detailed Drafts for: Detailed plans Schedule business SWOT for technical study for: • Strategic • Initial strategic goals Process of relevant • Educating, Process Participant list to Process Improvement CMMI Process training, Improvement for Workshops Improvement Areas developing • List of process plan goals skills improvement • Detailed list of • Tactical • Draft of risks adoption risks • Charters for Process measurable initial process • Starter set of Improvement Process action teams for risk mitigation plan Improvement the selected actions • Management objectives improvement team charter • List of areas candidate • Process group charter • Process Process Group improvement members • Adoption kickoff events measurement plan © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University 3
  • 4. Presentation Title 9/10/07 Readiness & Fit Analysis Generic SEI technique to evaluate risks with technology adoption – identify the implicit assumptions of the technology – evaluate to what extent these assumptions are correct When there is a low fit between assumptions and our context, we have a high risk – risks can be mitigated The next slides show the 7 identified CMMI assumptions. Things to Think About for Strategy Fit CMMI Assumptions: –Improving operations is a priority –Improving effectiveness of processes to achieve better performance is an accepted approach Where is your organization’s strategy focused in comparison to the strategy focus of CMMI? –For example, is improving operations, or focusing only on bringing the most advanced technology to the market, regardless of operational efficiencies/effectiveness? What other strategies is the organization engaged in that may affect fit (either positively or negatively) with the assumed strategies that CMMI supports? © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University 4
  • 5. Presentation Title 9/10/07 Things to Think About for Reward System Fit CMMI Assumptions: – Organization rewards participation in overall efficiency over individual dept efficiency – Organization rewards improvement in skills related to process management and support – Organization rewards fire prevention more than fire fighting – Are the current performance measures used consistent with the new technology's requirements? – Does the current reward system support the change (promotions and bonuses)? – Is the current reward system able to support the new way (even if the results are NOT perfect)? – Is the current system able to penalize the old way (even if the results ARE perfect)? – Do we reward fire fighting or fire prevention? Things to Think About for Sponsorship Fit CMMI Assumptions: – Strong, consistent support for quot;new way“ is exhibited by leadership – Penalties for avoiding new system are consistently applied When a significant technology is being introduced: Are leaders willing to visibly change the way they conduct their business to support the change? Do leaders behave in a way that is consistent with and supports the new technology? Do leaders focus an appropriate amount of their time on activities that directly support a change? Are scarce resources allocated in ways that support a change? When problems occur, are resources pulled from projects doing it the old way and not pulled from those doing it the new way? Is the new reward system honored without exception? © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University 5
  • 6. Presentation Title 9/10/07 Things to Think About for Values Fit CMMI Assumptions: – Metrics are used to improve, not punish – Participative management is encouraged – Mistakes are tolerated, as long as they lead to improved processes/performance – Are measures used fairly to make decisions rather than politics? – Is it acceptable to talk to people outside your part of the organization to accomplish management and coordination tasks? – Are staff rewarded for highlighting problems “in process” rather than waiting until after your part of the process is complete? Things to Think About for Skills Fit 1 CMMI Assumptions: – Project planning/mgmt skills (enough to manage a process improvement project) are available – Organization change management skills are available Do managerial skills include – scoping the work – resourcing the project – planning the work – communicating the plan and schedule – tracking performance – dealing with issues before they become problems © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University 6
  • 7. Presentation Title 9/10/07 Things to Think About for Skills Fit 2 CMMI Assumptions: – Project planning/mgmt skills (enough to manage a process improvement project) are available – Organization change management skills are available Do people management skills include ability to recognize the difference between – a skill problem – a behavior problem – an understanding problem – a motivation problem and the wisdom to know how to deal with each? Things to Think About for Structure Fit CMMI Assumptions: – Clear definition of roles/ responsibilities exists – Management is a role that is responsible for effectiveness of the processes in use within the organization, not a performing role, in terms of delivering products and services – Activities can be rationalized and organized around the concept of projects – Are hand-offs between people/organizational units clear ? – Does management focus on building and supporting the infrastructure needed to use the processes more than focusing on actually building the products/delivering services? – Are there clear lines of authority and responsibility to deal with those aspects of the new way that may be the failure points in the use of the new technology? – Is it easy/hard to characterize work in the organization as projects? © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University 7
  • 8. Presentation Title 9/10/07 History—Why Look at History as a Separate Factor? Without some change in the organizational climate to improve the fit with the technology (or a change in the technology to improve its fit with the current climate), prior success/failure history in implementing a new technology is one of the best predictors of future performance. Things to Think About for History Fit 1 CMMI Assumptions: – Helpful if other practice-based technologies have been successfully adopted with this mgmt team In relation to recent technology adoptions… – are the people who were intended to use the technology actually using it today? – were the changes in work practices that were needed to make the technology successful understood ahead of the adoption? During? After? Did the work practice changes actually take place? – did leadership support (or its lack) make it easier or harder to successfully adopt the technology? © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University 8
  • 9. Presentation Title 9/10/07 Things to Think About for History Fit 2 CMMI Assumptions: – Helpful if other practice-based technologies have been successfully adopted with this mgmt team In relation to recent technology adoptions… – was authority/responsibility changed to support the adoption? – were rewards and incentives changed to support the new way and sanction the old way? – was training/skill development in the new technology effective and timely? The Executive’s Role in Process Improvement 1. Take personal responsibility 2. Set realistic goals 3. Establish improvement project 4. Manage change 5. Align management 6. Align incentives 7. Establish policies & empower assurance 8. Involve customers 9. Involve developers 10. Review status 11. Replace laggards From Borland - Bill Curtis - ESEPG 2006 12. Never relent © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University 9
  • 10. Presentation Title 9/10/07 Our Judgement SEI Workshop is a great idea, but too heavy to implement for our customers – Can we make it modular, and deliver it piecemeal? Bill’s list on management commitment is great – Let’s turn it into a start-up checklist Agenda 1. Background - what inspired us 2. Our Workshop 3. Assessing Management Commitment 4. Two Case Studies 5. Questions & Answers © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University 10
  • 11. Presentation Title 9/10/07 Goals managementworkshop Identify problems and goals Is CMMI the solution to these problems and goals? Build up basic knowledge of CMMI Make important choices about the CMMI Check if the organization is ready for CMMI (SEI readiness and fit analysis) Measure and ensure management commitment Plan and organize preparation and implementation Overview workshop Part one: inventory problems and goals Part two: CMMI-content and choices Part three: Readiness & fit, management commitment and organization preparation and implementation © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University 11
  • 12. Presentation Title 9/10/07 Part one: inventory problems and goals Identify problems and goals – Brown paper session – Interviews – Document study Part two: CMMI-content and choices Why process management History CMMI Structure CMMI (specific components, generic components, levels, staged, continuous) Mapping of problems / goals with CMMI Decision continuous / staged If continuous: process areas / roadmap / iterations If staged: prioritization process areas Theory assessments and decision to do (or not to do) an assessment © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University 12
  • 13. Presentation Title 9/10/07 Part three: Readiness & fit, management three: commitment and organization implementation Theory IDEAL Readiness and fit analysis (business strategy, work practices, reward system, values, skills, structure, history) Management commitment analysis Decisions about the organization regarding the preparation and implementation – activities – organization (roles, responsibilities, contribution of employees) – planning – communication Next activity: process improvement plan first iteration. Benefits Problem-focussed process improvement Top management knows what is going to happen Top management made clear choices and can explain them Lack of readiness and fit is clear and actions have been adressed Lack of management commitment is clear and discusses Support of top management © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University 13
  • 14. Presentation Title 9/10/07 Agenda 1. Background - what inspired us 2. Our Workshop 3. Assessing Management Commitment 4. Two Case Studies 5. Questions & Answers Workshop - Assessing Management Commitment Please fill out the questionnaire – work together if you are from the same organization – if you want, add comments For groups from the same organization – please share your results with us (you will get them back!) © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University 14
  • 15. Presentation Title 9/10/07 Agenda 1. Background - what inspired us 2. Our Workshop 3. Assessing Management Commitment 4. Two Case Studies 5. Questions & Answers Case 1 Pension and insurance company – 150 IT staff – Project oriented organization – Develop in .NET, Oracle and Delta Cobol – Just before the decision to start a CMMI or an ASL implementation – No opportunity for an assessment because of benchmark, project evaluations and customer satisfaction evaluation – Resistance against CMMI © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University 15
  • 16. Presentation Title 9/10/07 Case 1: readiness and fit analysis Readiness and fit analysis Outcome Strategy 100% Variation 90% 80% 70% History Sponsorship 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Reward system Values Structure Skills Case 1: management commitment Sept. 2006 Management commitment Outcome Take personal responsibility 100% Variation Never relent 90% Set realistic goals 80% 70% 60% Replace laggards 50% Establish improvement project 40% 30% 20% 10% Review status 0% Manage change Involve developers Align management Involve customers Align incentives Establish policies & empower assurance © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University 16
  • 17. Presentation Title 9/10/07 Case 1: management commitment June 2007 Managementcommitment Uitkomst Persoonlijke verantw oordelijkheid 100% Variatie Nooit verslappen 90% Realistische doelen 80% 70% 60% A chterblijvers aanspreken 50% SPI als project 40% 30% 20% 10% Status programma review en 0% Managen veranderprogramma Medew erkers betrekken Management op een lijn Klanten betrekken Juist gedrag belonen QA ondersteunen Case 1: overall outcome Clear set of problems to be solved Agreement CMMI is the right solution Continuous representation First two iterations planned (first: RM, VER and M&A, second: OPD, OPF) Lessons learned: involvement of employees and management, more focus on implementation and introduction on adoption measurements Clear and visible management commitment Enthousiasm about the CMMI-implementation Sustained management commitment © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University 17
  • 18. Presentation Title 9/10/07 Case 2 Pension and insurance company – 100 IT staff – Release oriented organization – Developing in Bull and Siebel – CMMI-assessment in September 2005 – Continuous representation – Start of the improvement project in February 2006 – Two iterations, partly based on CMMI (OPD, OPF, QA, VAL, RM) – Perception: SPI program runs well. Facts: ? Case 2: readiness and fit analysis Readiness and fit analysis Outcome Strategy 100% Variation 90% 80% 70% History Sponsorship 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Reward system Values Structure Skills © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University 18
  • 19. Presentation Title 9/10/07 Case 2: management commitment October 2006 Management commitment Outcome Take personal responsibility 100% Variation Never relent 90% Set realistic goals 80% 70% 60% Replace laggards 50% Establish improvement project 40% 30% 20% 10% Review status 0% Manage change Involve developers A lign management Involve customers A lign incentives Establish policies & empow er assurance Case 2: management commitment May 2006 Managementcommitment Uitkomst Persoonlijke verantw oordelijkheid 100% Variatie Nooit verslappen 90% Realistische doelen 80% 70% 60% A chterblijvers aanspreken 50% SPI als project 40% 30% 20% 10% Status programma review en 0% Managen veranderprogramma Medew erkers betrekken Management op een lijn Klanten betrekken Juist gedrag belonen QA ondersteunen © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University 19
  • 20. Presentation Title 9/10/07 Case 2: overall outcome Mixed picture on commitment. Good discussion! Intensifying and empowering Quality Assurance Change in the reward system More focus on change management Address laggards Never relent Slower pace (focus) Workshop - Assessing Management Commitment © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University 20
  • 21. Presentation Title 9/10/07 Agenda 1. Background - what inspired us 2. Our Workshop 3. Assessing Management Commitment 4. Two Case Studies 5. Questions & Answers IMPROVEMENTFOCUS Questions? Thanks for your attention and success with gaining management commitment André Heijstek – andre.heijstek @ improvementfocus.com Jan Jaap Cannegieter – jcannegieter @ sysqa.nl © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University 21