This document describes a Deployment Excellence Framework (DEF) to effectively adopt high maturity processes. The framework includes 3 interlinked cycles: 1) Identification Cycle to target initial units and stakeholders, 2) Initial Deployment Cycle focusing on awareness and success indicators, and 3) Sustenance Cycle increasing adoption scope and self-reliance. It also includes a feedback adapter for course correction. The case study illustrates using DEF to standardize an organization's project estimation processes and templates by deploying new estimation models and tools over 6 quarters.

1. 0
Mantra for Process Excellence
Parag Saha
Consultant
Tata Consultancy Services Ltd.

2. 1
Leveraging the Deployment
Excellence Framework for
Effective Adoption of High
Maturity Processes
Theme: Mantra for Process Excellence
Keywords : Mastering
Deployment, Deployment
Framework, Adoption of
Processes and Tools

3. CONTENTS
1. Abstract .................................................................................................................................2
2. Introduction ...........................................................................................................................3
3. Challenges ............................................................................................................................3
4. Solution Approach.................................................................................................................4
4.1. Solution Components............................................................................................................1
4.1.1. Identification Cycle.........................................................................................................1
4.1.2. The Initial Deployment Cycle.........................................................................................1
4.1.3. The Sustenance cycle ...................................................................................................8
5. Case Study............................................................................................................................9
5.1. The Problem Statement: ...................................................................................................9
5.2. Solution Approach .............................................................................................................9
5.3. Solution Implementation.................................................................................................. 10
5.3.1. Assess.......................................................................................................................... 10
5.3.2. Build ...............................................................................................................................1
5.3.3. Convey ...........................................................................................................................1
5.3.4. Deploy ............................................................................................................................1
5.3.5. Excel ............................................................................................................................ 12
5.4. Results ......................................................................................................................... 12
5.5 Lessons Learnt ..............................................................................................................1
6. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................1
7. References .......................................................................................................................... 15
2

4. 2
1. ABSTRACT
In today’s highly competiti ve envi ronment, it is
imperative that organizations constantly
refine/streamline traditional processes and
define new processes or adopt best in class
processes to adapt to the changing
envi ronment. Employment of High Maturity
Processes is thus not a matter of option but a
necessity. However, just defining a highly
mature process is not enough, deploying it
effectively and ensuring that it percolates the
DNA of the organization is the key to success.
In general, deployment is characterized by strict
compliance, overemphasis on trainings and
excessive handholding. Unfortunately, this
dissolves the primary intent of deployment which
is willful adoption.
This paper defines a Deployment Excellence
Framework (DEF) that reduces adoption time
and ensures meaningful deployment comprising
3 major interlinked cycles and a feedback
adapter
a. Identifier Cycle consisting of a set of
decision parameters which helps identify
 Key stakeholders
 Initial set of business/organization units
to target
b. Initial Deployment Cycle consisting a set
of best practices/mantras ensuring
 Focus on “low hanging fruits”
 Spreading awareness, follow up
 Identification of ‘key success indicators’
 Creating & Showcasing success stories
c. Sustenance Cycle which takes adoption
to the next level by defining
 Shift of focus from awareness to sel f-sufficiency
 Cross-pollination of best practices
The Feedback adapter, plugged with each cycle,
enables data capture, analysis and reporting
ensuring
 Course correction
 Alignment to Business needs
 Resurgence of slow movers/Late
Adopters
Adapting to such an excellence framework has
resulted in ‘Faster & Better’ adoption of
processes as will be described through case
studies in the paper.

5. 3
2. INTRODUCTION
A study in CNN.com titled Software Disasters
Are Often People Problemshas the following
example “New software at Hewlett-Packard Co.
was supposed to get orders in and out the door
faster at the computer giant. Instead, a botched
deployment cut into earnings in a big way in
August and executives got fired.”
In today’s highly competiti ve envi ronment
organizations are looking to improve the current
processes, tools and technologiesaligned to
their overall business strategies to increase
revenues.Improving processes and
implementing tools to adapt to the changing
envi ronment is thus not a matter of option but a
necessity.In order to do this organizations make
huge investments and enormous effort in
identi fying areas of process improvement/tool
deployment, defining these processes,
automating them and then deploying these
throughout the organization. Imagine a scenario
where in spite of all this investment there is little
or no adoption of the process being introduced.
An organization might have the best in class
processes, the best tools and technologies,
however these are of no use unless they are
adopted organization-wide.
The root cause of this failure can be attributed to
poor deployment. However robust and effective
a process or tool, the most important aspect,
and one that finally means a difference between
achieving the potential benefits in terms of
revenue and stakehol ders’ expectations is
DEPLOYMENT. In most organizations
‘depl oyment’ is minor footnote in the overall
change management activity. However good the
process, it has no value until the change
percolates the DNA of the organization.
Thus the need of the hour is a well-defined and
flexible framework that can assist in Mastering
Deployment and ensuring that a process, tool or
technology reaches the lowest rungs of an
organization. The Deployment Excellence
Framework(DEF) proposed in this paper is once
such framework.
3. CHALLENGES
Today organizations face multiple challenges
when it comes to deployment.Usually the
ownership of deployment is given to a core team
consisting of a few members, who are required
to implement and deploy the process or tool in
organizational entities (Departments, Business
Units, Accounts and Projects).
Pitcher side challenges – Faced by the core
deployment team.
 The core deployment team is stretched out
in supporting deployment : “We’re depl oyi ng
in the entire organization, can’t spend more
than a few minutes per day for each entity”
 No measure of ‘deployment success’
identi fied: “How do I k now the process is
successfully deployed and will be
sustained?”
Batter side challenges- Faced by the
organization entity
 A reluctance in adoption: “I have been
doing it this way for 5 years, why should I
change now?”

6. 4
 Value Visibility missing : “ I don’t see any benefits of adopting this”
 Undue compliance pressure : “I’m doi ng this
because otherwise I ’ll be RED- will not do it
again”
 Deployment teams with very little know-how
of the ground realities and issues: “The core
team is with me for only a few days- what
happens after that?”
 Constant connect missing: “The core team
doesn’t help me when I want them”
These challenges in turn result in issues like
lack of focus from key stakeholders,
consideration of the deployment as an additional
burden and a “what’s in it for me” syndrome.A
key requirement in overcoming these challenges
and issues is a robust framework that assists in
deployment of processes and tools within an
organization. The Deployment Excellence
Framework assists the core deployment team
address these challenges.
4. SOLUTION APPROACH
The Deployment Excellence Framework
consists of 3 different cycles that are
accessorized with a feedback adaptor. These
cycles are iterative and constantly in the process
of self-refining and re-alignment with changes
both within the units where the process is being
deployed, the organization and the industry. (Fig
1)
1. The Identification Cycle: The purpose of
the identification cycle is to generate a
flexible strategy for the deployment process.
The identification cycle consists of two major
components which assist in the identi fication
of departments/organization units,
projects/accounts and key stakeholders to
target for initial deployment.
2. The Initial Deployment Cycle: The initial
deployment cycle focuses on successful
deployment in small, manageable pockets
within the organization. During this cycle
awareness is created and assessed, the
core deployment team handholds entities for
successful deployment. ‘Deployment
Success Indicators’ of deployment and the
‘Process Performance Objectives’ of the
process are defined and tracked.
3. The Sustenance Cycle: This cycle
focusses on increasing the scope of
deployment to the entire organization and
sustaining the deployment in such a way
that organization entities become sel f-reliant.
It uses techniques like 3 C and ‘In-
Boundary/Out-Boundary’ to increase
adoption and sustenance.
4. The Feedback Adaptor: The feedback
adaptor is a mechanism which assists the
deployment team to detect drift and perform
course correction to ensure successful
deployment. It collates best practices and
lessons learnt from each deployment and
assists in improvement of the deployment
mechanism. It also collates the data for
generation of Deployment Success
Indicators (DSI) and Process Performance
Objectives (PPO). The feedback adaptor is
a part of each cycle.
Throughout the paper ‘deployment’ is assumed
to mean deployment of
processes/tools/techniques /technologies and

7. 1
‘entity’ refers to the Organization Units/Departments/Accounts/Projects.
Fig 1. The Solution Approach
4.1. SOLUTION COMPONENTS
4.1.1. Identification Cycle
The identi fication cycleconsists of the following
activities performed by the core deployment
team
 Identification of the entitiesto be targeted for
initial deployment/pilot
 Identification of key stakeholders toact as
adopters and evangelists
The following components help in this
identification
1. The Deployment Impact Map Generator
(DIMG): The DIMG assists the deployment
team in identi fying which entity to target. It
consists of a set of decision parameters with
specific weightages and a ranking
system.Each of the parameters are pre-assigned
a weightage between 1-5, where 1
denotes low and 5 a high contribution to
deployment ease and impact. Each of these
parameters are then rated on a scale of
‘Low’, ‘Medium’ and ‘Hi gh’ based on
guidelines (Fig 2.1). The overall score
provides a success rank which determines
the speci fic entity where probability of
success and the impact of deployment is
high.(Fig 2.2)

8. 6
Fig 2.1 Illustrative guidance for the impact parameters
Fig 2.2 Determining Success Ranking- Sample
2. The Stakeholder identifier: The
Stakeholder identifier is a questionnai re
based system which helps in defining the
right stakeholders within the targeted
projects. Some sample questions can be :
 Is the stakeholder a go-to person for this
process within his entity?
 Does the stakeholder have the
confidence of the senior leadership?
 Is the stakeholder a decision maker
within the entity?
The feedback adaptor assists the deployment
team in ensuring that the Deployment Impact
Map is updated and any change in
demographics, stakeholders etc are fed back
into the identification cycle to ensure that a re-strategization
occurs before a substantial effort
is consumed in deployment.

9. 1
Fig 2.3 Illustrative Deployment Impact Map with Success Rankings
Based on Fig 2.3 a conscious decision can be
taken to deploy in Org Unit 2 before Org Unit 3
since the number of ‘red entities is lower, the
average success rating is higher and the
number of entities is lower in Org Unit 2.
4.1.2. The Initial Deployment Cycle
The identi fied entities are targeted for the initial
deployment. The core team performs the
following activities in this cycle
1. Define the deployment team from within
the project team: This team would have
an owner with the overall responsibility
for the deployment and would report to a
SPOC from the core deployment team.
2. Identify ‘ Low Hanging Fruits’ within the
entities: The projects with the highest
success ranking factor are easily
deployable and have high impact (Fig
2.3)
3. Create awareness: Awareness is
different from training since the success
criteria is not the ‘Number’ of people
trained and completion of exit tests but
application of the training. A few
parameters to identi fy awareness level
are:
 No. of trainings provided by the
trained project teams
 No. of successful deployments
made by the project teams either
directly or indirectly
 No. of issues successfully handled
by the teams
4. Showcase benefits vis-à-vis existing
process/tool.
5. Define and track key Deployment
Success Indicators (DSI) and targets:
The DSI are a measure of the success
of deployment itself. These include
metrics like:
 No. of entities where process is
deployed
 No. of Aware staff
 No. of success stories created
6. Define and identi fy measures to track
Process Performance Objectives (PPO):
In order to check if the process is
performing as expected the following
techniques can be applied to track the
Process Performance Objectives
 Base lining of current process
performance
 Defining Target for process
performance
 Causal Analysis in case of deviation
from target
7. Handhold project teams during
deployment: Initially the deployment
team needs to handhold the project
teams with the message “Compliance is
secondary, use the process and see if it
work s for you”.
The feedback adaptor provides data to generate
the DSI. It also tacks the PPO to check if any
fine tuning of the process is requi red. The
feedback adaptor helps capture Success Stories
and in updating the Best Practices and Lessons
Learnt Databases.

10. 8
4.1.3. The Sustenance cycle
Once the deployment is successful in the initial
deployment cycle it needs to spread across the
organization and be sustained. The Sustenance
Cycle is the longest running cycle in
deployment. The key activities in this cycle are:
1. Create Sel f-reliance within entities: Self-reliance
can be driven by the following 3C
approach
 Compile Success Stories
 Connect with Business Value and
Personal Benefit
 Communicate to all strata
2. Share success stories: In most cases the
best way for a process to be promoted is
through word-of mouth. In order to ensure
this a few initiatives that can be taken are :
 Get the identi fied key- stakeholders
to speak about the success on a
forum with their peers
 Build success stories with data on
benefits like time saved to which
everyone can connect
 For the senior management build
success stories with data on savings
and ROI
 Showcase the ‘Pain Vs Gain’
3. Create rewards and recognition initiatives:
Once the deployment reaches a specific
threshold, programs like ‘Most Successful
Adopter’ and ‘Depl oyment E vangelist’ can
be started to increase the rate of
deployment.
4. Promote healthy competition: Competition
among organization units/accounts/projects
can yield results in terms of long term
deployment. One of the methods of doing
this is the ‘In-Boundary/Out-Boundary’
comparison (Fig.3 ). The steps are:
 Classify organization entities which have
successfully deployed the process into
‘In-Boundary’
 Classify organization entities which have
not yet adopted the process into ‘Out-
Boundary’
 Identify organizati on entities in ‘In-
Boundary’ and ‘Out-Boundary’ that are
similar
 Communicate to the ‘Out-Boundary’
entity about the success of the ‘In-
Boundary’ entity
5. Create special initiatives for slow beginners
and late starters: A few special initiatives
can be undertaken to improve adoption in
slow beginners and late starters like
resurgence drives with the following
activities :
 Create a special plan with weaknesses
in mind
 Detailed weekly tracking
 Readiness to address issues
immediately
 Data intensive progress checks
 Appreciate people on the ground
 Share final results with data
 Thank stakeholders for hard work- but
remind them of the unfinished job!
 Use techniques like process
day/process week to spread the
message

11. 9
Fig. 3 ‘In-Boundary/Out-Boundary’ comparison
5. CASE STUDY
5.1. The Problem Statement:
A large organization was using multiple
estimation templates for their software
application development (AD) and application
maintenance (AM) projects. The challenges
faced by the organization in estimation were:
 Lack of standardization
 Inability to compare project performance
 Unavailability of central repository of
estimation data
The organization was convinced that there was
a need for standard models. An estimation tool
with 3 models (1 for AD and 2 for AM) was
procured. However, the organization found it
difficult to push the new processes down its
verticals as projects were using thei r individual
estimation templates for over 6 years.
5.2. Solution Approach:
The core deployment team comprising of 4
members were identi fied to deploy the
estimation models and the tool across the
organization. The suggested solution approach
leveraged the Deployment Excellence
Framework (DEF) and its various components
over a period of six quarters. The solution was
outlined as follows:
DEF Cycle Component/Activity
Identification DIMG 2 Business Units (Retail and Wholesale) identified
Identification DIMG Projects selection for both the units
Identification Stakeholder Identifier Associate right stakeholders with identified projects
Initial Deployment Awareness Model/tool demonstration, awareness, roadshows
Initial Deployment Feedback Adaptor Collecting and acting on feedback received in the
course
Initial Deployment DSI Tracking and measuring mechanism finalized with

12. 10
monthly score card publishing plan for both the units
Initial Deployment DSI Quarterly targets set in discussion with stakeholders
Initial Deployment PPO Model effectiveness analysis performed for each project
Sustenance Share Success Stories Monthly quality calls, quarterly Sr. Management calls
Sustenance Rewards/Recognition Top Team, Top Estimator, Top Reviewer
A sustenance DSI target of 80% for usage of
each model was proposed. A sustenance PPO
target of 90% projects in 10% effort variance
band was proposed.
5.3. Solution Implementation:
The entire Implementation cycle was distributed
across 5 phases – ABCDE.
A – Assess: Evaluate the current scenario of
the customer across the 2 BUs
B – Build: Create and fine tune material and
detailed plan to connect with the target audience
C – Convey: Conduct trainings and roadshows
at a mass scale to communicate the message
D – Deploy: Get down to project level and guide
them to adopt the new estimation model
E – Excel: Measure the success, generate and
incorporate feedback, create business cases,
sustain
5.3.1. Assess
The assessment phase started initially with
evaluating the total volume of existing projects in
each BU using the Identification Cycle. (Fig 4)
Fig 4 Demographics for Retail and Wholesale BU
It was also noted that these figures (Fig. 4) will
change every quarter with few projects getting
closed and some new projects getting started-the
feedback adaptor would help identify these
and regenerate the DIGM.
Fig 5Sample DIGM for Retail BU

13. 1
5.3.2. Build
Based on the above demographic, the
following activities were performed using
the Identification and Initial
Deploymentcycles:
 Identified “Low hanging fruits” ( Green in
Fig 5)
 Analyzed multiple existing templates
and value demonstrated when shi fting to
new model
 Prepared training and roadshow
material customized for multiple
audience groups
 Designed mail flyers and posters
 Created “definition of done” for
deployment. A project is considered
“deployed” only when team use the
designated model, feel happy about the
outcome and close the estimation in the
procured tool
 Created a feedback tracker
 Prepared and agreed upon the DSI’s
and targets (Fig 6):
(a) BU wise projects percentage using
new model
(b) Percentage of team members
performing and reviewing
Fig 6. DSI Targets
 Prepared and agreed upon the PPO
targets of effort variance less than 20%
5.3.3. Convey
Large scale general connects were
established with project teams through mass
roadshows and training sessions articulating
the reason of change and the benefits
accrued as part of an awareness drive
 6 roadshows conducted
 18 demonstration sessions conducted
 30+ mail flyers and posters used for
power messaging of the benefits
 2 online quizzes held to check
understanding amongst the masses
5.3.4. Deploy
The Initial DeploymentCycle was leveraged to
handhold the project teams in deployment. The
tasks were
 The proj ects identifi ed as “low hanging
fruits” were distributed among the core
deployment team
 Dedicated connects were established.
Multiple one-to-one meetings were held with
each project
 Specific benefits of the new model
articulated, gaps of the existing template
demonstrated
 Guiding projects step by step on how to
close the proj ect (refer “defi nition of done” in
Build phase)
 Handling specific issues in understanding
requirements, performing estimates and tool
features

14. 12
After gaining the initial momentum, next set of
identi fied projects were subjected through the
same process of dedicated connects.
What Worked
 The output of the models matched the
expectations of the project teams
 In case of variances, the root causes
were analyzed and actions taken
 Retail BU with more AM projects
showed steep rise in adopting new
models
 Word of mouth spread, especially in
Retail, on the benefits reaped and
adoption increased
 Wholesale and Retail BU leadership
became very pro-deployment after
attending Leadership connect on the
change
 Retail crossed quarterly targets and the
adoption curve further steeped up after
AD model gained momentum in the BU
(22% achieved against set target of 15%
in 1stQuarter)
Challenges Faced
 Wholesale BU Project Leads resistant to
change as they were comfortable with
their old template
 Deployment percentage achieved for
Wholesale at the end of 1stQuarter was
dismally lower than the target (4% vs. a
target of 15%)
Overcoming Challenges
Since Retail BU had picked up the momentum,
more attention and effort was placed on
Wholesale BU. Resources were re-distributed,
plans were re-prioritized.
 Creation of a plan named “Res urgence” to
improve deployment in Wholesale within 4
weeks
 Daily targets set with clear responsibilities
and weekly dashboards published with
weekly deliverables
 Daily standup calls
 Weekly backlog created for incomplete tasks
to be tracked in the subsequent week
After 2 weeks, the Resurgence Plan gained
momentum, and the results became visible. As a
result, a healthy competition was created among
the di fferent port folios of Wholesale on who
would reach there first.The second quarter
ended with Wholesale reaching a whopping 32%
(from 4%) and being very near to the planned
figure of 35%.
5.3.5. Excel
A lot of suggestions were generated using the
Feedback Adaptor for refining the models,
enhancing the tool, Best practices and Process
streamlining.
Each individual feedback was analyzed, and
actionable points were put against them. Also,
the lessons of the initial 2 quarters were
employed in the rest 2 for quicker turnarounds.
In-fact the core team of 4 resources was
reduced to 3 by mid third quarter.
5.4. Results

15. 13
 Overall Estimation model and tool
deployment for Retail and Wholesale BU
met targets (Fig 7)
 Quarter 3 and 4 saw a shi ft from the push
mode to pull mode (Fig 8), remaining
projects proactively connected with the core
team. At the end of the 4th Quarter, the
overall model adoption stood at 83.2%
 Over 4800 Estimators and 1200 Reviewer
pool created (40% and 10%) respectively.
(Fig 10)
 3 Success Stories were generated from
Retail BU on benefits reaped out of the new
models
 The whole Resurgence phenomenon
became a business case of “turning-it-around”
in Wholesale BU
 New checklist item was introduced in Project
Kick-Off Manual, to use the applicable
model and tool. That ensured new projects
readily pick up the process without further
intervention
 Improved model effectiveness was observed
for AM model with more than 90% projects
in the control band for +/- 10% (Fig 9)
 The core team was reduced to 2 resources
for the 5th and 6th Qtr. The engagement
ended with the overall adoption levels at
84.1%
 Recommendation for improvement report for
other BUs and newer models were
presented
‘Resurgence’ plan initiated.
Weekly tracking of deployment
Stringent targets set
Healthy competition among
entities
Fig 7.Retail and Wholesale BU-Actual Projects Deployed Q-o-Q
Fig 8. Increase in Self –Reliance Push vs. Pull in adoption
Specif ic projects identif ied.
Constant connect w ith key
people
Handholding focus projects
Success stories created

16. 1
Fig 9. Improved Model Effectiveness for AD – Most projects in +/- 10% band
Fig 10. Increase of Estimators & Reviewers
5.5 Lessons Learnt
Some of the lessons learnt during the
engagement were:
1. Different strokes apply for di fferent folks. No
two projects are same. The approach has to
be fine-tuned every-time.
2. Proper branding and positioning is very
important for the success of deployment.
3. Do not get demotivated in absence of early
results.
4. Awareness is essential, training is not.
5. Cross Pollination of best practices is critical.
6. CONCLUSION
The most common challenges that deployment
teams face are of changing mindset and
occupying mindshare. There are certain myths
around deployment and the Deployment
Excellence Framework with its key components
can dispel these. The identification of ‘soft
targets’ for i nitial deployment is one way of
looking at deployment but ensuring that they
have maximum impact on the organization wide
deployment is important. Another prevalent myth
is that trainings result in automatic deployment.
The framework proposes a handholding and an
awareness raising initiative to drive deployment.
Most deployment teams communicate only at
the top level, however communication at all
levels of the organization is vital for successful
deployment. And finally sustenance can be only
achieved if the users passionately believe in
what they are using. This can only be driven if
the success of the process or tool is not only
measured in terms of Return on Investment but
also in terms of personal benefits and
helpfulness to the users.
Deployment appears to be an easy task to
accomplish, but in reality it is the most difficult
task in the enti re cycle of creating value using
high maturity processes and tools. The
Deployment Excellence Framework provides a
set of guidelines, techniques and methodologies
along with a set of best practices, lessons learnt
and metrics which when used in conjunction will
help in achieve the results and the benefits of
these processes and tools.

17. 15
7. REFERENCES
1. http://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~mikeb/C
NN.pdf