![Process Management: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow David Trent Market Manager, Best Practices Segment for Rational Software [email_address]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/rsc2009processmanagementyesterdaytodaytomorrow-12712358831818-phpapp02/85/rsc-2009-process-management-yesterday-today-tomorrow-1-320.jpg)
![Legal Notice Process Management: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow ,[object Object]]()
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Rsc 2009 Process Management Yesterday Today Tomorrow
Similar to Rsc 2009 Process Management Yesterday Today Tomorrow (20)
Rsc 2009 Process Management Yesterday Today Tomorrow
- 1. Process Management: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow David Trent Market Manager, Best Practices Segment for Rational Software [email_address]
- 5. Yesterday 1972: Nixon goes to China 1967: First Superbowl played 1995: Spacecrafts Atlantis and Mir Join in Space 1987: US Stock Market Crashes Source: NY Times - http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/archive.html 1981: Prince Charles Weds Lady Diana
- 6. Typical Organization / Project Attributes Degree of governance – fairly formal milestones, other governance varied Compliance requirement – varied Enterprise discipline – project focus Organization and culture – fairly entrenched Organization distribution – mostly in-house, though outsourcing emerging Geographical distribution – generally co-located Application complexity – typically single platform Architecture / design reuse – code mostly custom, libraries emerging Tools – proprietary, not integrated Training – much “on the job”; classroom style training commonplace
- 10. Today 2001: First Harry Potter Film Released 1997: Computer Beats Grandmaster in Chess (Kasparov v Deep Blue) 2008: Obama Elected US President 2001: First iPod Unveiled 1997: Tiger Woods Wins First Masters Golf Title Sources: IBM archives; Dave Martin / AP file; Warner Brothers; Apple; C-SPAN
- 11. Typical Organization / Project Attributes Degree of governance – under-governed or over-governed, poor balance Compliance requirement – increased at multiple levels (e.g. SOX, BASEL II) Enterprise discipline – ranging from projects to systems Organization and culture – pockets of openness, pockets of entrenched Organization distribution – mixed employee/consultant/outsourcing teams Geographical distribution – can be co-located, though teams often dispersed Application complexity – multiple platforms with associated complexity Architecture / design reuse – commercial libraries, COTS, frameworks, … Tools – mix of proprietary and commercial; varying levels of integration Training – software skills often at varying levels, classroom training withers
- 13. Influences: Leveling the global playing field
- 14. Influences: The World is Flat – The Flatteners 1 11/9/89 2 8/9/95 3 Work Flow Software 4 Open-Sourcing 5 Outsourcing 6 Offshoring 7 Supply-Chaining 8 Insourcing 9 In-forming 10 The Steroids Source: Thomas L. Friedman, The world is flat: a brief history of the twenty first century (2005)
- 17. Influences: Service-Oriented Architecture Business Process Services Components Member Requests an Rx Refill (Call Center IVR or Online) Request Denied Rx Dept Processes Refill PC Physician Approves or Denies Request (WS or Email) Member Informed that Refill is Ready Validate Member is Authorized to Make Request Determine Member’s Coverages and Primary Care Physician Send Request Notification to pharmacy Send Request Notification to Notes Patient Records Member Informed that Request has been Denied Request Approved WS Enabled Not WS Enabled Credit Verification Office Scheduling Email System HR Authorization Service Email Service Outpatient Service Masters Service
- 24. Tomorrow Sources: http://www.fodey.com/generators/newspaper/snippet.asp Who knows what the future holds?
- 25. Typical Organization / Project Attributes Degree of governance – right-sized governance viewed as business asset Compliance requirement – compliance to mitigate risk Enterprise discipline – more enterprise and system, less project focus Organization and culture – more openness, less entrenched Organization distribution – mixed employee/consultant/outsourcing teams Geographical distribution – teams typically dispersed globally Application complexity – multiple platforms with associated complexity Architecture / design reuse – open source and commercial reuse a necessity Tools – open source & commercial with integration; tools and process lines blur Training – systems software professionals; motto: “just-in-time & just-enough”
- 27. Influences: Smarter Planet “ Every human being, company, organization, city, nation, natural system and man-made system is becoming interconnected, instrumented and intelligent. This is leading to new savings and efficiency— but perhaps as important, new possibilities for progress.” Because it can. Because it must. Because we want it to. The world is flatter. The world is smaller. The world is getting smarter.
- 36. State of Process – Rational Operationalize capability improvement Enterprise Modernization IT Business Transformation Complex / Embedded Systems Define Business and Operational Objectives Define Practices, RACI Specifications and Policies Operationalize processes, accountability and policies across your organization Measure business and operational results Measure practices adoption Lower TCO through governance platform not requiring each team to retool.
- 42. © Copyright IBM Corporation 2009. All rights reserved. The information contained in these materials is provided for informational purposes only, and is provided AS IS without warranty of any kind, express or implied. IBM shall not be responsible for any damages arising out of the use of, or otherwise related to, these materials. Nothing contained in these materials is intended to, nor shall have the effect of, creating any warranties or representations from IBM or its suppliers or licensors, or altering the terms and conditions of the applicable license agreement governing the use of IBM software. References in these materials to IBM products, programs, or services do not imply that they will be available in all countries in which IBM operates. Product release dates and/or capabilities referenced in these materials may change at any time at IBM’s sole discretion based on market opportunities or other factors, and are not intended to be a commitment to future product or feature availability in any way. IBM, the IBM logo, Rational, the Rational logo, Telelogic, the Telelogic logo, and other IBM products and services are trademarks of the International Business Machines Corporation, in the United States, other countries or both. Other company, product, or service names may be trademarks or service marks of others.
Editor's Notes
- Note: The attributes used here (degree of governance, etc.) are a merge of attributes used by Agility at Scale and COCOMO’s cost equation – with “training” added for good measure.
- MS-DOS was released an ran on an IBM microcomputer in 1981. It featured a 4.77-MHz Intel 8088 CPU, 64KB RAM, 40KB ROM, one 5.25-inch floppy drive, and PC-DOS 1.0 (Microsoft's MS-DOS), for US$3000. Total Quality Management / Baldrige Award – TQM term appeared in the early 1980s after long being part of Japan’s approach thanks to Deming, Juran, etal. US focus and associated Baldrige award began in 1988 with first winners including Motorola, Westinghouse Electric and Globe Metallurgical. (IBM won in 1990) Focus was on quality, but generally without bounds to cost or ROI. Re-Engineering the Corporation – ( Note it called itself a “manifesto”… way, way before Agile !) The origin of Business Process Re-Engineering in 1990. “Most of the work being done does not add any value for customers, and this work should be removed, not accelerated through automation. Instead, companies should reconsider their processes in order to maximize customer value, while minimizing the consumption of resources required for delivering their product or service.” The book came out in 1993. Despite saying that using it for cost reduction alone was not a sensible goal and that layoffs shouldn’t be the point, that genie was out of the bottle! Criticisms of approach also include strict focus on efficiency / technology and disregard of people subjected to the re-engineering. Sought out radical improvement rather than incremental improvement. Object-oriented programming becomes dominate programming methodology in the mid 1990s due to C++. OO techniques/language has beginnings in 1960s though Smalltalk introduced term object-oriented programming in 1970. Microsoft Foundation Classes for C++ - First version arose in 1992 for Microsoft C/C++ v7.0 – which later became Visual C++ (and MFC though it still exists became .NET in 2002). Added Windows 95 support in 1995. The library/framework and a host of means for handling windows objects catapulted C++ and object-oriented all the more into the mainstream. Classic Booch text arrived no later than 1991 (note: can’t find first publish info and picture is of 2 nd edition) Design Pattern book (pictured only, not in text) arrived in 1995 to provide the “Gang of Four” patterns – Erich Gamma provides great input into the Jazz platform today! Decline and Fall of the American Programmer was Authored in 1992. Provided warning that American programmers needed to embrace various productivity enhancing technologies to make themselves cost effective providers of software. Among other things, it discussed: the lure of the “silver bullet” approach, peopleware, software processes, CASE (computer aided software engineering) tools, and software metrics. CASE tools reached their peak of popularity in the early 1990s – KnowledgeWare was one well known company. Interestingly many CASE tool vendors were acquired by Computer Associates. Issues of these tools included inadequate standardization, unrealistic expectations, lengthy training process, and weak repository controls. Software metrics – “You can’t control what you can’t measure”, Tom DeMarco. Yourdon discussed metrics: why, what, and how to measure. Windows 95 is released and improves vastly upon Windows x.y releases. Further transforms the way software is developed. The Internet becomes mainstream in the mid to late 90s… and the genie comes out of the bottle Rise and Resurrection of the American Programmer was authored in 1996…. To his credit Yourdon updated various predictions based upon technology changes, etc. made in his original “Decline and Fall” text.
- Ad Hoc was a common way of developing software given it was an emerging discipline. Waterfall lifecycle was developed in the late 1960s and early 1970s with the first formal description citation coming from Winston Royce in 1970 – Rational VP of Services Walker Royce’s father. Structured techniques emerged about the same time, continued to grow in popularity. Structured techniques employed not only “project management” aspects (roles, timeline, cost, what is “done”) but typically also various techniques like entity-relationship diagrams. Information Engineering originated in the late 1970s and emerged in the early 1980s. The James Martin thread emerged in 1983 and provided a foundation for the CASE tool industry (including KnowledgeWare). IE had seven stages including “Construction” and “Transition” stages – which should seem familiar to those knowing RUP (which was yet to emerge). Various IE techniques include normalization and data flow and data analysis (via data flow diagrams, DFDs). (By the way Martin James had a “manifesto” as well, for IE though!) Six Sigma – First formulated at Motorola by Bill Smith in 1986. Heavily borrowed from decades of existing quality improvement methodologies but provided its own packaging around it though with at least one notable aspect: clear focus on achieving measurable and quantifiable financial returns to the bottom-line of an organization. SEI Capability Maturity Model – Funded by the US Air Force after many software overruns in the early 80s. Result of the study was a model for the military to use to objectively evaluate software contractors. First published in 1989 as “Managing the Software Process”. Basis for the model comes from Crosby’s Quality Management Maturity Grid as found in “Quality is Free.” As per “Decline and Fall” Yourdon notes that according to that model Apple shouldn’t be successful… but they are and demonstrate the model needs to evolve. Incremental, Spiral and Iterative Methodologies Incremental – technically a scheduling and staging strategy that does not require or preclude waterfall or iterative; alternative to incremental is “big bang” – incremental is typically co-mingled with iterative any more as the two terms are currently intertwined (though they always were not!). Spiral – Proposed by Barry Boehm and others to address shortcomings of the waterfall. Often initially termed “modern waterfall”. Spiral first defined by Boehm in his 1988 article “A Spiral Model of Software Development and Enhancement” – though it was not the first to address iterative development, it was the first to discuss why iterative matters! Iterative – A rework scheduling strategy, technically does not presuppose incremental usage though works very well with it. Popular Methodologies (as captured in Yourdon’s Decline and Fall book in Software Processes chapter) Binders of process – value of a process was in how high the printed binders/books would stack The author of this presentation worked for Computer Sciences Corp in the mid 90s and was issued their Catalyst process in binder form initially and eventually in book form. The book form included well over 20 (30?) volumes and stacked several feet high!
- Objectory v1.0 was in 1988. Rational purchased Objectory AB in 1995. Rational Objectory Process 4.0 is developed in 1996…. (RUP is not released until 1998 – and that is captured in “Today”) Why talk about UML? It really goes hand in hand with RUP so should be noted here as well as a state of the industry at the time with regard to process even though it isn’t process per se. Booch already working at Rational, his “Booch Method” known for its design strength Rumbaugh hired by Rational from GE in 1994, his Object Modeling Technique (OMT), known for its analysis strength Jacobson joined Rational in 1995 when Objectory acquired by Rational and his OOSE method, that was the first to include use cases Booch, Rumbaugh, and Jacobson are referred to as “the three amigos” somewhat in jest because of the methodology arguments they had together UML 1.0 proposed to the OMG (Object Modeling Group) in January 1997; UML 1.1 resulted and was submitted (Aug 1997) and approved by in November 1997
- Note: The attributes used here (degree of governance, etc.) are a merge of attributes used by Agility at Scale and COCOMO’s cost equation – with “training” added for good measure.
- This is in contrast to Total Quality Management and its lack of cost / ROI considerations. It also demonstrates the continued evolution of development as a mature engineering discipline. Software Project Management was first published in 1998 (?)
- Leveling the global playing field Main point: Business of all sizes are enjoying whole new degrees of freedom in the way they perform work. Market forces and technology are leveling the playing field. Basically, any business activity or process that can be digitized can be sourced to the most knowledgeable workers, no matter the partner company they work for or where they are located in the world. With such publications as Tom Friedman’s best-seller, The World is Flat, we find the on demand trends becoming better understood by the general population. Whether we refer to these trends as “on demand” or the “world it flat,” we are seeing an economic environment emerge that allows for seamless geographic boundaries and the possibility for process optimization on a scale never seen before. Opportunity abounds, and we find all organization now studying these trends to understand not only how they may be affected by them, but also how to leverage them for tremendous growth. Segue: This focus on exploiting new opportunities in a world without boundaries is reflected in the software delivery challenges facing IT organizations today. And there is an awareness that software is at the core of the transformation to On Demand Business is reflected in the software delivery challenges facing IT organizations today.
- Tom listed 10 major events over the past 15 years that has shaped the world we live in today. 11/9/89. Fall of the Berlin Wall. This opened up the world and many of its closed economies and removed many political geographic boundaries that had been put in place. Capital economies flourished as after this point we saw Russian de-unification, India, China etc enter the global business stage as first class players. This also opened up their talent. 8/9/95. Netscape goes public. The Internet land rush is on. Software booms, e-business booms and more importantly networks and infrastructure booms. Thousands of miles of high speed fiber is laid in place far ahead of the demand which can be used to day for almost cost free global connectivity Workflow Software: With the infrastructure now in place…the world needed two things…Programmers and magic pipes. New software to take advantage of the connected world and open standards to allow all those building for the environment to extend the network. From this work a flat world platform emerges. Open Sourcing: This brought us intellectual collaboration. This set the cornerstone on how application development to begin to evolve. Brought the concepts forward for continual improvement of software and distributed development teams. Outsourcing: India on the world stage. The trend here is that the pattern we saw with Y2K developed into at tremendous pool of technical talent. From Y2K, we had dotcom apps that needed development, to show applications to now very fine grained components With Offshoring, China comes onto the stage as a major player in both technology and business. What started with the desire to tap into opportunities in China turned out to companies looking at leveraging their resource and labor.. By leveraging the labor force in China and the expertise in other countries the benefit is bi-directional. Supply chaining With the infrastructure and models maturing we started to see many company begin to turn their focus back on their internal processes. We started seeing process break out of the bounds of the traditional organization. Insourcing. The next flattener gave firm the process automation, and the new applications that allowed them to have better information both about how they worked and how their customers worked. UPS turned from a package firm to a logistics firm. Asia Paint moving from a paint reseller to retail store management. In-forming: With the availability of information firms can truly become 7x24…always on, always connected. The steroids: mobile, digital, RSID etc. Everything focused on being connected to the network and communicating on the network. Moving beyond just person to person to a realm of app 2 app and machine 2 machine. So these are the trends that have gotten us to where we are today.
- As Friedman’s book eloquently explains, the global economics, and technology base are allowing us to distribute and integrate: skills, labor rates, activities, teams and resources in new ways Some mixtures don’t work too well yet, but the flat world allows much more flexibility Reqts/design teams are hard to distribute (very creative) Coding and Testing are much more componentized and “distrbutable” Open sourced maintenance evolution works well….but open sourced design?
- Software is now: in the critical path of almost every product or project the “smarts” and differentiators of most products and systems the most vulnerable asset (humans) Compliance is a necessity and a differentiator of “trustworthiness” Minimum cost of compliance is the job of our development platform: processes, methods and tools. Compliant development platforms: Executives trust investments to deliver more ROI, and manage risks better economics Project managers trust processes to help illuminate, steer, measure, control, instrument more predictability Practitioners trust environment to automate, document, analyze, assess, manage change more engineering, less dogwork
- To keep pace with global competition: “ We are taking apart each task and sending it … to whomever can do it best, … and then we are reassembling all the pieces” from Thomas Friedman’s ‘The World is Flat’ The standards and technology are finally in place, with broad industry support Availability of best practices for effective governance The necessary software to get started is available today You’ve heard about things like re-use before so what is different about SOA than past approaches to IT? To begin with, SOA takes better advantage of standards than anything that has come before it. SOA uses broadly adopted Web services standards that ensure well-defined interfaces. In the past, standards exists but they didn’t have the extensive buy-in that they do today. These amounted to proprietary standards limited interoperability Second, we see a much greater degree of organizational commitment to SOA. While in the past IT and business lacked a common way to communicate about designing architectures, we see SOA acting as a unifying force between business and IT. <Note: Do not spend as much time with the next 3 sections> Third, the degree of focus is different. You may have heard people call this “level of granularity” or “degree of abstraction”. In any case, there is more of a one-to-one relationship between steps in a business process and the services that support these steps. SOA services are linked dynamically and flexibly while past service interactions were hard-coded and dependent on the applications where they resided. And finally, looking at the level of reuse, SOA services can be re-used extensively regardless of whether they’re newly created services or existing IT assets that have been converted to services.
- We can learn a lot from other industries. The biggest influence on software development right now comes from the principles of Lean Manufacturing which can be derived from Toyota Production System. Toyta in 2007 became the world’s largest car manufacturer. Even more impressive is that Toyota’s profit is bigger than the combined profit of all other car companies combined, so it seems like they are doing something right. Toyota revolutionized how the manufacturing process, and many of these key concepts can effectively be leveraged in the software industry. They changed the notion of that Quality must cost. Instead, they said that if you build with high quality directly, you can actually reduce cost, and the same is true for software development. They introduced the notion of Kaizen, continuous process improvement where many small improvements will add up over time. They involved team members in the change process. In the 70s, it was pretty revolutionary to have a blue collar worker stop the manufacturing process because they saw a defect. And they focused heavily on measures. No work without process No process without metrics No metrics without measurement No measurement without analysis No analysis without improvement MCIF brings many of these key thoughts to the domain of software delivery
- Unified Process – Unified Software Development Process or Unified Process was first released as a book by Rumbaugh, Jacobsen, and Booch in 1999. The UP (and RUP) is known for it being Iterative and Incremental, Architecture Centric, and Use Case Driven – additionally for its focus on risk reduction/mitigation. Rational Unified Process – A commercial extension of the UP, it is based upon: Objectory v3.8 (1995) / Rational Objectory Process v4.0 (1996); the “Booch Method”; and the Object Modeling technique by Rumbaugh. RUPv5.0 was introduced in July 1998. Note: RUP v2003 just went off support last year (5 years after release date) UML – UML 1.1 evolved to UML 1.3 and 1.4 in 2000, UML 1.5 in 2003, UML 2.0 in 2005, and various versions since then. Branching off of the UML 2.1.2 spec is SysML 1.1. Contributors to SysML include Dr. Chris Sibbald, now product manager of RMC, among others. Other derivations from the UML spec exist as well… it serves as foundation for other innovations and growth! Books noted as reference: UML reference manual was the original UML reference manual, many others such as UML Distilled followed suit The USDP book captured the work of the Three Amigos in more academic form. The RUP an Introduction by Krutchen for a long time was a much more interpretive and digestible text on RUP. That said, The RUP Made Easy by Kroll and Krutchen was a more pragmatic and “how to” text that was released in April 2003. Harmony – Discussion of Rational-related iterative methods wouldn’t be complete without discussing Telelogic brings to Rational. Harmony/ITSW: Builds off of OpenUp and is another IT SDLC Harmony/SE: Builds upon the work of Dr. Peter Hoffman in the field of model-based systems Harmony/ES: Builds upon the work of Dr. Bruce Douglass in the Embedded Real-Time areas
- SPEM is the Software Process Engineering Metamodel. It is an extension of the UML spec specifically for software process. SPEM v1.0 was born in Nov 2002. RMC 7.0 pre-dated EPF and was not built upon it, but rather was a somewhat parallel code base while the open source collaboration lagged behind due to deliberations about the SPEM meta-model, etc. EPF v1.0 included Open UP / Basic (sometimes called BUP), which eventually became known as OpenUP RMC 7.5 released Oct 2009. Both EPF v1.2 and RMC v7.5 introduced capabilities to support the notion of “practices”. OpenUP practices created; IBM Practices born
- Agile is potentially a touchy topic depending upon the zeal of those present =^) Be sure to stress that this is an abbreviated truncated history of Agile! Note that Agile has much in common with the Rapid Application Development techniques in the 1980s/1990s by James Martin, etal! Scrum – Actually not an acronym (not all caps). 1991 DeGrace and Stahl in “Wicked Problems, Righteous Solutions” referred to a 1986 Japanese approach as “Scrum”. In the early 90s, Ken Schwaber used an approach that led to Scrum at his company. In parallel, Jeff Sutherland, etal developed a similar approach and was the first to call it “Scrum”. Both Schwaber and Sutherland presented a joint paper at OOPSLA in 1995; they continued to collaborate. In 2001, Schwaber teamed with Mike Beedle to author Agile Development with Scrum. Scrum is a process skeleton which contains sets of practices and pre-defined roles that include ScrumMaster, ProductOwner, and Team. Scrum uses sprints to create an increment of usable software. Artifacts are the product backlog, the sprint backlog, and the burn down chart. “ Pigs and Chickens” is famously associated with it: A pig and a chicken are walking down a road. The chicken looks at the pig and says, &quot;Hey, why don't we open a restaurant?&quot; The pig looks back at the chicken and says, &quot;Good idea, what do you want to call it?&quot; The chicken thinks about it and says, &quot;Why don't we call it 'Ham and Eggs'?&quot; &quot;I don't think so,&quot; says the pig, &quot;I'd be committed, but you'd only be involved.&quot; Extreme Programming – created by Kent Beck during his work on the Chrysler Comprehensive Compensation System payroll project. Beck became project lead in March 1996 and wrote a book on the method he evolved in that role -- Extreme Programming Explained in 1999. (by the way, Chrysler cancelled the C3 project 6 months later!) Various of its practices have been around for some time though the XP approach that combines them is new. The approach has its detractors due to drawbacks in unstable requirements, undocumented compromises of user conflicts (no audit trail), and lack of design spec/document. The main aim of XP is to reduce the cost of change by being more flexible based upon the XP values, principles, and practices – each of which go into more detail. Agile Manifesto – Famously drafted at a ski resort in Feb 2001 in Utah by notables in the Agile space. Participants included: Kent Beck, Mike Beedle, Arie van Bennekum, Alistair Cockburn, Ward Cunningham, Martin Fowler, James Grenning, Jim Highsmith, Andrew Hunt, Ron Jeffries, Jon Kern, Brian Marick, Robert C. Martin, Steve Mellor, Ken Schwaber, Jeff Sutherland, and Dave Thomas. http://agilemanifesto.org/ Lean Software Development – Leverages lean manufacturing principles and applies them to the software engineering domain as per the Poppendecks. The seven lean principles are: eliminate waste, amplify learning, decide as late as possible, deliver as fast as possible, empower the team, build integrity in, and see the whole. Lean software development practices, what the authors call “tools”, are expressed differently than traditional Agile ones but have strong parallels. Rational has been talking about “agile” and “agility” for years as well. Examples include the Agility and Discipline Made Easy text by Kroll and MacIsaac that include 20 practices and both Kroll and Ambler speaking to Agility at Scale – agile process taking into account important scaling attributes like governance and GDD. Rational introduced Agile practice content in RMC v7.5 last year. Scott Ambler is currently evolving Agility at Scale into the APMM (Agile Process Maturity Model) – see next slide for an associated graphic of that!
- Insight – Rational’s next generation metrics collection offering that is built upon Cognos technology. RMC – Practices were launched with RMC 7.5 in October, 2008. MCIF – First shared at RSC 2008, the idea that a meta-process around a process/tooling adoption was needed that ties business objectives to operational objectives to objective metrics/measurements to ensure the organization’s goals are met, proper feedback loops and expectations are set, and ROI is obtained. Agility at Scale – Something Per Kroll and Scott Ambler have spoken about and to for years…. That Agile is good, but that scaling Agile based upon governance, compliance, GDD, and other factors are important attributes that must be taken into account when adopting process.
- Note: The attributes used here (degree of governance, etc.) are a merge of attributes used by Agility at Scale and COCOMO’s cost equation – with “training” added for good measure.
- Next two slides purposefully remove the “marketing” aspect of IBM Smarter Planet to minimize info-commercial effect. To ensure an info-commercial does not occur start off saying: “Most everyone here has seen IBM’s Smarter Planet messages on TV, print, etc. Lets strip away the marketing and talking to the core of what it speaks to because there is a real message there for the future.” The tie we are making to process here is the challenge with keeping up with that much change, that much dynamic everything! This tone provides a good lead into then to all the other slides which talk less about static structures but instead structures which are better suited to adapt, change, and evolve with the nature of the business and support everyone’s journey to a Smarter Planet =^) We are all familiar with global integration and how the planet is becoming flatter And through interconnected communications and commerce, it’s becoming smaller But something else is also going on. Something that may ultimately have a more profound affect on our society, businesses and individual lives…the planet is also becoming smarter. Our planet is becoming more intelligent, more instrumented, and more interconnected day by day. And with these changes come amazing opportunities for society as a whole and for every business, institution and individual. With so much technology and networking abundantly available, what wouldn't you put smart technology into? What service wouldn’t you provide ? What wouldn't you connect? What information wouldn't you mine for insight? The answer is, you – or your competitor – will do all of that. You will do it because you can. But the even more compelling reason we will all begin to transform our systems, operations, enterprises and personal lives to take advantage of a smarter world isn’t just because we can. It’s because we must .
- Again, what does this and “Smarter Planet” have in common with process management?!? Consider the issues of over-fishing and pollution. What is the issue with over-fishing? Those that are involved in the environmentally costly behavior have no incentive to do otherwise – fishermen who overfish likely pay no penalty which results in a “tragedy of the commons” situation. Incentives are not properly aligned. What is the issue with pollution? The impact of your use of energy and its impact on air quality and global warming is not obvious. As a result, you may not be aware of or appreciate that impact. Feedback is not properly aligned. The issues of poorly aligned incentives and feedback mechanisms are root issues of process management. Consider data architecture, enterprise architecture, and configuration management for a moment. Is the benefit of any one of these things the project team or the organization? What if you examine this in the scope of just a project? (There is little to no incentive and little to no feedback for the project team to care – it just “delays” their project!) Instrumented THE HEALTH OF ANY SYSTEM OR PROCESS WE CARE ABOUT CAN NOW BE MEASURED, SENSED AND SEEN. Putting sensors not just in “things,” but thoughtfully across entire ecosystems of supply chains, business processes, cities, companies, infrastructures, work flows, even nature’s systems. Every transaction and change in location, state, temperature and condition become sources of valuable insight. Interconnected INSTRUMENTED SYSTEMS WORK TOGETHER IN NEW WAYS. Work can now get done more efficiently—the right capability, from the right source, at the right time can be brought to bear. But more than that, interconnected systems help us to see new opportunities for progress, offering fertile ground for making the world work better. Intelligent EVERY INSIGHT RESULTS IN ACTION THAT CREATES NEW VALUE. A new kind of enterprise application enables us to Sense-Analyze-Act. An ability to see and model the future for better decision-making. Optimize resource allocation across ecosystems—smarter use of natural resources, human energy, capital investment and time.
- Web 2.0: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2.0 -- The sometimes complex and continually evolving technology infrastructure of Web 2.0 includes server-software, content-syndication, messaging-protocols, standards-oriented browsers with plug-ins and extensions, and various client-applications. The differing, yet complementary approaches of such elements provide Web 2.0 sites with information-storage, creation, and dissemination challenges and capabilities that go beyond what the public formerly expected in the environment of the so-called &quot;Web 1.0“. Among the technologies most applicable to process: wiki, mashups, user-generated content, and content sharing and filtering though certainly technologies like REST (which is critical to Insight reporting!) are important as well Wikinomics – discusses a fraction of the web 2.0 world and certainly can be described as “over optimistic” but it gives an interesting perspective on a new world unfolding. Don Tapscott has said the book is primarily based upon the ideas of Openness, Peering, Sharing, and Acting Globally – basically, that mass collaboration is seen as an extension of the outsourcing trend and can occur in many ways. The technologies involved in web 2.0 help enable this collaboration to happen. Coase’s theorem, attributed to Ronald Coase, describes the economic efficiency of an economic allocation. Initially proposed in 1959, it is cited in Coase’s 1991 Nobel Prize winning Economics paper. The Coase Theorem has been used by jurists and legal scholars in the analysis and resolution of disputes involving both contract law and tort law. Coase never defined a theorem so its really various derivations / applications that are typically cited. Among those that have most relevance to process: “property rights should initially be assigned to the actors gaining the most utility from them”. Implication: people should own/define the processes that impact them!
- Six Degrees of Separation – Has been culturally embedded truism for years (e.g. the game Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon); the idea that because of social networks everyone is separated from everyone else on the planet by a relatively small set of social links “ Hundredth Monkey Effect” – The idea that once a new idea has been introduced into a population and shared enough it reaches a critical threshold where it is spread throughout the community quickly. Original reference is to monkeys learning to wet sweet potatoes in the water before eating them to remove the sand: one smart (lucky?) monkey; a small group learns; and at some threshold it becomes a cultural norm. Original reference: Rhythms of Vision by Lawrence Blair in 1975. There are disputes as to claims and original research apparently captured that old monkeys tended to go about their ways while the young monkeys adapted/learned from elders. Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell – Published in 2000, expanded and exemplified the above works and returned social network dynamics back to center stage with his best seller. There are criticisms of this text – just like any text! – but the core ideas appear generally meritorious and provide a reasonable framework for effecting organizational change via social networks. (*** NOTE: there are certainly blog postings, etc. of Agilists who cite this book and they see the choice of the word Agile and application of social networks, etc. as very applicable) The Law of the Few – (1) 80/20 rule applied as per Gladwell: &quot;The success of any kind of social epidemic is heavily dependent on the involvement of people with a particular and rare set of social skills.“; (2) 3 critical types of people. (Note that various innovative types of marketing plays off this concept: have those that meet trend-starter stereotypes use a product to have viral use of it catch on “naturally.”) Connectors as exemplified by the six degrees problem, Paul Revere’s ride (that Paul could roust many people quickly given who he knew), etc. “The ability to span many different worlds as a function of something intrinsic to their personality, some combination of curiosity, self-confidence, sociability, and energy.” Mavens accumulate knowledge of the marketplace and are people we rely upon to connect us with new information. A Maven is someone who wants to solve other people's problems, generally by solving his own. Able to start word-of-mouth epidemics due to their knowledge, social skills, and ability to communicate. They not only know, but are excited about knowing and have credibility with raising action in another. Salesmen are charismatic persuaders. Among other examples the author cites Peter Jennings and the importance and implication of non-verbal cues. Stickiness Factor – Content of a message makes its impact memorable: basically, if you aren’t made to care you won’t make the effort to remember. Exemplifies with Sesame Street and Blues Clues. Don’t need to be entertained necessarily, but its that entertainment works to engross the children to learn. Power of Context – Human behavior is sensitive to and strongly influenced by its environment. &quot;Epidemics are sensitive to the conditions and circumstances of the times and places in which they occur.“ Gladwell cites ‘zero tolerance’ efforts and their impacts. “ bystander effect” - The more people are around, the more everyone else assumes its someone else’s responsibility. Generally cited case is Kitty Genovese rape and murder in 1964 and 38 witnesses failing to intervene or contact police. Impact of relative isolation on a circumstance making people more responsive to a situation from a sense of personal/moral responsibility. Dunbar’s number – Theoretical natural limit of the number of people with whom one can maintain stable social relationships. Generally cited as 150 people. As applied to corporate settings the idea that groups larger than this dramatically impact productive cooperative effort due to the overhead of maintaining an unnatural organization size. Outliers by Malcom Gladwell – Most important point is the 10,000 rule: Gladwell explains that reaching the 10,000-Hour Rule, which he considers the key to success in any field, is simply a matter of practicing a specific task that can be accomplished with 20 hours of work a week for 10 years. The idea that in order to achieve greatness/expertise there is a minimum threshold of focused effort required.
- How does this apply? Before we’d talk about “software economics” and the equation. Rather than using economics to only calculate cost, looking at economic theory to help improve the way we do things. Choice is good, but a guiding hand is needed. Freakonomics by Levitt and Dubner – Among the first of a slew of books that began leveraging the tools of economics to non-traditional “everyday” situations. Although this text itself doesn’t directly apply as strongly as some of the other examples the avenues it opens are intriguing. Economics in general – we are always ROIing and “monetizing” everything but don’t often explicitly apply economics… why not? Conventional wisdom – what are the impacts of incorrect institutionalized assumptions, especially those that are embedded in how you do business? Impact of information asymmetry – “information asymmetry” occurs when someone has more/better information than another; recent seminal works include 2001 Noble prize in Economics by Michael Spence, etal; how do you minimize the impact of this occurring?; heavily applied to human resource and personnel economics regarding incentive schemes when the employer cannot continually observe worker effort Using new questions to perform data mining – example from Freaknomics: its one thing to test if students are cheating on standardized tests, but how do you determine if teachers are trying to cheat the tests?!? Nudge – explores “choice architecture”: the notion of manipulating outcomes without changing people’s underlying presences, a sort of paternal “guiding hand” that still provides for choice The issues of pollution, global warming, etc. have roots in poor incentives and feedback mechanisms – issues we face in the environment and associated root causes are similar to ones that exist in large organizations for process management! Both our world and our company is an ecosystem… and sadly, both may have issues! “ choice architecting”: important to stress that the notion is that of a benevolent parent/guardian, not a devious “big brother” * Natural biases: many abound the most commonly discussed are financially related biases regarding risk * How things are presented impacts decision making: e.g. positioning of products on a supermarket shelf Importance of feedback: How many important decisions do we make without having prior experience to guide us? Where to go to college? Which major / career path to take? Who to marry? Where to live? Even things like IT projects that last years don’t provide enough opportunity to be “experienced” and learn… especially since many of those projects are not structured with feedback loops so that information to provide learning occurs! Need for default choices and “guiding hand” – Medicare D is great example of overwhelming people with choices; some 401k plans are similar. What if based upon a few attributes the appropriate set of practices for a given project could be provided? (and a short ramp / education to those team members about those practices provided?!?) quotes: * “Choice architecture and its effects cannot be avoided… offer nudges that are most likely to help & least likely to inflict harm.” [p.72] * “Even practice does not make perfect if people lack good opportunities for learning. Learning is most likely if people get immediate, clear feedback after each try.” [p.75] * “…many of life’s choices…not structured to provide good feedback…Long-term processes rarely provide good feedback.” [p.75] * “It is particularly hard for people to make good decisions when they have trouble translating the choices they face into experiences they will have.” [p.76] * “When people have a hard time predicting how their choices will end up effecting their lives, they have less to gain by numerous options and perhaps even choosing by themselves. A nudge might be welcomed.” [p.76]
- Sometimes all it takes is to ask the right question! …. ( implications of the various aspects to process in bold ) Note: the Daisyworld and Amino acids ideas are particularly interesting from a “Smart Planet” perspective and IBM’s associated marketing of it Power law – small changes to unstable systems can have huge impacts; what small impacts in an organization can improve process? Fractals - building a process that scales indefinitely for projects, programs, portfolios, etc.; an example of a fractal is shown on the slide; a framework for process that can scale to any size for the organization? Sandpiles – you can drop grains of sand at the top of a sandpile, at some point one grain will cause an avalanche of impacts as the pile seeks to self-reorganize to a sustainable steady state; even when unstable systems “release” they leave instabilities which need to be “released” later; can we create organization/process structures that take advantage of or mimic such a self-correcting reaction given we know change is inevitable? Lovelock test – Jim Lovelock sat in on a team meeting of a Mars Mission team trying to answer the question “is there life on Mars?” He realized there was an extreme presumption of what “life” was, that what the “existence of life” implied had to be answered first, and then the correct metric/measurement could be applied. (He posited that where life was present the waste products from life processes would be present in an atmosphere and that as a result any atmosphere that had compounds that were in equilibrium implied that there was no life present.); what is the right question/test/metric(s) to determine if process really is present in an organization? Daisyworld – Original 1983 simulation performed by James Lovelock and Andrew Watson that simulated a planet consisting of nothing but black and white daisies and demonstrated how they could achieve a self regulating biosphere within certain parameters. This model was later expanded to include more complicating factors and as such demonstrated the potential importance of a diverse biosphere. It also suggests that the ability of a system to self-regulate is finite: that it can only do so within certain parameters. What are the necessary attributes for a self-sustaining, self-correcting process structure to exist in an organization; what kills it?!? CHON and Amino acids – CHON (Carbon, Hydrogen, Oxygen, and Nitrogen) is an acronym to help remember the four most abundant elements in living organisms. Amino acids are the building blocks of life. In 2002 there was a successful experiment showing how raw materials known to exist in interstellar space under interstellar conditions spontaneously arose Amino acids from a mixture of water, methanol, hydrogen. Another similar experiment with different ingredients produced 16 (of the 20 known!) Amino acids as well as several other organic compounds. While this doesn’t prove life itself could evolve from this on a planet, it does make the presumption more plausible. Under what conditions can process “life” spontaneously arise and be sustained?
- Other process experts have talked about making process “a game” complete with “game boards”, etc. That isn’t what we mean here. Rather we are talking about leveraging what we know about what games entail, how they grow to be successful, etc. and applying that to the process world. The net of this conversation from a process perspective? It isn’t whether you do waterfall, iterative, or Agile. It isn’t whether you have formal and complex rules and governance. Rather it is enough to say that “you are playing the game” and really its about rightsizing associated support based upon your industry, culture, needs for governance, etc. and working from that spot. Many analogies can be made: e.g. don’t write a thick rule book if nobody is sanctioned as an umpire and oversees compliance. Baseball analogy - have enough rules and structure: Baseball has umpires who “really know the rules”; have players who know “enough of the rules” – the important thing is that everyone agrees the amount of rules and how they are governed! - have different flavors of rules: MLB rules; softball rules (competitive, coed, etc.); little league rules - have “simplified” or “standard” versions: kids-playing-in-a-field rules - standards on equipment: (1) T-ball, by adding a batting tee the physical skill required for pitching and the advanced skill of hitting a moving ball is removed from the game to enhance the “fun” for younger players and allow them to play in a competitive situation – interim steps, a process mentor knowing which rules the team can break/bend in the interim (2) changing the size / type of the ball (e.g. baseball, softball, whiffle ball) and regulating bat types (e.g aluminum, wood) and size; requirement that a team may / may not have to have a standard uniform, be able to wear cleats, etc. – level of governance and standardization - have natural limits on micromanagement of rules: You can only micromanage rules so much: MLB ballpark fence distances must remain same for entire season to prevent home teams from changing based on opponent but the art of “doctoring” the playing field itself (e.g. how balls roll foul/fair due to unlevel ground, bad hops / rolling resistance of ball in grass due to sod maintenance) are all little things that are still employed as they can’t be micromanaged – knowing where to “draw the line” in what is being controlled Games evolved from simple structures: sometimes its unclear how they evolved as baseball has history ties to cricket, German Schlagball, a Russian sport called Lapta, and many other international roots; the US version of baseball based on English game rounders called “Town Ball” (among other things) in the early 1800s it wasn’t until the 1871 that the first attempt at a “major league” occurred though semi-pro ball did exist in the 1860s [Standalone batter: Clipart open source and does not require attribution as per terms of: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Batter_(PSF).png]
- The main points here… RPGs are the closest thing to what process in our industry tries to accomplish: a bunch of people agreeing to be governed by a set of rules in order to achieve an objective. The gaming industry that serves RPGs has a captive audience that wants to play the game; our industry has “players” that are not always as enthused participants. Examining how this industry has evolved and how core game mechanics have remained relevant and become “automated” is important to our industry understanding how to keep apply process without being overbearing about it! More detail on a “soap opera like story” The journey begins with a set of objectives, given set resources, and may need to be performed in a given duration Risks exist and need to be mitigated, problems need to be solved, and battles fought Random events can (and do) occur that can both help and hinder the players How the game played out and the final ending often differs from the onset… and, regardless of the outcome, you always declare “victory” at the end Regarding “keeping score”… granted many RPGs have “experience points”, gold that is one, and levels that are climbed and player characters do “die”… but those are attributes more of an evolution of the character more than anything else… which begs for ties to the IT world as well: (1) how do you accurately access the skill set of those involved? (2) impact of performing tasks/milestones and having accomplished something of value? … There also is the ultimate issue of “playing the game” or “gaming the system” – once you know what is rewarded, continuing to focus only on high-margin activities. Role-playing games history: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_role-playing_games ; important things to call out in parallels to process world: Not everyone loves RPGs Differing levels of detail, documentation desired Even the respected gurus disagree Commercial and open source / homebrew exist! Important thing is the net exploration and evolution, convergence on common important differentiating aspects (e.g. SPEM, important aspects of governance), and the evolution of the discipline to yet another relevant form
- I wanted to wrap this presentation up with a short discussion of our future direction as it relates to providing the industries only platform for operationalizing capability improvements, But before I talk to the future, let me talk about what is here today: You can define practices in RMC, and make those available in context of Jazz-based tools You can capture best practices and policies in Jazz platform and the platform will support and enforce their usage We have beta capabilities that provide you with the ability to measure how you are doing within Jazz and non-jazz-based products. Jazz is a middleware platform for software delivery. That means that you can get access to all of the above without having to force each team to retool. Your team can e,g. stay on VisualStudio, while benefiting from the above, which lowers TCO, allowing you to decide when and how to evolve the development environment of each individual team while still operationalizing your ability improve the capabilities of your Software and Systems Delivery organization. The direction we are moving towards is to further strengthen these capabilities. We want to fully integrate our process definition capabilities with the Jazz process capabilities, so that Rational Method Composer becomes a process definition tool for the Jazz platform We want to extend the capabilities of the Jazz platform in areas such as RACI specifications and policies We want to deliver a comprehensive measurement solution, allowing you to monitor the business process of software capabilities The sum of the above is that we believe that we today have the industry leading solution in this area, and that we continue evolving it to address your needs.
- Optional IBM Rational “Questions” Breaker Slide
- Mandatory IBM Rational standard closing slide to be included in all external presentations. Learn more links: IBM Rational software: www.ibm.com/software/rational Rational launch announcements: www.ibm.com/software/rational/announce/ Rational Software Delivery Platform: www.ibm.com/software/info/developer Accelerate change and delivery: www.ibm.com/software/rational/offerings/scm.html Deliver enduring quality: www.ibm.com/software/rational/offerings/testing.html Enable enterprise modernization: www.ibm.com/software/info/developer/solutions/em/index.jsp Ensure Web site security and compliance: www.ibm.com/software/rational/offerings/websecurity/ Improve project success: www.ibm.com/software/rational/offerings/lifecycle.html Manage architecture: www.ibm.com/software/rational/offerings/design.html Manage evolving requirements: www.ibm.com/software/rational/offerings/irm/ Small and midsized business: www.ibm.com/software/rational/smb/ Targeted solutions: www.ibm.com/software/info/developer/solutions/index.jsp Rational trial downloads: www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/downloads Leading Innovation Web site: www.ibm.com/software/rational/leadership developerWorks Rational: www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational IBM Rational TV: www.ibm.com/software/info/television/index.jsp?cat=rational&media=video&item=en_us/rational/xml/M259765N40519Z80.xml IBM Rational Business Partners: www.ibm.com/partnerworld/pwhome.nsf/weblook/index.html IBM Rational Case Studies: www.ibm.com/software/success/cssdb.nsf/topstoriesFM?OpenForm&Site=rational