Introduction
In my first post I focused on the human factor related to the match between the Business Strategy, Business Processes, Data Processes and Legal requirements”.
In my second post I addressed why the Management Team must take ownership of securing the match between the Business Strategy, Business Processes, Data Processes and Legal requirements.
Here in my third post I will share my observations related to the reference models I see will be an advantage for even small companies to use, i.e. Think big, act small.
The reference models and the human factor
In the old days craftsmen were not only trusted for but also recommended due to the quality of their deliveries. They were members of societies that focused on maintaining the high level of their craft and reputation. It was also within the society the detailed knowledge were exchanged, maintained and handed over to the chosen ones.
Without diving in to the history of each individual business or technical reference model, then as I remember it, the initial intentions were to create a reference model for use in the communication between all involved parties in order to secure the same level of understanding, i.e. related to expectations, design and success criteria. Each model are today either maintained by a community or a “neutral” organization, i.e. vendor independent.
I do believe in the value of these reference models and that they all have an important role to play.
I have to say, that some of the models has turned in a direction of academic complexity rather than an operational toolbox, but I would state, that it is acceptable, that you decide to use a reference model despite you know there will be sections without any content.
Like anything else within IT – nothing is simple. I recommend therefore to participate in all the basic trainings – including the models interacting with your chosen one – before starting any implementation at all.
Reference models used within IT
Among several reference models I have chosen to comment COBIT 5, TOGAF, ITIL, UML and the project management tool with respect to the operational use in an organization.
COBIT 5 is the framework for governance and management of enterprise IT. COBIT 5 is owned and maintained by ISACA.
TOGAF is the framework for enterprise architecture, i.e. any business using IT as this model covers the business processes within the organization (people), services (applications used by the business), data (all available information) and the technology (hardware, software and network). TOGAF is owned and maintained by Open Group.
ITIL is the framework for IT Service Management, i.e. how to operate the IT Platform. Owned and maintained by AXELOS, a joint venture by the Government of the United Kingdom and Capita.
UML is a general–purpose modelling language in the field of software engineering that is intended to provide a standard way to visualize the design of a system. UMLhas many diagrams which are divided into two categories: Structural UML diagrams and Behavioural UML diagrams – as a subset of the latter there are Interaction diagrams that covers the flow of control and data among the components in the system being modelled. UML is owned and maintained by Object Management Group.
The preferred Project Management Methodology is often Prince 2 as it is owned and maintained by AXELOS, a joint venture by the Government of the United Kingdom and Capita.
With insight in and working with the PMBOK®, Prince 2, HERMES and PROPS not to mention several company modifications of either PMBOK® or Prince 2, then I still find PROPS (developed by L. M. Ericsson and in use since 1988) to be the best operational framework for project management. (SEMCON bought in 2002 PROPS from Ericsson. In 2010 SEMCON released their own project methodology: XLPM using elements from PROPS. PROPS are no longer maintained.)
The rational approach to these model
I am fully aware of that an implementation of all these models will be a very expensive investment and a tough one to fulfil even within a long time frame. However when you start thinking and acting within the frames described in these models, you will be better of when starting using the models.
A rational approach will strengthen both the business
and the IT platform supporting your business.
Do not be afraid of having gaps in the first preliminary or official versions of the documentation. The sooner you share the documentation, the sooner the organization will understand and see the value of having a complete full documented version.
When you spend time on preparing and involving people in an upcoming change, the sooner you will benefit from this change.
The rational approach for a new IT platform
When starting from scratch then it would be natural to start by making the first draft of the Governance Structure (COBIT 5) followed by the Architecture (TOGAF) and finally using UML to document the function and operation of the IT platform (ITIL).
When you have this in place you can start planning the implementation using a project management methodology, i.e. PMBOK® or Prince 2.
I do believe in flexibility and that it is possible to work parallel with some of these activities. The only challenge will be to secure, that no implementation work is started before the governance and maintenance of the IT platform have been documented.
The rational approach for an existing IT Platform
In my objective then the best sequence for the business will be to start with TOGAF as this will provide an overview of all the active components.
TOGAF should then be followed by ITIL as you will have to secure, that you have documented how the IT platform is maintained and how the components are interacting. Start using UML in a simple form will be beneficial – I have seen experienced technicians get a “wake up call” when discovering the benefits using UML.
In order to secure a proper governance of your system, then the next step would be to fill out the COBIT 5 framework with what is available of today. Sometimes you will find that any gaps are easy to close as you just missed to document what already is in production.
Having a full picture of your IT Platform will make it possible to generate the strategic action plan for technical upgrade/ increase effectiveness/ improve processes/ new investments/ etc.
The IT Platform – mind set when approaching
There are different ways of approaching your IT Platform, but I would recommend the management team to be inspired by ISACA’s The Business Model for Information Security.
ISACA has with this model established the holistic and business-oriented approach to managing information security and to fill the gaps in other standards and frameworks related hereto.
IT is more than technology – it is also the humans operating it.
Training is a must
I would like to address that training to the organization provided by the experts in these toolboxes always will be both a required and a good investment at strategic level.
“A fool with a tool is still a fool”
I have participated in both company specific and open trainings in this relation – both have their advantages, however I prefer the open trainings as here you often will be inspired to see other options in order to achieve the result.
Relation to the human factor
In my next post I intend to give the reader my reflections on the human factor experienced when operating in the zone between business and technicians and then link these observations to my first three articles.
Thank you for having read my third post in this series – hope it has given you some inspiration.
Best wishes for the future.
This article was published initially on LinkedIn on 1 August 2017. I have made some adjustments to the content in this version.
Image Credits:
| LEGO parts | Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash |
| Giving directions | Photo by Sebastian Hietsch on Unsplash |
| The Wood Work Shop | Photo by s w on Unsplash |
Recent Comments