Conclusion: Organisations that fail to recognise the difference between information and knowledge are at risk of haemorrhaging knowledge at a rate that at the very least has a measurable impact on the quality of service delivered by the organisation. In the worst case, a loss of knowledge poses an existential threat to a product line or to the entire organisation. Whilst tools can play an important role in facilitating knowledge preservation, it is information sharing between individuals and teams that fuels the creation of knowledge.
Governance & Planning
For several months business analysts and government ministers have been telling the public that Australia has to lift its productivity. The urgent call to action has come about because the golden years of mining are stuttering. To fill the gap left by mining, at the same time as the creeping shadow of ageing ‘boomers’ lengthens, productivity has to rise.
Companies and individuals are aware of this. Recommendations to improve productivity come in various forms. With technology, it’s in almost every piece of kit offered, from gadgets that squeeze that extra bit of output per hour to a full migration or new stack. In the human resources area it may come as advice to give more time to the work-life balance. Even adding green plants to the workplace has been another means to lift productivity.
Conclusion: Most Software Asset Management (SAM) Maturity models are theoretical and do not provide an organisation with a pragmatic way to consider SAM in the context of their organisational objectives. IBRS proposes an alternative that provides organisations with a basis to plan gradual, incremental improvements in both technology and, more importantly, organisational culture.
Conclusion: While many IT organisations believe that using public IaaS (e.g. AWS, Microsoft Azure, Google) to host business applications is a cost-effective strategy, they still require to manage the hosted environment themselves or select an external service provider to manage it for them. Towards this, it is critical to understand the current service management maturity level prior to choosing an in-house or outsourced solution. This note provides a self-assessment service management maturity model to create a solid foundation for selecting sourcing options. IBRS recommend that IT organisations with maturity level 3 or higher retain the service management function in-house, whereas, IT organisations below maturity level 3 should outsource the service management function.
Conclusion: Consumer-oriented software and online services are raising user expectations. To determine the aspects of user experience design, and the trade-offs that are appropriate in a particular business context, requires extensive collaboration across multiple disciplines. The cross-disciplinary nature of the work must be considered when evaluating external providers of user experience design services. References and case studies should be consulted to confirm cross disciplinary capabilities and the level of expertise in all relevant disciplines.
I have observed that many organisations operate with limited knowledge of the costs, structures and competitive initiatives planned by their competitors or of comparable agencies in other jurisdictions.
Rarely does management know which system solutions have been acquired, deals concluded with suppliers such as software licence pricing, or whether their online competitors are operating profitably or not.
In the private sector lack of understanding of the competitive landscape breeds management paranoia and in the public sector fear of being disbanded if the services are not critical to government or costs are high. When fear is pervasive management is internally focussed and preoccupied with survival. To counter the fear management seek quantitative and qualitative data.
Conclusion: A major reason CRM projects stumble, or fail outright, is a poorly argued strategy and business case.
A thorough strategy and business case will provide all stakeholders with a clear rationale of what is being planned, and the related business issues that will be managed better as a result. Additionally, the reason for the investment will be understood and the potential costs and benefits articulated.
Conclusion: Whilst senior management recognise continued investment in IT is critical for business success there is increasing evidence of dissatisfaction with IT management’s performance. It is critical IT managers identify reasons for the dissatisfaction and take remedial action. If not, credible survey data indicates they will be replaced.
Conclusion: 80% of traditional outsourcing 1contracts established in Australia during the last 25 years were renewed with the same service provider. However, with the emergence of public Cloud, IT organisations should examine the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of migrating to public Cloud prior to renewing the existing outsourcing contracts.
Conclusion: Equitably allocating IT resources to competing proposals can be simplified by conducting a business systems portfolio assessment in advance with stakeholders. Without the assessment, management will find it hard to reach consensus on where to best allocate their IT investment and skilled resources.