Steep curves.

Learning curves that is!

Related to big data - in real companies with old legacy systems (COBOL - are you kidding me!), system variants (are you running V10 or V10.1?), a plethora of home grown (and I hasted not to call them) packages as well as multiple and complex processes for getting systems onto the company infrastructure (to make sure you don't muck up the current operations of course). Add to this time pressures of day-to-day business activity and the need to maintain existing system issues and upgrade in line with user expectations.

The very definition of complexity.

HELP - how do we get control over the big data - can we start again!

The answer of course is yes - but. How do you start to get a grip of this landscape?

Do you drive new business change projects into it to flesh out issues and interfaces, or take a global view of the mess and plan a grand strategy around what needs to be done. Or indeed do both simultaneously. Can you initiate 'agile' projects to get buy-in from stakeholders - indeed can you use agile in this type of environment?

Bring on the 'Solution Architects'.

We will see......

6-Sigma twaddle

Diversion - I've wandered into a management quicksand as part of my asset management explorations.

Lean Six Sigma: Combining Six Sigma Quality with Lean Speed - WHAT - is this stuff? 

Read more: http://www.ehow.com/about_7296799_difference-six-sigma-six-sigma.html#ixzz2Wy5Rw5Zp

This surely is management twaddle gone mad! Brown belts, yellow belts - do we really need all this - not very agile and looks a bit old school. I'm sure its all very well for improving what a business does but do we really need all the associated scientific psycho-babble.


Quote from my font of knowledge;

"Hence the widely accepted definition of a six sigma process is a process that produces 3.4 defective parts per million opportunities (DPMO). This is based on the fact that a process that is normally distributed will have 3.4 parts per million beyond a point that is 4.5 standard deviations above or below the mean (one-sided capability study).^[6] So the 3.4 DPMO of a six sigma process in fact corresponds to 4.5 sigma, namely 6 sigma minus the 1.5-sigma shift introduced to account for long-term variation.^[6] This allows for the fact that special causes may result in a deterioration in process performance over time, and is designed to prevent underestimation of the defect levels likely to be encountered in real-life operation.^[6]

The role of the sigma shift is mainly academic. The purpose of six sigma is to generate organizational performance improvement. It is up to the organisation to determine, based on customer expectations, what the appropriate sigma level of a process is. The purpose of the sigma value is as a comparative figure to determine whether a process is improving, deteriorating, stagnant or non-competitive with others in the same business. Six sigma (3.4 DPMO) is not the goal of all processes."

If you believe all that you will believe anything - can we get some real scientist involved please.

Agility fragility

Everyone says they are but are they really?

I'm talking about - agile - that's in the systems development sense of course. Though when I think of agile my analogy is of a footballer who has the ball and is running down field avoiding tackles changing direction etc. That's agile in my mind - making changes and looking for opportunities to gain an advantage on-the-fly.

In software and systems development the term agile seems to be cropping up everywhere I look. Agile development, agile design, agile management, agile this, agile that. However, the question in my mind is, is the systems engineering industry really ready or 'real' agile.

A few worrying issues are appearing. Firstly the industry is developing an 'Agile Standard', certificates the lot! Doesn't seem to fit very well with the concept. Having worked over the past few months with leaders in system development. There is a willingness to embrace the concepts of 'agile' but we are all struggling letting go of our background in structured approaches to systems development. Which now, given the speed at which things are changing definitely looks like an 'industrial era' approach to design.

When I check my font of all knowledge Wikipedia its not much better - a thousand and one versions of what people think agile is - very well presented though! High level concepts fair enough but where the rubber hits the road not much cop.

The journey continues......

When do you stop....

So when do you stop?

That's requirements gathering and defining and modelling and verifying and ...

At some point you need to get on with it and start designing and building. But when is the right time to begin - we just need to check we have the requirements in from planet zog and then we are good to go!

There is also a bit of Parkinson's law going on in this phase of the systems engineering lifecycle. A bit of of well we have a few months (years) left to go lets have another cup of tea and think about some more requirements. Just when do you have enough requirements?

What's the answer - nobody knows! There will be a tipping point in every project and then the muck hits the fan and off we go - then its - what requirements - I'm too busy building stuff!

You would almost be better off starting by creating a 'Compelling Event' milestone in your project plan - by plan I mean a high level plan - not the Primavera I've planned everyone's tea break's for the next 5 years type plan. The 'Compelling Event' might be something like when we reach 100 requirements that's it we are going into build or it could be if you don't have something working by now then you are all sacked.

Either way, this would provide a point of reference for everyone to sign up to and then focus on. There obviously needs to be an incentive scheme associated with the CE or it will be just a 'so long thanks for all the fish' point in people's lives ;)

Sort of on optimised Parkinson law!

Top of the pops......

Well the Top 5 focus activity reported in the last post seems to be working very well indeed - surprisingly given the shaky start to it all!

Focus, focus, focus in all areas is paying dividends and  we all finally know what is needed to deliver the Top 5 in all areas including;

1. Planning arena around development of the programme plan,
2. Data modelling, what, when type questioning,
3. Process modelling activity, business change etc related
4. Contract-ITT developments, what's in and what's out of the contract,
5. Business benefits, what and when released by the Top 5 areas.

all starting to align in terms of the overall approach.

So its looking pretty good for this equifinality approach - much to think over - can we get to an end game with it though?

Only time will tell.....

Complexity is .. er.. complex!

I seem to be mired in complexity these days - very exciting though must admit - closet (or not) problem solver at heart you see.

In past posts have focussed on how on the current project we are going about defining the requirements for a very complex revamp of an asset management system. This has used the concept of 'viewpoints' to build up the requirements and ensure as comprehensive a coverage of system functionality as possible. What was than new word I learned - ah yes - equifinality!

All well and good but then the question was asked - what does all that mean - which seemed reasonable to me. What do I get and when do I get it? Which means having to think through the outline design and high level system architecture - to answers the "what I get" question- and production of an outline programme plan - when to I get it. Logical again!

But - where do you start? How do you then start to put an outline design together? The design team all have different views on timescales and exactly what can be delivered when. Data team running ahead of architecture team running ahead of process modelling - not to mention how are we going to control and manage acceptance of whatever it is is produced! Just where DO you start?

The answer again - equifinality - starting to like this word even more! This time though used in a different context. This time used as a focussing tool - a lens as one of the team explains it - to help focus in on particular aspects of the system design and build. Trying to specify the design of the whole system in one go or even think about how the whole works just blows your mind - yes, but, if this, and if that, and if the other - people disappearing up their own exhaust pipes left right and centre - others sat there fish like, mouth open, eyes agog, what does it all mean, anyway what's on the telly tonight.

So to drive the thinking a Star Trek Management decision was made - a Top 5 would be selected for the team to focus on - make it so number one. A Top 5 what though? The Top 5 'things' of course - go and find out what they are! This has cause a lot of hand wringing, what Top 5 - that's the wrong Top 5 - we don't have the right priority Top 5. However, miraculously, running numerous workshops over the past could of weeks has shown that there actually was a consensus on a Top 5! Key items and dependencies drove everyone to the same set of Top 5 'things' - you could have written them on the back of a fag packet in Top 5 minutes but the real value I have seen is in rallying the team around some common themes - driven by a final outcome - equifinality focussing in action!

So we are now up and running putting together outline timescales for delivery of our Top 5 and drawing boundaries around what can and can't be delivered in these timescales.

There could of course be another Top 5 next week ;)

Onward and upward.....

Not quite there yet ...

This week has been a bit of a reality check on all things connectivity related - so beware you Cloud computing evangelists.

Having said that, this past week has seen me use a remote desktop service from Microsoft pretty effectively. Well in fact I wouldn't have been able to complete the job I was working on without it. Essentially I can't load anything onto my work computer - locked down tighter than a duck's ..... - anyway safe to say it makes  Apple look almost developer friendly. However, through the wonders of the internet and the RDS service all was well, Microsoft Project, Visio you name it I could use it. Impressive, bit slow where I was due to internet speed, but full functionality at the click of a button. Only problem was the client had the same problem as me, they don't have Project or Visio loaded as standard either - convert to pdf saved the day. So all that was worked swimmingly.

The problem came when I had to go into London which involved moving hotel. From my usual cheap 'Lodge' to some very expensive place. I have to say it - the room didn't have any windows either - not sure if that's even legal? Anyway, issues began to arise around wifi connectivity. I was trying to meet up with a friend, who doesn't have a mobile phone (now there is a learning point) only a laptop for communicating via gmail. So we had set a time to check email's in order to plan meeting up one evening. However, I couldn't get onto the wifi at my hotel - life is too short to find out why, one minute it was working the next poof it had gone! So what was the backup plan for communication - well we didn't have one - so I thought, Costa's or McD's and free wifi. Off I trundle with brick of laptop looking for the nearest free connection. Made it thanks to Nero's only to find no message from my friend. What I didn't realise at the time - he was staying in another hotel - and having the same connectivity problems. So he had gone to even greater extremes to connect up. Not knowing this I thought the best plan would be to just walk to his hotel and sit in the foyer and wait for him to pass by. Long story short - we passed each other in the street - he had the same plan and was heading for my hotel foyer! Now that would have been funny.

So the lesson - don't bet your business on ropey internet connections and always have a tested business continuity plan ......