Making a Business Case in Software Creation DataMatrix in Software Making a Business Case

2. using software tomake data matrix ecc200 on web,windows application Visual Studio Development Language Where I am right no Software data matrix barcodes w is a very interesting case in point. I am trying a hybrid approach. Across our business units, one has already made a $5m investment in documenting their processes, getting ISO certified, and building continuous improvement around them.

The standard that they used is a very loose proprietary standard in iGraphx. Let"s say I now come along and say "Our strategic partnership is with Oracle. The language that Oracle uses for process modeling is BPMN Version 2.

From now on, at the governance level, I mandate all processes will be modeled using BPMN 2 in this repository." Obviously, that works for me, because if those processes go into the enterprise repository, then suddenly they are linkable. Then the thirty continuous improvement people say, "Wait a minute.

We have made this massive investment here. We have trained all these business people. They understand all the modeling constructs and views.

We are going to continue with what we are doing." So at that point, I can get my governance stick out and beat people. However, their point is valid.

They have a continuous improvement agenda for their business unit. They have a standard and a method defined, everybody is trained and everyone is using it. They are delivering results.

The only benefit of changing is that if they start to do it in the same way as everyone else then I can start to get that snowball effect connecting them into the rest of the business. What I chose to do this year with them is accept that the leveling is all over the shop and their methodology is full of inconsistencies. Let"s now give us nine months to build a process catalog.

We won"t re-do any process flows or procedural documents. Let"s agree that we are going to create a process hierarchy using APQC within each of the two modeling repositories. Then, at least the taxonomy is same.

We just won"t sweat about the details. Then we start linking their processes to the strategic drivers. Obviously a lot of what they are doing is operational, so they have metrics where they measure the time taken for delivery, average operating cost per widget, among other things.

We have implemented those slow changing metrics, the ones that are measured monthly or quarterly. It is not onerous for us to gather those and put them into the model..

Leveling: Because a process breaks down into sub processes and tasks, it is important to get agreement on the characteristics of each level. Otherwise one model might contain sub processes that are designated level three and another model designates them as level five. When you try to connect the two models you get a leveling issue.

. Now the business un Software Data Matrix ECC200 it has a big transformation project coming up. They are seeing the other programs that we have got using our toolset, model, and methodology. So now an internal war has broken out in their business unit, between two camps, which is currently unresolved.

. [ 65 ]. Making a Business Case What will happen is that the rest of the business will adopt the new approach. The reason is that we have developed a certain amount of critical mass in the new repository. Just for context, we have about 240 solution architects and 200 business analysts using the toolset.

That is a decent amount of intellectual property (IP) when you have 440 people working inside the model. When a lead architect launches a new project, we are just quietly modeling it in the tool. We are on the leadership teams of all major programs of work.

We are leaving it to the leadership teams to decide if there is value. At the same time, the small group of us in enterprise architecture is quietly continuing to chip away, getting content into the model, regardless of where it is and what format it has been created in. I suggest a guerilla warfare approach is the best way to do it.

It either stands or falls on its merits. I don"t believe that trying to use a stick to force enterprise modeling is the right approach. There has to be a need and a demand that is pulling it through.

It is inherently abstract. You cannot get business people to understand the abstract. You can only get them to understand the benefits of the outputs, the views coming out of the model.

When you start early, although the information you have at hand during the planning and strategy stage is less but it is of high value. It is not until you get into design and the later stages, when you get into integration and data models. Getting adoption of modeling early in the lifecycle is the easiest way.

The other thing that we have mandated is that there has to be an enterprise architect on the leadership team of every program of work. The leadership team consists of five people the director, the lead architect, the program management office person, and a couple of senior business people. We are making sure that the people on those leadership teams are champions of the model, not just in name but in practice.

We have just moved six people out of those roles because they were not championing the cause. That is all within our own area of authority. You have to be sensitive to the data ownership.

We are only slaving much of the data, we aren"t actually mastering it. For example, our Integration Catalog has 12,000 integrations. They are mastered in the Oracle Enterprise Repository.

We just replicate that information. BA: Presumably you are doing a similar thing with the continuous improvement documentation that you were talking about earlier. Are you just making hyperlinks .

[ 66 ].
Copyright © . All rights reserved.