Pearl Zhu's Blog, page 1444
April 3, 2015
Agile Tuning: Process vs. Practice
On a continuum, you'd have well-defined processes on one end, and loosely defined practices on the other end.
Agile has been adopted as a main principle, philosophy and methodology to manage project and even run business today. Within the years of experimenting and tuning, it also develops systematic processes and best or next practices, why are they important for the success of Agile and how to leverage them in Agile management?
Practices are activities, processes are well defined steps: Practices are activities that are used to manifest or implement Agile principles and values. The specifics are left up to the people who make them work based on their knowledge, skills, etc. As soon as you have more than one practice - and you need to go through a sequence of interdependent steps - you will have a "process." Processes, are a series of well-defined steps leading to repeatable, predictable results. All the knowledge necessary to carry out the work is embedded in the process. On a continuum, you'd have well-defined processes on one end, and loosely defined practices on the other end.
Processes and practices are a reflection about how the organization thinks about itself: It is a choice to design a process and manage practice so that it supports Agile values and principles. You can have Agile practices adopted in a non-Agile process, and vice versa. Both need to be aligned with agility. Conversely, a process does not exist in the abstract. It needs to be instantiated through a sequence of steps, which are "practices." At the end of the day, process, procedure and practice are all just words in the overall "taxonomy" that describes work, and people often swap them in and out of usage to suit their purpose at the time. As for the idea that agile is a process in its own right. So what's really important is that you have a set of things that enable you to achieve your objectives within your specific environment and, those things are clear, understood and practiced collectively within the internal and external interfaces. And as you go along, you swap out the things that don't work with things that do. Of course, the choice of what practices to adopt, and in what sequence you want them executed, is of great importance.
Mix-match ideas and practices: In development work, it is inherent that there are things we don't know we don't know. In such an environment, so it is important to cover the “why,” before people address the "what" or "how" of practices or processes. Teams should be able to mix and match ideas and practices from various different process to create value driven effective ways of working. Does it matter, which process one follow as long as it is capable of consuming good ideas and is easily adaptable, even if they arise from other processes. The end goal is to produce an effective working software quickly.
The idea of process is to enable the system. But you should not get obsessed with a process. Agile is not your end goal. Agile should help you to reach your end goal. The moment you see something more useful one should adapt that. Overly rigid processes are seen as a block to innovation or progress rather than a facilitator of it. The best, most relevant and innovative ideas in the world will be completely useless to your business unless they can be implemented to the benefit of your customers in a way they're prepared to pay for them. Integrating valuable ideas into a business is definitely more likely to succeed if a well understood sequence of practices is followed.
Either processes or practices, they are just set of things that enable you to achieve your objectives within your specific environment and they are well understood. But they are not static, and can be updated in order to adapt to the changes, in order to achieve the ultimate business goals.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Agile has been adopted as a main principle, philosophy and methodology to manage project and even run business today. Within the years of experimenting and tuning, it also develops systematic processes and best or next practices, why are they important for the success of Agile and how to leverage them in Agile management?
Practices are activities, processes are well defined steps: Practices are activities that are used to manifest or implement Agile principles and values. The specifics are left up to the people who make them work based on their knowledge, skills, etc. As soon as you have more than one practice - and you need to go through a sequence of interdependent steps - you will have a "process." Processes, are a series of well-defined steps leading to repeatable, predictable results. All the knowledge necessary to carry out the work is embedded in the process. On a continuum, you'd have well-defined processes on one end, and loosely defined practices on the other end.
Processes and practices are a reflection about how the organization thinks about itself: It is a choice to design a process and manage practice so that it supports Agile values and principles. You can have Agile practices adopted in a non-Agile process, and vice versa. Both need to be aligned with agility. Conversely, a process does not exist in the abstract. It needs to be instantiated through a sequence of steps, which are "practices." At the end of the day, process, procedure and practice are all just words in the overall "taxonomy" that describes work, and people often swap them in and out of usage to suit their purpose at the time. As for the idea that agile is a process in its own right. So what's really important is that you have a set of things that enable you to achieve your objectives within your specific environment and, those things are clear, understood and practiced collectively within the internal and external interfaces. And as you go along, you swap out the things that don't work with things that do. Of course, the choice of what practices to adopt, and in what sequence you want them executed, is of great importance.
Mix-match ideas and practices: In development work, it is inherent that there are things we don't know we don't know. In such an environment, so it is important to cover the “why,” before people address the "what" or "how" of practices or processes. Teams should be able to mix and match ideas and practices from various different process to create value driven effective ways of working. Does it matter, which process one follow as long as it is capable of consuming good ideas and is easily adaptable, even if they arise from other processes. The end goal is to produce an effective working software quickly.
The idea of process is to enable the system. But you should not get obsessed with a process. Agile is not your end goal. Agile should help you to reach your end goal. The moment you see something more useful one should adapt that. Overly rigid processes are seen as a block to innovation or progress rather than a facilitator of it. The best, most relevant and innovative ideas in the world will be completely useless to your business unless they can be implemented to the benefit of your customers in a way they're prepared to pay for them. Integrating valuable ideas into a business is definitely more likely to succeed if a well understood sequence of practices is followed.
Either processes or practices, they are just set of things that enable you to achieve your objectives within your specific environment and they are well understood. But they are not static, and can be updated in order to adapt to the changes, in order to achieve the ultimate business goals.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Systems Thinking vs Common Sense
“Common sense” is about interpreting experience to “think fast,” while systems thinking helps us focus on careful reasoning by “thinking slow.”
Common sense is an accumulated experience from day to day activities. With common sense we avoid the complexity with the intention to think fast. However, we must be cautious of common sense. Because what seems to make sense in one circumstance might not work so well in another situation. Common sense often uses false assumptions and intuition instead of thinking throughly. What systems thinking appears to allow us to do pretty well is juggle our pre-conceptions and allow us to comprehend where they lead to. So system thinking vs. common sense: what’s the leverage point?
Common sense vs. Systems thinking: Common sense will in most cases be determined by what defines you as an individual at a certain point, your experience and accumulated knowledge, the current context defined by its properties and interactions, the information and data at hand, your previous engagement with similar situations and your skills and capabilities to manage all of this into a structure. Systemic thinking is about the above in the very first instance, but more important is about thinking of your common sense, how it becomes influenced by the above and how you could change your approaches towards the desired transformation of the system. It is about developing further your common sense and fine tuning it. People become unrational because of fears and prejudices; system thinking could be another way of understanding the drivers behind people's fears and prejudices to help make people more rationale. It might be worth seeing how your view of systems thinking and common sense fits with Kahneman's 'Thinking, fast and slow” patterns. It's an oversimplification to equate common sense to his 'system 1' mode and systems thinking to 'system 2', but it's maybe a good first approximation.
Common sense is individual driven; and Systems Thinking aims to have same base information: For Common Sense, each individual has a different set of information that makes base of thinking turning into action, so what sounds logical or balanced to one will not to another individual or group. However, 'Systems Thinking' aims to have the same base information to make eventual action more directed and balanced. Systems thinking sounds that it has all encompassing feature meaning that there is a system or model for the usage of common sense but not vice versa. Also there is an argument that systems thinking could have emerged in history from intuitive forms of interaction.
One aspect of common sense that distinct from systems thinking is the purported obviousness: Systems thinking is the discipline for discerning relationships and context that are not obvious and may upon first thought even appear to be doubtful in their veracity or usefulness. Common sense has its power of persuasion and the attribute of being widely shared or held. Just because some idea or notion is widely held does not make it so as history shown repeatedly. Also common sense in many situations is found to have been based on some usefulness, but it is often deficient on why or how. Systems thinking allows us to go beyond the obvious. Indeed, it is very much the process of seeing what is obvious... then asking what additional connections might (or must) exist. There are many examples of common sense that have been overturned.
Systems thinking digs deeper: Systems thinking would help us get behind the "surface" validity and give us deeper insight into the nuances of why and how. “Common sense” is about interpreting experience, as it is perceived without much consideration for underlying factors or relationships. After all, if common sense were so effective, we might not have needed a formal analysis and policy in the first place. Everyone would have agreed on a course of action because it simply made sense. Or, the problem would have never arisen in the first place, because everyone would have used their common sense to choose actions that would not lead to such problems. When the problems arise, the reasonable people disagree about the causes and solutions. So, it seems that common sense is not a sufficient tool for determining the logic (or potential effectiveness) or Logic Models. As such, systems thinking differs from common sense, in that a systems thinker is acutely aware of any experience in the context of interconnectivity and inter-relationships rather than standing alone.
Some say systems thinking is exactly common sense done right. “Common sense” is about interpreting experience to “think fast,” while systems thinking helps us focus on careful reasoning by “thinking slow,” and get behind the surface by digging through the WHY.
.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Common sense is an accumulated experience from day to day activities. With common sense we avoid the complexity with the intention to think fast. However, we must be cautious of common sense. Because what seems to make sense in one circumstance might not work so well in another situation. Common sense often uses false assumptions and intuition instead of thinking throughly. What systems thinking appears to allow us to do pretty well is juggle our pre-conceptions and allow us to comprehend where they lead to. So system thinking vs. common sense: what’s the leverage point?
Common sense vs. Systems thinking: Common sense will in most cases be determined by what defines you as an individual at a certain point, your experience and accumulated knowledge, the current context defined by its properties and interactions, the information and data at hand, your previous engagement with similar situations and your skills and capabilities to manage all of this into a structure. Systemic thinking is about the above in the very first instance, but more important is about thinking of your common sense, how it becomes influenced by the above and how you could change your approaches towards the desired transformation of the system. It is about developing further your common sense and fine tuning it. People become unrational because of fears and prejudices; system thinking could be another way of understanding the drivers behind people's fears and prejudices to help make people more rationale. It might be worth seeing how your view of systems thinking and common sense fits with Kahneman's 'Thinking, fast and slow” patterns. It's an oversimplification to equate common sense to his 'system 1' mode and systems thinking to 'system 2', but it's maybe a good first approximation.
Common sense is individual driven; and Systems Thinking aims to have same base information: For Common Sense, each individual has a different set of information that makes base of thinking turning into action, so what sounds logical or balanced to one will not to another individual or group. However, 'Systems Thinking' aims to have the same base information to make eventual action more directed and balanced. Systems thinking sounds that it has all encompassing feature meaning that there is a system or model for the usage of common sense but not vice versa. Also there is an argument that systems thinking could have emerged in history from intuitive forms of interaction.
One aspect of common sense that distinct from systems thinking is the purported obviousness: Systems thinking is the discipline for discerning relationships and context that are not obvious and may upon first thought even appear to be doubtful in their veracity or usefulness. Common sense has its power of persuasion and the attribute of being widely shared or held. Just because some idea or notion is widely held does not make it so as history shown repeatedly. Also common sense in many situations is found to have been based on some usefulness, but it is often deficient on why or how. Systems thinking allows us to go beyond the obvious. Indeed, it is very much the process of seeing what is obvious... then asking what additional connections might (or must) exist. There are many examples of common sense that have been overturned.
Systems thinking digs deeper: Systems thinking would help us get behind the "surface" validity and give us deeper insight into the nuances of why and how. “Common sense” is about interpreting experience, as it is perceived without much consideration for underlying factors or relationships. After all, if common sense were so effective, we might not have needed a formal analysis and policy in the first place. Everyone would have agreed on a course of action because it simply made sense. Or, the problem would have never arisen in the first place, because everyone would have used their common sense to choose actions that would not lead to such problems. When the problems arise, the reasonable people disagree about the causes and solutions. So, it seems that common sense is not a sufficient tool for determining the logic (or potential effectiveness) or Logic Models. As such, systems thinking differs from common sense, in that a systems thinker is acutely aware of any experience in the context of interconnectivity and inter-relationships rather than standing alone.
Some say systems thinking is exactly common sense done right. “Common sense” is about interpreting experience to “think fast,” while systems thinking helps us focus on careful reasoning by “thinking slow,” and get behind the surface by digging through the WHY.
.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
April 2, 2015
Digital Master Tuning #69: Agility as Strategic Priority?
From doing agile to being agile, achieving agility is a strategic priority for any high mature digital organizations.
Agility is a quality that allows an enterprise to embrace market and operational changes as a matter of routine. A well adapted enterprise strives to make change a routine part of organizational life to reduce or eliminate the organizational traumas that paralyzes many businesses attempting to adapt to new markets and environments. Should agility becomes your top strategic priority:
Agility brings speed and flexibility: Strategy needs to be flexible, it is the objectives that drive strategy, so if you need to adopt a new strategy, agility should be your priority, because it helps you achieve your objectives - better/quicker/faster- there is your justification. And objectives may of course change as well, but only subject to even more consideration. If you look at increasing speed of agility, it should get faster as you go from strategic objectives, through strategy and tactics to actions. Structures and processes in the organization should enable this and this is the challenge for leaders
The Agile principle applies to strategy-execution cycle as well: Once you have that vision of the well-defined goals, then the process can start. Break the goal to deliverable elements. Each task are weighed and assessed and delivered in continuous burn down chunks with flexibility to adapt in solution design. The greater the speed of change in the market, the greater the level of agility is required to respond to it effectively.
Balance stability and agility: In business, projects can be complex with uncertain outcomes and goals that can change over time. The main focus of agile methods is to address the issues of complexity, uncertainty, and dynamic goals. Agile methods integrate planning with execution allowing an organization to "search" for an optimal ordering of work tasks and to adjust to the changing requirements. The major causes of chaos on a project include incomplete understanding of project components, incomplete understanding of component interactions and changing requirements. Balance in everything. You need to focus on the well thought out strategy - and follow that star. But you do need the agility, that when markets move, you can move with them - or even better - ahead of them - and adjust the strategy accordingly.
Build the culture of agility: Before you can be agile, you need to 'connect' with all the workforce. Change is a continual factor. Creating a culture of agility gives companies a real sustainable existence with adaptability; moral - keep mentally and physically supple and agile. Be aware of competition. Let the potential challenge of old and new competitors drive you to remain agile - and exercise!! Though it means being agile, not just doing agile. Too many companies flit from this month's flavour to the next with everyone getting demoralized and exhausted by too much agility practices. Devise strategy, then test proposed initiatives to see if fall within your strategy, before diving into implementing them. You can initiate change that falls outside of your strategy, but you need to be aware that you're doing this and come up with a very good justification for doing so.
From doing agile to being agile, achieving agility is a strategic priority for any high mature digital organizations. So to achieve agility, you need to have a clear vision, a transparent process, a culture of change, an engaged workforce and an agile leader. And then, agility needs to be well embedded into the business processes to execute strategy seamlessly.
Digitalization is like a flywheel, and Digital Masters are the one riding above it. Surf more Information about Digital Master:
Digital Master Wikipedia Introduction
Digital Master Kindle Version Book Order URL
Digital Master Book URL
Digital Master Author URL
Digital Master Video Clip on YouTube
Digital Master Fun Quiz
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Agility is a quality that allows an enterprise to embrace market and operational changes as a matter of routine. A well adapted enterprise strives to make change a routine part of organizational life to reduce or eliminate the organizational traumas that paralyzes many businesses attempting to adapt to new markets and environments. Should agility becomes your top strategic priority:
Agility brings speed and flexibility: Strategy needs to be flexible, it is the objectives that drive strategy, so if you need to adopt a new strategy, agility should be your priority, because it helps you achieve your objectives - better/quicker/faster- there is your justification. And objectives may of course change as well, but only subject to even more consideration. If you look at increasing speed of agility, it should get faster as you go from strategic objectives, through strategy and tactics to actions. Structures and processes in the organization should enable this and this is the challenge for leaders
The Agile principle applies to strategy-execution cycle as well: Once you have that vision of the well-defined goals, then the process can start. Break the goal to deliverable elements. Each task are weighed and assessed and delivered in continuous burn down chunks with flexibility to adapt in solution design. The greater the speed of change in the market, the greater the level of agility is required to respond to it effectively.
Balance stability and agility: In business, projects can be complex with uncertain outcomes and goals that can change over time. The main focus of agile methods is to address the issues of complexity, uncertainty, and dynamic goals. Agile methods integrate planning with execution allowing an organization to "search" for an optimal ordering of work tasks and to adjust to the changing requirements. The major causes of chaos on a project include incomplete understanding of project components, incomplete understanding of component interactions and changing requirements. Balance in everything. You need to focus on the well thought out strategy - and follow that star. But you do need the agility, that when markets move, you can move with them - or even better - ahead of them - and adjust the strategy accordingly.
Build the culture of agility: Before you can be agile, you need to 'connect' with all the workforce. Change is a continual factor. Creating a culture of agility gives companies a real sustainable existence with adaptability; moral - keep mentally and physically supple and agile. Be aware of competition. Let the potential challenge of old and new competitors drive you to remain agile - and exercise!! Though it means being agile, not just doing agile. Too many companies flit from this month's flavour to the next with everyone getting demoralized and exhausted by too much agility practices. Devise strategy, then test proposed initiatives to see if fall within your strategy, before diving into implementing them. You can initiate change that falls outside of your strategy, but you need to be aware that you're doing this and come up with a very good justification for doing so.
From doing agile to being agile, achieving agility is a strategic priority for any high mature digital organizations. So to achieve agility, you need to have a clear vision, a transparent process, a culture of change, an engaged workforce and an agile leader. And then, agility needs to be well embedded into the business processes to execute strategy seamlessly.
Digitalization is like a flywheel, and Digital Masters are the one riding above it. Surf more Information about Digital Master:
Digital Master Wikipedia Introduction
Digital Master Kindle Version Book Order URL
Digital Master Book URL
Digital Master Author URL
Digital Master Video Clip on YouTube
Digital Master Fun Quiz
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Does Big Data Require Big Mind?
It takes both Big Mind and Big Data to successful dealing with uncertainty which is a characteristic of Wisdom.
“Big Data" refers to a problem which deals with large volume, high variety, high velocity and high variability of data. However, Big Data is the means to the end, not the end. Before agreeing to bring out the checkbook, an organization must ask why they need Big Data. What part of their strategy requires the benefits Big Data provides to execute? What challenges they face today cannot be faced by the current data management or business intelligence solution refinements? They will need to be able to listen intently to the reasonable voice from among the din of Big Data. To put simply, does it mean that Big Data needs to have big minds for unleashing its potential?
Working with big data, surely requires a Big Mind: Business users who is interested in mining Big Data, don't ask for a well defined KPIs or a number that will be written in stone and nobody can argue with, but are asking to be given access to all data they consider relevant, analyze and discover them for themselves, coming to conclusions that don't depend just from the data, but also from the their mind crafting, business acumen and experience. There's a huge connection between Big Mind and Big Data. It’s the way we approach "solutions" or "answer seeking." Not to mention ways into "insight" of questioning! Big Data analytics gives you answers that are more often than not framed as probabilities, not exact measures.
Big Mind helps bridge “the Ingenuity Gap": The big mind creates the non-rival idea and surely isn't narrow! So we need to pursue a focused approach, not in the light of narrow, perhaps in implementation and seek to refute the conjecture it's based on? Does the Big mind aim to bridge our ingenuity gap or make it less hollow? Has Big Mind learned from the past experience or historical lessons. Sometimes, we lose wisdom, because we rather seek new methods than to remember the stories from our ancestors. The new does not make the old obsolete. We lose wisdom, because it gets misplaced, we underestimated the need of curatorship and reevaluate our own reference models. etc. So Big Data is not complete new “data species”, the principle to explore it would be the same as deploying traditional BI.
The Big Mind helps identify patterns: The very needed starting point should be in the microeconomics of data; more often organizations can find a lot of large unused data within the organization that can be used to find some patterns and information that, if really coupled well with external data sets, can lead to real insights. Big Data can be considered to be a set of technologies that are used to develop a data focused infrastructure targeted at solving business problems for an organization. However, working with Big Data usually implies a complex system at work in which case, if the system is adaptive, remembering solutions won't always help, since the same problem is highly likely never to occur again, and if it does, it will have different initial conditions, and thus not be able to be identified as a candidate for a remembered solution. But the Big Mind helps identify patterns, learning from experiences, and managing the tailored solution to fit each case.
Big business is like the big ocean. Schools of fish are swimming according to a real-time decision patterns. Other fish is mapping their next move according to all the environmental and non-environmental attributes. Others have predefined behavior regardless of anything around them. And a few fish have no clue what is going in. Analytics is the realization of how to observe all movements of all the fish (that matters to you and that have an affect) and decide what to do next. It takes both Big Mind and Big Data to successful dealing with uncertainty which is a characteristic of Wisdom. Big Data can be extracted into valuable information, but it’s Big Mind helps transform information further into updated knowledge, big Insight and ultimate wisdom.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
“Big Data" refers to a problem which deals with large volume, high variety, high velocity and high variability of data. However, Big Data is the means to the end, not the end. Before agreeing to bring out the checkbook, an organization must ask why they need Big Data. What part of their strategy requires the benefits Big Data provides to execute? What challenges they face today cannot be faced by the current data management or business intelligence solution refinements? They will need to be able to listen intently to the reasonable voice from among the din of Big Data. To put simply, does it mean that Big Data needs to have big minds for unleashing its potential?
Working with big data, surely requires a Big Mind: Business users who is interested in mining Big Data, don't ask for a well defined KPIs or a number that will be written in stone and nobody can argue with, but are asking to be given access to all data they consider relevant, analyze and discover them for themselves, coming to conclusions that don't depend just from the data, but also from the their mind crafting, business acumen and experience. There's a huge connection between Big Mind and Big Data. It’s the way we approach "solutions" or "answer seeking." Not to mention ways into "insight" of questioning! Big Data analytics gives you answers that are more often than not framed as probabilities, not exact measures.
Big Mind helps bridge “the Ingenuity Gap": The big mind creates the non-rival idea and surely isn't narrow! So we need to pursue a focused approach, not in the light of narrow, perhaps in implementation and seek to refute the conjecture it's based on? Does the Big mind aim to bridge our ingenuity gap or make it less hollow? Has Big Mind learned from the past experience or historical lessons. Sometimes, we lose wisdom, because we rather seek new methods than to remember the stories from our ancestors. The new does not make the old obsolete. We lose wisdom, because it gets misplaced, we underestimated the need of curatorship and reevaluate our own reference models. etc. So Big Data is not complete new “data species”, the principle to explore it would be the same as deploying traditional BI.
The Big Mind helps identify patterns: The very needed starting point should be in the microeconomics of data; more often organizations can find a lot of large unused data within the organization that can be used to find some patterns and information that, if really coupled well with external data sets, can lead to real insights. Big Data can be considered to be a set of technologies that are used to develop a data focused infrastructure targeted at solving business problems for an organization. However, working with Big Data usually implies a complex system at work in which case, if the system is adaptive, remembering solutions won't always help, since the same problem is highly likely never to occur again, and if it does, it will have different initial conditions, and thus not be able to be identified as a candidate for a remembered solution. But the Big Mind helps identify patterns, learning from experiences, and managing the tailored solution to fit each case. Big business is like the big ocean. Schools of fish are swimming according to a real-time decision patterns. Other fish is mapping their next move according to all the environmental and non-environmental attributes. Others have predefined behavior regardless of anything around them. And a few fish have no clue what is going in. Analytics is the realization of how to observe all movements of all the fish (that matters to you and that have an affect) and decide what to do next. It takes both Big Mind and Big Data to successful dealing with uncertainty which is a characteristic of Wisdom. Big Data can be extracted into valuable information, but it’s Big Mind helps transform information further into updated knowledge, big Insight and ultimate wisdom.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
To Celebrate #1700 Blog: Who are the Digital Professionals?
Being a digital professional inherently and inextricably links with high levels of “professionalism.”
Generally speaking, a professional is an individual with expertise of some specific area, who earns his or her livings from that expertise. Being professional also means that the individual not only has the skill, but also presents the high quality professionalism such as positive mentality and attitude, fair judgement and good behaviors. So at the age of digital, who are the digital professionals?
Being a digital professional means consistency: At the dawn of digital age, the bar is actually raised higher either being a digital leader or being a digital professional. Because, nowadays, the line between our professional life and personal life is blurring, thanks for the technology to make everything so transparent. Being a digital professional doesn't just mean the face you post at work or the talk you have in the meeting. It’s more about the consistent image you deliver about being who you are, or the mentality you have in or out of working hours. It becomes a life attitude.
Being a digital professional means high level of maturity: A professional is someone who has a high level of maturity and treats everyone as a human being. Maturity and humane attitude are necessary qualities of any good human being, including professionals. As our digitized world becomes hyper-connected, over-complex and interdependent, a digital professional is a person who:-is thinking independently with the capability to make good judgement, -is clear about his/her responsibility and added value in the organization and the world, -has the expertise and integrity to substantiate what he/she stands for, -works according to the the principles, but with the courage to break the rule, if out of date,-is accountable, which first of all means he/she is willing to articulate the thinking process behind the decisions and actions.
Being a digital professional means “anti-unprofessionalism”: A true professional dislikes, and even fight against those unprofessional phenomenons such as: unsatisfactory communication, back-biting and rumor-mongering, bully, obsessive favoritism, discrimination (age, racial, sexual, etc), harassment of any kind, abuse of any kind, and lack of inclusiveness. These are just some of the characteristics -and the numerous possible combinations thereof which make a workplace more or less toxic.
Being a digital professional means to master the special sets of digital capabilities: If industrial professionals make career advancement more base on "who they know," due to the traditional silo setting; then digital professionals equip themselves with game-changing mindsets, from discovery, autonomy to mastery, to grow into "who they are," by exploring the expanded talent pipeline. Further, the “VUCA” reality requires digital professionals to have the following skill set to be heading in a professional direction! -Capacity to be non-judgmental -Tolerance for ambiguity -Capacity to appreciate and communicate respect for other people's ways -Capacity to demonstrate empathy -Capacity to be flexible -Willingness to think differently and acquire new patterns of behavior -Humility to acknowledge what you don't know -Capacity to see the bigger picture -Capacity to challenge outdated mindsets, inappropriate behaviors and provide feedback
Being a digital professional means to cultivate digital leadership qualities, which include: -Learning agility: They need to exercise a strong mix of judgement or creativity in unison with the practical skills they bring to bear.-Integrity: Integrity is an unreduced or completeness or totality or moral soundness in the behavior. -Responsibility & accountability: A professional is responsible for his/her actions. He/she should be accountable to his/her company, to himself/herself or his/her conscience. -Respect: Respect others if you want others to respect you, not simply based on their position or power only, more based on their ability and behavior.-Humility: One of the true tests of a professional is to know when you don't know. Having met the professional standard and achieved the credential to practice a profession. -Leadership: “Lead, Follow or Get out of the way.” Leaders are both nature and nurtured, they become leaders by vision, determination and constant efforts.
Being a digital professional inherently and inextricably links with high levels of “professionalism.” A professional is an individual who strives to represent skill and delivers quality. A professional is specially trained to practice a profession without even being employed by some one. A digital professional presents high mature professionalism which means: the mastery of digital capabilities, the sound judgment via independent thinking, the positive attitude to fight unprofessionalism, the humility to the things they don't know, and the polite behavior to act cohesively.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Generally speaking, a professional is an individual with expertise of some specific area, who earns his or her livings from that expertise. Being professional also means that the individual not only has the skill, but also presents the high quality professionalism such as positive mentality and attitude, fair judgement and good behaviors. So at the age of digital, who are the digital professionals?
Being a digital professional means consistency: At the dawn of digital age, the bar is actually raised higher either being a digital leader or being a digital professional. Because, nowadays, the line between our professional life and personal life is blurring, thanks for the technology to make everything so transparent. Being a digital professional doesn't just mean the face you post at work or the talk you have in the meeting. It’s more about the consistent image you deliver about being who you are, or the mentality you have in or out of working hours. It becomes a life attitude.
Being a digital professional means high level of maturity: A professional is someone who has a high level of maturity and treats everyone as a human being. Maturity and humane attitude are necessary qualities of any good human being, including professionals. As our digitized world becomes hyper-connected, over-complex and interdependent, a digital professional is a person who:-is thinking independently with the capability to make good judgement, -is clear about his/her responsibility and added value in the organization and the world, -has the expertise and integrity to substantiate what he/she stands for, -works according to the the principles, but with the courage to break the rule, if out of date,-is accountable, which first of all means he/she is willing to articulate the thinking process behind the decisions and actions.
Being a digital professional means “anti-unprofessionalism”: A true professional dislikes, and even fight against those unprofessional phenomenons such as: unsatisfactory communication, back-biting and rumor-mongering, bully, obsessive favoritism, discrimination (age, racial, sexual, etc), harassment of any kind, abuse of any kind, and lack of inclusiveness. These are just some of the characteristics -and the numerous possible combinations thereof which make a workplace more or less toxic.
Being a digital professional means to master the special sets of digital capabilities: If industrial professionals make career advancement more base on "who they know," due to the traditional silo setting; then digital professionals equip themselves with game-changing mindsets, from discovery, autonomy to mastery, to grow into "who they are," by exploring the expanded talent pipeline. Further, the “VUCA” reality requires digital professionals to have the following skill set to be heading in a professional direction! -Capacity to be non-judgmental -Tolerance for ambiguity -Capacity to appreciate and communicate respect for other people's ways -Capacity to demonstrate empathy -Capacity to be flexible -Willingness to think differently and acquire new patterns of behavior -Humility to acknowledge what you don't know -Capacity to see the bigger picture -Capacity to challenge outdated mindsets, inappropriate behaviors and provide feedback
Being a digital professional means to cultivate digital leadership qualities, which include: -Learning agility: They need to exercise a strong mix of judgement or creativity in unison with the practical skills they bring to bear.-Integrity: Integrity is an unreduced or completeness or totality or moral soundness in the behavior. -Responsibility & accountability: A professional is responsible for his/her actions. He/she should be accountable to his/her company, to himself/herself or his/her conscience. -Respect: Respect others if you want others to respect you, not simply based on their position or power only, more based on their ability and behavior.-Humility: One of the true tests of a professional is to know when you don't know. Having met the professional standard and achieved the credential to practice a profession. -Leadership: “Lead, Follow or Get out of the way.” Leaders are both nature and nurtured, they become leaders by vision, determination and constant efforts.
Being a digital professional inherently and inextricably links with high levels of “professionalism.” A professional is an individual who strives to represent skill and delivers quality. A professional is specially trained to practice a profession without even being employed by some one. A digital professional presents high mature professionalism which means: the mastery of digital capabilities, the sound judgment via independent thinking, the positive attitude to fight unprofessionalism, the humility to the things they don't know, and the polite behavior to act cohesively.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
April 1, 2015
What’s your favourite word for motivating people
Speaking an encouraging word, perhaps like pushing the right button, can motivate people to perform the best.
It is correct that people give their best when getting motivated. An unmotivated individual or team cause low morality, or lack of energy. But what are those unmotivating factors, and as a leader, what's your sets of favorite words to "push the right button" for motivating people? Trust: Trust people by empowering them as being part of team. It allows them to take ownership of processes, issues, departments, projects, etc. Sometimes unwilling they may be but as part of team you forget those unmotivating factors, and as a team you are bound to achieve results. After coaching and training personnel, let them go and do the job. If they make a bad decision, counsel them so that they know how to make a better decision next time.
Believe: When people "believe" they have the skills, know what to do, know how to assess a problem or develop a solution, who can help, they have motivation to achieve. As leaders, when you "believe" in someone, you show it through giving them control to do what needs to be done and thanking them for achieving results. When employees know that you believe in them, that they can perform and do their roles at the risk of failing, they will always give you their best effort.
Yes: Some think the best word to motivate people is "Yes". This is the acknowledgement that your employee, co worker or business partner had a great idea and should act on it. Although there are times when a definitive "yes" is not appropriate, as people feel more empowered and engaged in the business, you will find it will becoming a greater part of your business vocabulary.
Thanks: It is the word that includes a lot of motivation if we would use one word: "Thanks" satisfies a multitude of emotions - confidence, worth, qualified, capable, competence. Not only should you be recognizing your employees but also colleagues with whom you work. Teamwork and awareness of others' strengths are just as mutually empowering. Thanks is great for motivation but following it up with 'I appreciate that you...' gives it some more substance. Showing appreciation is much more rare and clarifying the traits or actions which you appreciate helps that person know exactly what they've done right, empowering them to repeat that behavior.
"EACH" acronym as: Empowerment / Accountability / Courage / Humility. This describes the inclusive leadership style which target is to get the best out of the people's potential while having a great team that includes everyone.
Impact: empowering and suggestive of "making a difference," whether it's from a leadership role that uses a shared company vision and the idea of employees being a part of something bigger than themselves or an individual with a dream. It's inspiring to step up to something greater than oneself and reach their own potential, to believe in themselves and go out and make an impact in the world.
Engagement: It offers a foundation to build ideas upon. Engagement goes both ways; the leader is sending out information but also listening to the receiver. The receiver of the information should also be processing information through communication feedback and by asking questions. You can't build trust or establish good communication if you don't engage with people. The leader can articulate the goal and why the goal is important. People can then become motivated by the conversation through listening and asking questions through the engagement process. At the end of the day, people want to be heard and are satisfied when they are.
Motivating people via those great words, they will be delightful to do the work because they have been listened to and understand why they are doing it, they are more engaged in the work and bring up the high performance result.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
What are the main characteristics of an Innovation Leader
An innovation leader is not only a dreamer and a strategist, but also a practitioner.
Innovation in organizations get encouraged because of the inevitability of competition and the accelerating changes. But is innovation a structure issue or management discipline? A culture thing or a talent matter? The spirit comes from the top, what are the main characteristics of an innovation leaders?
Walk the Talk: The true innovative leaders give employees freedom and have the calculated tolerance for failure. A leader who encourages innovation first of all shall allow an innovator to bend the rules as long as it is not harmful to the organization. As long as this flexibility is provided with necessary oversight by the management. One very important thing is also the ability to enable the employees to visualize the vision, take risks and above all the ability to tolerate mistakes and the courage to see spade as a spade. Many leaders 'say' that they are ok with the same but exhibit the contrary. It is very important that employees not only 'hear' but also 'see' that they can actually take risks, question the status quo without any fear of being put down or let go. The true innovative leaders give the freedom to employees to do anything new and even if it fails, they learn from it and grow only to make better products in future and that is where innovation thrived in every little thing they did. The culture of innovation is a gradual process and continuous one in that sense, and a leader plays a very important role in ensuring that it is sustains over time.
Open-minded: The innovative leaders develop insights and be open to what employees have to say. Leaders who are open, collaborative and willing to listen to employees are more likely to be successful innovators. Create a culture where the sharing of ideas are welcome and innovation is rewarded. Following the program, leaders are able to apply discovery thinking or the skills needed to both develop insights about emotional, economic, or functional customer needs, and to create new options for meeting those needs. They are also able to develop execution skills, by managing uncertainty and approaching innovation projects as an experiment, testing ideas, assessing results, and having the fortitude to kill projects. Finally, they are open to what the employees have to say and they way they feel is essential. They are the best resource for what is wrong and what needs to be fixed, versus what is working well already. Involving them in process improvement is key. 1) LISTENING (and actually HEARING what is being said) by front line staff. 2) MIRRORING (repeat it back to make sure you UNDERSTAND). 3) VALIDATE ideas and suggestions, even if they cannot be implemented. 4) EMPATHIZE with the problem/issue that brought about the suggestion/comment/idea. 5) TAKE ACTION if you can; EXPLAIN *WHY* if you cannot.
Hands-on: An innovation leader is not only a dreamer and a strategist, but also a practitioner. Innovation leaders face a complex reality, environment plays an important role, every industry is different, enterprise culture is unique, Innovation leaders must be at the right moment (environmental opportunities), develop skills and knowledge, and use the right information available, to take the right decisions, with the right people, using the right methods, to give the best results. So an innovation leader is not only a dreamer, but also an action leader with 20% planning 80% action. He/she must be sensible to hear customers and connect with what a company can offer. They must be strategic leaders, and must take risk in order to find new opportunities that would lead the correct path. Failure is not always well seen when status quo is threatened. Leaders who encourage innovation have a learning organization and one of the critical factors to having a learning organization is to make sure you have a feedback organization. It is important for a leader to find success in failure and reward risk taking. A leader should create an environment that allows followers the opportunity to push boundaries and seek out new frontiers.The leader views the whole picture and applies creativity in areas not tried. As a result, either the new application works and the leader adds it to his / her arsenal for future applications or removes the application because it doesn't work and tries another idea.
Encouragement: The innovation management practice comes to mind first is a dedication to time slot to pitch questions to their team, be it a design group or simply a collection of those who would normally contribute to "thought leadership", and not just take down ideas blindly but pitch questions to the group taken from observed directions the business is taking. You build the organization towards innovative working climate by encouraging the curiosity of the individuals, but you as leader skillfully focus it towards the direction required. This is to significant part an issue of group development, of competence development and higher skills in leadership. You must establish high level of autonomy/ for individuals. Thus ability to be self-directed is important as it is to function in groups, allow them to develop their skills and provide a strong sense of purpose for why the organization are doing what they are doing.
Exercise, Discipline, and Affection. Innovation is a structural issue as well. An innovative company has created a method that enables development of a company's innovation capability. At the core of the program is a customized business simulation, that lets participants experience the comprehensive problems and opportunities associated with creating and executing innovations at the company, and develop the critical capabilities to be successful in the future. And the method is translated in to what this means for humans: (1) Exercise: The leader must create the environment that encourages the exercise of the innovators and talents and affords them the chance to use their gifts as the major responsibility of their job. (2) Discipline. The best innovation leaders are specific about boundaries and limitations, the project design and performance parameters, budget, available resources for the project, timeline, and what success looks like. For the best innovation to occur, knowing what not to do and what resources are available is liberating.(3) Affection. Innovators of the highest order will get intrinsic rewards from the process but still need validation. The best leaders know what their people need and when they need it.
So the very characteristics of an innovation leaders include being a risk taker, challenging the status quo, being fearless, looking at failure as a learning opportunity, and always looking for a better way. And more often, they are the innovator themselves, walk the talk, to build a high-innovative organization.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Innovation in organizations get encouraged because of the inevitability of competition and the accelerating changes. But is innovation a structure issue or management discipline? A culture thing or a talent matter? The spirit comes from the top, what are the main characteristics of an innovation leaders?
Walk the Talk: The true innovative leaders give employees freedom and have the calculated tolerance for failure. A leader who encourages innovation first of all shall allow an innovator to bend the rules as long as it is not harmful to the organization. As long as this flexibility is provided with necessary oversight by the management. One very important thing is also the ability to enable the employees to visualize the vision, take risks and above all the ability to tolerate mistakes and the courage to see spade as a spade. Many leaders 'say' that they are ok with the same but exhibit the contrary. It is very important that employees not only 'hear' but also 'see' that they can actually take risks, question the status quo without any fear of being put down or let go. The true innovative leaders give the freedom to employees to do anything new and even if it fails, they learn from it and grow only to make better products in future and that is where innovation thrived in every little thing they did. The culture of innovation is a gradual process and continuous one in that sense, and a leader plays a very important role in ensuring that it is sustains over time.
Open-minded: The innovative leaders develop insights and be open to what employees have to say. Leaders who are open, collaborative and willing to listen to employees are more likely to be successful innovators. Create a culture where the sharing of ideas are welcome and innovation is rewarded. Following the program, leaders are able to apply discovery thinking or the skills needed to both develop insights about emotional, economic, or functional customer needs, and to create new options for meeting those needs. They are also able to develop execution skills, by managing uncertainty and approaching innovation projects as an experiment, testing ideas, assessing results, and having the fortitude to kill projects. Finally, they are open to what the employees have to say and they way they feel is essential. They are the best resource for what is wrong and what needs to be fixed, versus what is working well already. Involving them in process improvement is key. 1) LISTENING (and actually HEARING what is being said) by front line staff. 2) MIRRORING (repeat it back to make sure you UNDERSTAND). 3) VALIDATE ideas and suggestions, even if they cannot be implemented. 4) EMPATHIZE with the problem/issue that brought about the suggestion/comment/idea. 5) TAKE ACTION if you can; EXPLAIN *WHY* if you cannot.
Hands-on: An innovation leader is not only a dreamer and a strategist, but also a practitioner. Innovation leaders face a complex reality, environment plays an important role, every industry is different, enterprise culture is unique, Innovation leaders must be at the right moment (environmental opportunities), develop skills and knowledge, and use the right information available, to take the right decisions, with the right people, using the right methods, to give the best results. So an innovation leader is not only a dreamer, but also an action leader with 20% planning 80% action. He/she must be sensible to hear customers and connect with what a company can offer. They must be strategic leaders, and must take risk in order to find new opportunities that would lead the correct path. Failure is not always well seen when status quo is threatened. Leaders who encourage innovation have a learning organization and one of the critical factors to having a learning organization is to make sure you have a feedback organization. It is important for a leader to find success in failure and reward risk taking. A leader should create an environment that allows followers the opportunity to push boundaries and seek out new frontiers.The leader views the whole picture and applies creativity in areas not tried. As a result, either the new application works and the leader adds it to his / her arsenal for future applications or removes the application because it doesn't work and tries another idea.
Encouragement: The innovation management practice comes to mind first is a dedication to time slot to pitch questions to their team, be it a design group or simply a collection of those who would normally contribute to "thought leadership", and not just take down ideas blindly but pitch questions to the group taken from observed directions the business is taking. You build the organization towards innovative working climate by encouraging the curiosity of the individuals, but you as leader skillfully focus it towards the direction required. This is to significant part an issue of group development, of competence development and higher skills in leadership. You must establish high level of autonomy/ for individuals. Thus ability to be self-directed is important as it is to function in groups, allow them to develop their skills and provide a strong sense of purpose for why the organization are doing what they are doing.
Exercise, Discipline, and Affection. Innovation is a structural issue as well. An innovative company has created a method that enables development of a company's innovation capability. At the core of the program is a customized business simulation, that lets participants experience the comprehensive problems and opportunities associated with creating and executing innovations at the company, and develop the critical capabilities to be successful in the future. And the method is translated in to what this means for humans: (1) Exercise: The leader must create the environment that encourages the exercise of the innovators and talents and affords them the chance to use their gifts as the major responsibility of their job. (2) Discipline. The best innovation leaders are specific about boundaries and limitations, the project design and performance parameters, budget, available resources for the project, timeline, and what success looks like. For the best innovation to occur, knowing what not to do and what resources are available is liberating.(3) Affection. Innovators of the highest order will get intrinsic rewards from the process but still need validation. The best leaders know what their people need and when they need it.
So the very characteristics of an innovation leaders include being a risk taker, challenging the status quo, being fearless, looking at failure as a learning opportunity, and always looking for a better way. And more often, they are the innovator themselves, walk the talk, to build a high-innovative organization.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
The Project without ROI: Does it Make Sense?
Do not think of ROI as a simple accounting measure.
Nowadays, with rapid change and hyper business competition, organizations have to continue to build the new business capabilities as well as keeping the light on, via solid project deliveries. As say’s going, every IT project is business project, IT is business, business justification is crucial for initiating and managing projects. Does that mean every project needs to have ROI. The project without ROI: Does it make sense?
A project has to deliver some business value: Success is not usually delivering a new IT application. Business value is usually achieved by improving or adding business capabilities. Often the root cause for dissatisfaction with IT projects is a mismatch between the initial expectations of the business stakeholders and IT. This can be addressed by ensuring up front that the desired benefits are realistic and achievable in an organization. A business stakeholder has to be accountable for realizing the benefits, not IT. On the ROI side, there are metrics that could be used and monetized. The top metrics which is of interest to Executive Management are either ROI, ROE or growth. Any project has a cost, and a cost with no obvious or measurable (directly or indirectly) return makes no sense. A project with no clear ROI (not just the crunching number from finance perspective though) sounds like you don't really understand the project and its relation to the strategy.
Do not think of ROI as a simple accounting measure: ROI is a concept first and a set of numbers second – and the types of numbers involved can vary widely depending upon to what the ROI relates. If ROI is only financial, you are hard-pressed to do that. But in the 21st century, ROI is expanding into other less measurable, but no less tangible areas that we need to be focusing on, such as employee satisfaction, creativity, teamwork, collaboration, making silos disappear, etc. There is a concept of the 'golden thread' that can link business strategy to an investment objective, a business benefit, a business change, an enabling change and finally a technology enabler. This helps an organization to assess if the business change (with associated technology) is the right thing to be doing in the first place.
Scrutinize the ROIs from vendors as well: you cannot take at face value a standard ROI provided by a vendor of a product as not only are they potentially “tweaking” the numbers to make their product look good, they also do not include the unique local company practices and behavior patterns – something most companies fail to ever accurately assess – which in many, if not most environments is far more relevant to this type of risk assessment than most of the factors that are routinely discussed. So make objective assessment about partner relationship, "trust but verify," not through single lenses, but through multi-dimensional viewpoint.
Cost-Value communication starts ASAP: With many projects, the CIO, IT manager or some kind of tech liaison should be in on the early discussions whenever technical infrastructure or other initiatives will be needed. At that early stage, valuable insights can be provided and any cost / implementation issues can be communicated to the people / team driving for a specific project. With this open level of communication on every project: - Everyone is in the knowing -Unnecessary low-value projects stay in the drawer - Costly backtracking and project / implementation failures can be avoided - And when IT sees an opportunity, the communication channels are open to propose ideas.There are a wide variety of projects that have been dismissed by the board, and C-level is also not supportive; this suggests either an issue about trust and credibility or a blockage at board level. Generally speaking, if there are no ROI calculations, but a cost to deliver a project from someone the board does not have any history or track record, most boards would not agree to it progressing (unless it was an enforced regulatory / compliance change, in which case it could still be monetized).
The ultimate deliverable is to deliver a product/service useful to the defined purpose with well set priority. There are many items that need to be done, but with no incremental business value, and would not make the cut from many prioritization perspectives. There are also initiatives where IT could sponsor some server consolidation or cost reduction activities, the ROIs for these type of investments will not be as high as transformation initiatives, but IT does need to make sure they get done... if they do not champion and sponsor them, who will. Many organizations somehow seem to have a disconnect between the pure IT project portfolio (infrastructure) and the rest of the (business oriented) IT project portfolio. This leads to the rest of the business having little or no visibility of such investments and not always appreciating their value. So IT leaders need to make solid business case, interpret IT project portfolio more clearly with tangible measurement to gain business support.
Companies have limited resources, it is important to have well calculated ROI (going beyond just traditional accounting measurement) or some form of rigor in making wise investment decisions about where and why to spend on what, and make sure all the shareholders are in the same page. By communicating earlier and often, and use the language everyone understand, IT leaders shall work strategically to ensure the investment has been made via leveraging the varying factors including ROI to achieve optimal business result.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Nowadays, with rapid change and hyper business competition, organizations have to continue to build the new business capabilities as well as keeping the light on, via solid project deliveries. As say’s going, every IT project is business project, IT is business, business justification is crucial for initiating and managing projects. Does that mean every project needs to have ROI. The project without ROI: Does it make sense?
A project has to deliver some business value: Success is not usually delivering a new IT application. Business value is usually achieved by improving or adding business capabilities. Often the root cause for dissatisfaction with IT projects is a mismatch between the initial expectations of the business stakeholders and IT. This can be addressed by ensuring up front that the desired benefits are realistic and achievable in an organization. A business stakeholder has to be accountable for realizing the benefits, not IT. On the ROI side, there are metrics that could be used and monetized. The top metrics which is of interest to Executive Management are either ROI, ROE or growth. Any project has a cost, and a cost with no obvious or measurable (directly or indirectly) return makes no sense. A project with no clear ROI (not just the crunching number from finance perspective though) sounds like you don't really understand the project and its relation to the strategy.
Do not think of ROI as a simple accounting measure: ROI is a concept first and a set of numbers second – and the types of numbers involved can vary widely depending upon to what the ROI relates. If ROI is only financial, you are hard-pressed to do that. But in the 21st century, ROI is expanding into other less measurable, but no less tangible areas that we need to be focusing on, such as employee satisfaction, creativity, teamwork, collaboration, making silos disappear, etc. There is a concept of the 'golden thread' that can link business strategy to an investment objective, a business benefit, a business change, an enabling change and finally a technology enabler. This helps an organization to assess if the business change (with associated technology) is the right thing to be doing in the first place.
Scrutinize the ROIs from vendors as well: you cannot take at face value a standard ROI provided by a vendor of a product as not only are they potentially “tweaking” the numbers to make their product look good, they also do not include the unique local company practices and behavior patterns – something most companies fail to ever accurately assess – which in many, if not most environments is far more relevant to this type of risk assessment than most of the factors that are routinely discussed. So make objective assessment about partner relationship, "trust but verify," not through single lenses, but through multi-dimensional viewpoint.
Cost-Value communication starts ASAP: With many projects, the CIO, IT manager or some kind of tech liaison should be in on the early discussions whenever technical infrastructure or other initiatives will be needed. At that early stage, valuable insights can be provided and any cost / implementation issues can be communicated to the people / team driving for a specific project. With this open level of communication on every project: - Everyone is in the knowing -Unnecessary low-value projects stay in the drawer - Costly backtracking and project / implementation failures can be avoided - And when IT sees an opportunity, the communication channels are open to propose ideas.There are a wide variety of projects that have been dismissed by the board, and C-level is also not supportive; this suggests either an issue about trust and credibility or a blockage at board level. Generally speaking, if there are no ROI calculations, but a cost to deliver a project from someone the board does not have any history or track record, most boards would not agree to it progressing (unless it was an enforced regulatory / compliance change, in which case it could still be monetized).
The ultimate deliverable is to deliver a product/service useful to the defined purpose with well set priority. There are many items that need to be done, but with no incremental business value, and would not make the cut from many prioritization perspectives. There are also initiatives where IT could sponsor some server consolidation or cost reduction activities, the ROIs for these type of investments will not be as high as transformation initiatives, but IT does need to make sure they get done... if they do not champion and sponsor them, who will. Many organizations somehow seem to have a disconnect between the pure IT project portfolio (infrastructure) and the rest of the (business oriented) IT project portfolio. This leads to the rest of the business having little or no visibility of such investments and not always appreciating their value. So IT leaders need to make solid business case, interpret IT project portfolio more clearly with tangible measurement to gain business support.
Companies have limited resources, it is important to have well calculated ROI (going beyond just traditional accounting measurement) or some form of rigor in making wise investment decisions about where and why to spend on what, and make sure all the shareholders are in the same page. By communicating earlier and often, and use the language everyone understand, IT leaders shall work strategically to ensure the investment has been made via leveraging the varying factors including ROI to achieve optimal business result.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
March 31, 2015
CIO's Digital Dilemma: How to Run A Bimodal IT
The biggest challenge for IT leaders is about how to strike the right balance to leverage both speeds: the industrial speed and the digital speed.
More and more IT organizations are at the journey of digital transformation. However, such radical shift cannot be done overnight. Especially for those legacy companies and industries, digital movement needs to have thoughtful planning and well balance of two speeds: the industrial speed to keep the business light on, and the digital speed to adopt the new sets of minds, the latest technologies and proven methodologies for acceleration. To put simply, there are multiple perspectives for running a bimodal IT:
Stability & Agility: From IT management perspective, bimodal IT intends to manage two separate, but coherent IT delivery modes: One focuses on stability to “keep the lights on,” the fundamental IT responsibility to support business and serve internal customers. However, such mode limits IT potential and even drag down the overall business speed. Hence, with the emerging digital technology trends such as SMAC (Social, Mobile, Analytics and Cloud), many IT organizations now explore the second mode -running faster, modular, nimble and resilient IT with digital speed, to focus on IT agility -the IT capability and capacity to adapt to the changes.
Agile & Waterfall: From IT project management perspective, Agile is well adopted as a major philosophy and methodology to run IT projects in many IT organizations now. Agile is a great approach with three “I” digital characteristics: Interaction, Iteration and Improvement. If there is a lot of change and discovery during execution, Agile/Scrum will serve you better than re-planning with traditional Waterfall. But for years and years, the “Waterfall” methodology is doing fine for certain projects with less changes. So there really is no such thing as one size fits all - being able to tailor the methodology to the goal will help create better outcomes.
Cloud & On-Premise IT Service: From IT service management perspective, Cloud brings unprecedented opportunity for IT to speed up and improve IT agility. However, it takes strategic planning to push the cloud envelop step by step. In quite long period of time, IT organizations will have to keep both models: the on-premise models to keep IT stable and reliable; and the hybrid cloud model to take the path for IT growth and expansion, and cloud shift focuses on what's differentiating to the business, the "what" value of IT services rather than "how" to do it. So it makes sense that business are constantly seeking new flexible tools that totally exceeds what the available arms and legs can provide.
Innovation & Process: From innovation perspective: IT mantra is shifting from “doing more with less,” to “doing more with innovation.” However, running an innovative IT doesn't mean IT will go “wild,” or "rogue"; more about IT should go smarter and flexible; it doesn't mean IT should get rid of all those processes or IT framework hassles. In fact, creativity and process have to go hand in hand; without process there is chaos and from chaos it’s hard to be creative. Using both modes-creativity and IT framework to be successful; that could sound like a contraction. But actually you need to run IT with two modes: the systematic approach with IT framework to achieve the benefits of industrializing certain domains of activity such as Service management, Infrastructure management etc. The concepts of framework are good, but they are often implemented in a bureaucratic manner with a focus on processes and not execution. So you even need more creativity - the innovative mode to provide agile and flexible products and service, and build up competitive uniqueness for business to compete in long term.
Bimodal IT is a way with sets of practices for IT leaders to meet the demands of digital business. However the biggest challenge is about how to strike the right balance to leverage both speeds, the industrial speed to keep IT stable and efficient, and the digital speed to expediting IT agility and maturity.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
More and more IT organizations are at the journey of digital transformation. However, such radical shift cannot be done overnight. Especially for those legacy companies and industries, digital movement needs to have thoughtful planning and well balance of two speeds: the industrial speed to keep the business light on, and the digital speed to adopt the new sets of minds, the latest technologies and proven methodologies for acceleration. To put simply, there are multiple perspectives for running a bimodal IT:
Stability & Agility: From IT management perspective, bimodal IT intends to manage two separate, but coherent IT delivery modes: One focuses on stability to “keep the lights on,” the fundamental IT responsibility to support business and serve internal customers. However, such mode limits IT potential and even drag down the overall business speed. Hence, with the emerging digital technology trends such as SMAC (Social, Mobile, Analytics and Cloud), many IT organizations now explore the second mode -running faster, modular, nimble and resilient IT with digital speed, to focus on IT agility -the IT capability and capacity to adapt to the changes.
Agile & Waterfall: From IT project management perspective, Agile is well adopted as a major philosophy and methodology to run IT projects in many IT organizations now. Agile is a great approach with three “I” digital characteristics: Interaction, Iteration and Improvement. If there is a lot of change and discovery during execution, Agile/Scrum will serve you better than re-planning with traditional Waterfall. But for years and years, the “Waterfall” methodology is doing fine for certain projects with less changes. So there really is no such thing as one size fits all - being able to tailor the methodology to the goal will help create better outcomes.
Cloud & On-Premise IT Service: From IT service management perspective, Cloud brings unprecedented opportunity for IT to speed up and improve IT agility. However, it takes strategic planning to push the cloud envelop step by step. In quite long period of time, IT organizations will have to keep both models: the on-premise models to keep IT stable and reliable; and the hybrid cloud model to take the path for IT growth and expansion, and cloud shift focuses on what's differentiating to the business, the "what" value of IT services rather than "how" to do it. So it makes sense that business are constantly seeking new flexible tools that totally exceeds what the available arms and legs can provide.
Innovation & Process: From innovation perspective: IT mantra is shifting from “doing more with less,” to “doing more with innovation.” However, running an innovative IT doesn't mean IT will go “wild,” or "rogue"; more about IT should go smarter and flexible; it doesn't mean IT should get rid of all those processes or IT framework hassles. In fact, creativity and process have to go hand in hand; without process there is chaos and from chaos it’s hard to be creative. Using both modes-creativity and IT framework to be successful; that could sound like a contraction. But actually you need to run IT with two modes: the systematic approach with IT framework to achieve the benefits of industrializing certain domains of activity such as Service management, Infrastructure management etc. The concepts of framework are good, but they are often implemented in a bureaucratic manner with a focus on processes and not execution. So you even need more creativity - the innovative mode to provide agile and flexible products and service, and build up competitive uniqueness for business to compete in long term.
Bimodal IT is a way with sets of practices for IT leaders to meet the demands of digital business. However the biggest challenge is about how to strike the right balance to leverage both speeds, the industrial speed to keep IT stable and efficient, and the digital speed to expediting IT agility and maturity.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
March 28, 2015
Fixed vs. Growth Minds
Human’s mind is the most valuable thing to shape every progress, but also the root cause of all mankind problems.
At traditional organizational setting, people are hired to do their job with compliance; and managers are hired to manage projects or people with control. However, businesses large or small are faced with rapid changes and digital dynamic. Such static management practice based on the fixed mindset is no longer sufficient to adapt to the changes or lift business up to the next level. Which shift is needed for smooth digital transformation.
From fixed mind to growth mind: Fixed mindset refers to those who approach the work with fixed mindset-the assumption that their abilities were innate and not subject to change; while accelerated or growth mindset refers to those who solve problems or target the goals with growth mindset- the belief that their ability level was nothing more than a snapshot in time and eminently changeable as they continued to learn and develop. In industrial era, fixed mindset is OK to survive, even get rewarded as the business and world are slow to change, and businesses avoid risks and stay in their "comfort zone" with culture of mediocre; however, at age of digitalization, knowledge is only clicks away, growth mindset is strategic imperative to adapt to the changes, and accelerated mind is needed to match the digital speed and leapfrog their businesses. The speed in organizations is determined by: -The speed of transactions -The speed of decision making -The speed with which new ideas are created -How fast ideas are brought to market -The velocity of capital flows -The speed which information and knowledge flows through the economic system.
Growth leadership mind is the key to drive business growth: What inspiring leaders want to cultivate a ‘growth mindset’? With this mindset you believe that you can change things through the result into great output and vise verse. Growth leadership mindset must believe - all dreams have the potential to be translated into fulfillment. The key here is BELIEF. Even harder than changing behavior, it is changing beliefs. And, when you effort doesn't translate into desired results trying to understand why. Were you focusing on the wrong things? What can you learn? What would you do differently next time? What can you change? Beats the 'beating myself up' option every time! A growth leadership mind can inspire more growth mind by making the story VIVID. Research has shown that when you do a presentation follow these three principles: Tell the Truth, Tell a Story, Tell the Story with Pictures. Extraordinary Presentations CHANGE people. Demonstrate a challenge and how obstacles were overcome - a Hero's Journey. Then instead of perceiving information from your HEAD because you THINK it, the information is in your HEART and you BELIEVE it.
Growth mindset wanted: There are some basic fundamental characteristics will separate a right candidate from a wrong candidate in digital talent recruiting. For example, would you prefer hiring person who has a graduate (know it all) attitude vs. somebody who is passionate about lifelong learning? Would you hire somebody who demonstrates the ability to execute vs. somebody who lacks the capacity to break down a strategy into execution? Would you hire a person who is constant negative vs. somebody have positive attitude? Would you hire a candidate for leadership position who is strong in keeping hands full, but lacks of thinking and strategy formulation skills? Would you hire a person for coaching position who understand the subject inside out, but not a great communicator? Would you hire one who only follows the command, but lack of creativity to do things differently, to fit a key position? In a business setting, the philosophy, work ethic and values of an organization are established in recruiting people to the company. Then through training and closely monitoring results and ethics, you develop your talent so that they have the growth mind to deliver business results effectively and efficiently in an ethical manner while exhibiting the vision and guts required to lead the organization’s next level of growth.
Mindset is everything. Human’s mind is the most valuable thing to shape every progress, but also the root cause of all mankind problems. And a growth leadership mindset is audacious, adaptive, aggressive when necessary—these leaders are stepping out of their own comfort zone, walking the talk and leading changes more confidently.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
At traditional organizational setting, people are hired to do their job with compliance; and managers are hired to manage projects or people with control. However, businesses large or small are faced with rapid changes and digital dynamic. Such static management practice based on the fixed mindset is no longer sufficient to adapt to the changes or lift business up to the next level. Which shift is needed for smooth digital transformation.
From fixed mind to growth mind: Fixed mindset refers to those who approach the work with fixed mindset-the assumption that their abilities were innate and not subject to change; while accelerated or growth mindset refers to those who solve problems or target the goals with growth mindset- the belief that their ability level was nothing more than a snapshot in time and eminently changeable as they continued to learn and develop. In industrial era, fixed mindset is OK to survive, even get rewarded as the business and world are slow to change, and businesses avoid risks and stay in their "comfort zone" with culture of mediocre; however, at age of digitalization, knowledge is only clicks away, growth mindset is strategic imperative to adapt to the changes, and accelerated mind is needed to match the digital speed and leapfrog their businesses. The speed in organizations is determined by: -The speed of transactions -The speed of decision making -The speed with which new ideas are created -How fast ideas are brought to market -The velocity of capital flows -The speed which information and knowledge flows through the economic system.
Growth leadership mind is the key to drive business growth: What inspiring leaders want to cultivate a ‘growth mindset’? With this mindset you believe that you can change things through the result into great output and vise verse. Growth leadership mindset must believe - all dreams have the potential to be translated into fulfillment. The key here is BELIEF. Even harder than changing behavior, it is changing beliefs. And, when you effort doesn't translate into desired results trying to understand why. Were you focusing on the wrong things? What can you learn? What would you do differently next time? What can you change? Beats the 'beating myself up' option every time! A growth leadership mind can inspire more growth mind by making the story VIVID. Research has shown that when you do a presentation follow these three principles: Tell the Truth, Tell a Story, Tell the Story with Pictures. Extraordinary Presentations CHANGE people. Demonstrate a challenge and how obstacles were overcome - a Hero's Journey. Then instead of perceiving information from your HEAD because you THINK it, the information is in your HEART and you BELIEVE it.
Growth mindset wanted: There are some basic fundamental characteristics will separate a right candidate from a wrong candidate in digital talent recruiting. For example, would you prefer hiring person who has a graduate (know it all) attitude vs. somebody who is passionate about lifelong learning? Would you hire somebody who demonstrates the ability to execute vs. somebody who lacks the capacity to break down a strategy into execution? Would you hire a person who is constant negative vs. somebody have positive attitude? Would you hire a candidate for leadership position who is strong in keeping hands full, but lacks of thinking and strategy formulation skills? Would you hire a person for coaching position who understand the subject inside out, but not a great communicator? Would you hire one who only follows the command, but lack of creativity to do things differently, to fit a key position? In a business setting, the philosophy, work ethic and values of an organization are established in recruiting people to the company. Then through training and closely monitoring results and ethics, you develop your talent so that they have the growth mind to deliver business results effectively and efficiently in an ethical manner while exhibiting the vision and guts required to lead the organization’s next level of growth.Mindset is everything. Human’s mind is the most valuable thing to shape every progress, but also the root cause of all mankind problems. And a growth leadership mindset is audacious, adaptive, aggressive when necessary—these leaders are stepping out of their own comfort zone, walking the talk and leading changes more confidently.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
