Although Transformation Debt Ratio™
is defined for each project, it can also be combined to produce an TDR for a
group of projects in a program or an overall TDR for the entire Project
Portfolio. Of course, when combining TDR you need to weight each individual TDR
to get a balanced view.
While TDR for the entire Transformation Portfolio provides a
useful metric at a point in time, it is more useful to track it over time. A
sensible view might be that over time, an Enterprise might like to see the
amount of work that is Compliant increase and the amount of work done in a
Non-Compliant way decrease - since doing work in a Compliant way is generally
the most effective, most efficient and least risky manner of doing it.
In Year 0 - the year of adopting PEAF (and hence Transformation Debt™) it is more than probable that a lot of
work will still have to done in a Non-Compliant way. However we make the
necessary plans to do a decent amount of Remedial work the following year.
In Year 1, while still having to do a lot of work in a
Non-Compliant way, we perform the Remedial work we planned the year before,
which lays the groundwork for Year 2.
In Year 2, we can now start to do more work in a Compliant way
(because of the remedial work we did in the previous year) and less work in a
Non-Compliant way, while still doing some Remedial work, both of which lays the
groundwork for Year 3.
In Year 3, doing work in a Compliant way is now beginning to
outweigh doing work in a Non-Compliant way (because of the remedial and
Compliant work we did in the previous year) and this, in addition to a little
Remedial work, lays the groundwork for Year 4.
In Year 4 we are doing most work in a Compliant way and only do
work in a Non-Compliant way when really necessary.
This is only an example of course and will vary from
Enterprise to Enterprise and will be influenced by many factors such as the
fiscal climate and current Enterprise Strategy.
However, the examples provided illustrate one of the
indicators of increasing EA Maturity in that Enterprises that are more “mature”
are the ones who spend a greater proportion of their resources doing work in a
Compliant way rather than a Non-Compliant way and therefore need to spend
little on remedial work.
The key point is:
If You Never PLAN To Do Transformation
In A Way That
Complies With Guidance,
You Will Never DO Transformation
In A Way That
Complies With Guidance.
Unless you planned for it, time pressures (the incessant
need for quick wins for example) will always force you to do work in a
Non-Complaint way rather than in a Compliant way. The key is breaking the
Another thing to consider is that the choices being made
when formulating the Transformation Portfolio should perhaps aim to do less,
better. What we mean by that is that it might be a better approach to doing
less things in a Compliant way (spending the money and time you save on
allowing those initiatives to execute in a Compliant way (thereby incurring no Transformation Debt™) rather than doing more things in a
Non-Compliant way (thereby incurring Transformation Debt™).