The Pragmatic Family of Frameworks


◄◄◄ Previous Page         


          Next Page ►►►

Here we suggest the Executive Structure required for an Enterprise based on DOTS.

The COO would have the Head of Business Operations and the Head of IT Operations reporting to them. To the COO, it doesn’t matter if the business is being executed by a person or a machine. He is accountable for the execution of Operations, but also for the improvement to Operations. All of Operations.

Just as there is a COO (because the Operation part of the Enterprise is critical to its success), in the 21st century the same is true for the Chief Transformation Officer (CXO). There needs to be someone, at board/CxO level who is accountable for this strategically important part of the Enterprise, and to bang the boardroom table for resources to improve it. As well as the Head of Business Change and Head of IT Change, the CXO also has the key reports of the Transformation domain reporting to him – the Head of Enterprise Architecture and the Head of Enterprise Engineering.

The COO would have dotted line responsibility for the Head of Business Change.

The CSO would have the Head of Business Support and the Head of IT Support reporting to the. All support, regardless of the area will be initially handled by the same first line support and ticket issuing and managing system. Further depth is outside the scope of POET but handled in more detail in POES.

The COO would have dotted line responsibility for the Head of Business Support.

The CFO and other CxO roles would be as normal with the continued representation of the CIO/CTO/IT Director role, although that role would have overseeing and dotted line responsibility to the Head of IT Operations, the Head of IT Change and the Head of IT Support.

In most Enterprises, the CXO role does not exist, so the obvious question is who will lead that domain? Two possibilities exist, to either recruit from inside the Enterprise or from outside the organisation. In terms of outside the organisation, this may prove impossible or extremely difficult. When POET was first launched this role did not exist in widespread use and its growth has not been steep. Where it does exist, it tends to be more of a carrot and tick role to drive Transformation forward (against any dissent) rather than role that is accountable for improving the domain.

As time has gone on, more and more “experts” are beginning to tout this important role. For example, an article in Raconteur states:

Chief transformation officer: revolutionary or functionary?

Some are visionaries, others project managers, the newest role in the C-suite is all about change…. it’s not a job title that’s been around for very long, emerging over the past decade or so as organisations realise the need to be more responsive to change”

 - Raconteur (July 2018)

I would hope that they were inspired by POET – that has been around for, surprise surprise, the last decade!

If external recruitment is not an option, the alternative is internal recruitment which may turn out to be the most Pragmatic approach.

So, if you were to appoint the role to an existing employee, who would that be?

You would probably want to choose someone who already spends an appreciable amount of time involved in Enterprise Transformation at a senior level, and since a large part of Transformation happening within Enterprises today is IT related it might seem reasonable to ask the CIO to expand his remit from just dealing with IT Transformation to dealing with Transformation as a whole. To be accountable for the Entire Transformation domain - Transforming the Methods, Artefacts, Culture and Environment used for Transformation not just its IT (which is a sub part of the Technology domain, which is a sub part of the Environment domain, which is a sub part of the Enterprise Transformation domain).

The other important adjustment is to make this person accountable not only for the running of Transformation but for its improvement. This is a very very important point. Most CIO’s today do not have that remit in their current role (or if they do, are rarely provided with the resources to do so) and therefore the move from CIO to CXO is not only a change from an IT focus to a Transformation focus, but also a change from one that is only accountable for running Transformation to one that also includes its improvement - The Transformation of Transformation. This will require the CXO to relinquish accountability for IT Operations and IT Support to the COO and CSO.

The COO has someone he can call on who is accountable for transforming Operations - the CXO, but the CXO has no one to call on who is accountable for transforming Transformation except himself, and he can only do that if he is given an explicit remit and mandate from the CEO to do so.

NOTE: It is not anticipated than an Enterprise would implement this, as-is. It is provided more as a suggestion to how an Enterprise may begin to organise itself differently in response to the strategic drivers of the 21st Century, namely Transformation and Support.

Questions to ponder...

Do you have a CXO?

Who in your Enterprise will bang the boardroom table to resources to improve how Transformation is effected?

Who in your Enterprise would be best placed to move into that role?

Are Transformation and Support represented at the CxO level in your Enterprise?

If not, does this cause any problems?

What are the impact of these problems?

What needs to happen to alleviate these problems?

◄◄◄ Previous Page          

          Next Page ►►►


© 2008-2019 Pragmatic EA Ltd