Reference Books

Focus Books

Study Guides

 

BOOK - Enterprise Transformation - A Pragmatic Approach Using POET

 





◄◄◄ Previous Page         

.  

          Next Page ►►►

Here the phases are across the top and the disciplines are down the side. The coloured humps give an indication of when each discipline is used and to what degree. Some of you will notice the similarity with RUP (Rational Unified Process). POET does not use RUP and does not mandate anyone that uses POET should adopt RUP. However, POET does recognise some important fundamentals that are present in RUP, which POET has also adopted:

¨      Firstly, POET (like RUP) recognises Phases vs Disciplines and that the mapping of disciplines to phases is complex and not a simple one-to-one mapping. In addition POET also adds the disciplines of Modelling, Discovery, and Governing & Lobbying.

¨      Secondly, POET (like RUP) is iterative and recognises that within each of the phases, the work carried out may not be of a simple waterfall nature but is more naturally of an iterative nature.

We also need to point out that while RUP is IT Project Centric, POET is Enterprise Transformation centric, recognising that Transformation has an Enterprise scope (not just IT) and encompasses Strategising and Roadmapping as well as Project Execution.

Note the background colours:

¨      Light blue for disciplines that predominately work on Structural Information (MACE).

¨      Light red for disciplines that predominately work on Transformational information (MAGMA).

¨      Grey for disciplines that work on both Structural and Transformational information.

The disciplines identified in red text (which form the backbone of Pragmatic Transformation) are defined in more detail later.

So, starting to look at the disciplines and phases contained in RUP, the question was, “What work is going on in the Strategising and Roadmapping phases?”. It turns out the it’s the same!

So I extended the use of the basic disciplines to the left. Essentially, the only difference between the use of Analysis and Design in the project phases, and the use of Analysis and Design in the Strategising and Roadmapping phases, is the information that is being Analysed and Designed. The same is true for all the other disciplines also, to a greater or lesser extent.

To complete the work going on in the Strategising and Roadmapping phases I added more key disciplines that are sadly very immature in many Enterprises. Having done so, I then realised that these disciplines are also used (and mostly immature) in the Project level phases also (Initiating, Elaboration, Constructing and Transitioning)

And so they we added there too, which provides us with a complete overview of the key disciplines used throughout the Transformation domain.

At this point, it is also worth point out, that Frameworks aimed at maturing parts of the Transformation domain, could be focussed around Phases or around Disciplines. For example, PRINCE2 is organised around the Project Planning and Management disciplines (horizontally), whereas EA frameworks such as PEAF are organised around the Strategising and Roadmapping phases (vertically). In general, this distinction is largely hidden and exists because without POET there is no context to position them within.

 

◄◄◄ Previous Page          

          Next Page ►►►

Questions to ponder...

Does your Enterprise recognise the complicated mapping of Disciplines to the Phases of Transformation?

If yes, how is this evidenced?

If not, do you think it would be a good idea?

Does your Enterprise recognise Modelling, Discovery, Decision Making and Governance & Lobbying as disciplines that require an appropriate amount of time and resources to execute?

If not, does that create any problems or issues?

What needs to be done to alleviate them?






© 2008-2018 Pragmatic EA Ltd