Is ITIL just a theory or viable pragmatic approach? A ... · PDF fileIs ITIL just a theory or...

Is ITIL just a theory or viable pragmaticapproach?

A practical business case from CEZ

Vladimír KufnerHP SW Professional Service Organization, Prague, Czech Republic

13.10.2011

Is ITIL just a theory or viable pragmaticapproach?

A practical business case from CEZ

Agenda

• Introduction

• PPM project in CEZ• Who is the customer• Project goals and objectives• Project scope• Implementation phases and timelines• Delivery team and HP engagement• Key lessons learned, encountered problems and benefits for CEZ• Key takeaways

• Final wrap-up – CSF

• Questions & Answers

• Introduction

• PPM project in CEZ• Who is the customer• Project goals and objectives• Project scope• Implementation phases and timelines• Delivery team and HP engagement• Key lessons learned, encountered problems and benefits for CEZ• Key takeaways

• Final wrap-up – CSF

• Questions & Answers

Focus of thispresentation

ITILITIL V3V3/2011/2011 booksbooks overviewoverview

ServiceTransition

Continual ServiceImprovement

Contin

ual S

ervice

Impr

ovem

ent

Continual Service

Improvement

ServiceOperation

ServiceDesign

ServiceStrategies

ITIL

Governance MethodsStandards Alignment

Case StudiesTem

plates

Scal

abili

ty

Quick Wins

Qualifications

Study Aids

Knowledge &

Skills

Spec

ialty

Top

ics

Executive Introduction

ServiceTransition


Contin

ual S

ervice

Impr

ovem

ent

Continual Service

Improvement

ServiceOperation

ServiceDesign

ServiceStrategies

ITIL

ServiceTransition


Contin

ual S

ervice

Impr

ovem

ent

Continual Service

Improvement

ServiceOperation

ServiceDesign

ServiceStrategies

ITIL


Case StudiesTem

plates

Scal

abili

ty

Quick Wins

Qualifications

Study Aids

Knowledge &

Skills

Spec

ialty

Top

ics



Case StudiesTem

plates

Scal

abili

ty

Quick Wins

Qualifications

Study Aids

Knowledge &

Skills

Spec

ialty

Top

ics


SD Processes:• Design coordination• Service Portfolio Design• Service Catalogue Management• Service Level Management• Capacity Management• Availability Management• Service Continuity Management• Information Security Management• Supplier Management

CSI Processes:• 7-step improvement process

SO Processes:• Event Management• Incident Management• Request Fulfillment• Problem Management• Access Management• Common Service Operation Activities• 4 Functions

• Service Desk• Application Management• Technical management• IT Operations Management Service

Transition


Contin

ual S

ervice

Impr

ovem

ent

Continual Service

Improvement

ServiceOperation

ServiceDesign

ServiceStrategies

ITIL


Case StudiesTem

plates

Scal

abili

ty

Quick Wins

Qualifications

Study Aids

Knowledge &

Skills

Spec

ialty

Top

ics


ServiceTransition


Contin

ual S

ervice

Impr

ovem

ent

Continual Service

Improvement

ServiceOperation

ServiceDesign

ServiceStrategies

ITIL

ServiceTransition


Contin

ual S

ervice

Impr

ovem

ent

Continual Service

Improvement

ServiceOperation

ServiceDesign

ServiceStrategies

ITIL


Case StudiesTem

plates

Scal

abili

ty

Quick Wins

Qualifications

Study Aids

Knowledge &

Skills

Spec

ialty

Top

ics



Case StudiesTem

plates

Scal

abili

ty

Quick Wins

Qualifications

Study Aids

Knowledge &

Skills

Spec

ialty

Top

ics

Executive IntroductionSS Processes:• Strategy management• IT Financial Management• Service Portfolio Management• Demand Management• Business relationship management

ST Processes:• Transition Planning & Support• Change Management• Service Asset and Configuration Management• Knowledge Management• Release and deployment management• Service Validation and testing• Change Evaluation

SO Processes:• Event Management• Incident Management• Request Fulfillment• Problem Management• Access Management• Common Service Operation Activities• 4 Functions

• Service Desk• Application Management• Technical management• IT Operations Management

Traditional ITSM focusTraditional ITSM focus

ServiceTransition


Contin

ual S

ervice

Impr

ovem

ent

Continual Service

Improvement

ServiceOperation

ServiceDesign

ServiceStrategies

ITIL


Case StudiesTem

plates

Scal

abili

ty

Quick Wins

Qualifications

Study Aids

Knowledge &

Skills

Spec

ialty

Top

ics


ServiceTransition


Contin

ual S

ervice

Impr

ovem

ent

Continual Service

Improvement

ServiceOperation

ServiceDesign

ServiceStrategies

ITIL

ServiceTransition


Contin

ual S

ervice

Impr

ovem

ent

Continual Service

Improvement

ServiceOperation

ServiceDesign

ServiceStrategies

ITIL


Case StudiesTem

plates

Scal

abili

ty

Quick Wins

Qualifications

Study Aids

Knowledge &

Skills

Spec

ialty

Top

ics



Case StudiesTem

plates

Scal

abili

ty

Quick Wins

Qualifications

Study Aids

Knowledge &

Skills

Spec

ialty

Top

ics


SD Processes:• Design coordination• Service Portfolio Design• Service Catalogue Management• Service Level Management• Capacity Management• Availability Management• Service Continuity Management• Information Security Management• Supplier Management

CSI Processes:• 7-step improvement process

SO Processes:• Event Management• Incident Management• Request Fulfillment• Problem Management• Access Management• Common Service Operation

Activities• 4 Functions


NO, for this time!Service

Transition


Contin

ual S

ervice

Impr

ovem

ent

Continual Service

Improvement

ServiceOperation

ServiceDesign

ServiceStrategies

ITIL


Case StudiesTem

plates

Scal

abili

ty

Quick Wins

Qualifications

Study Aids

Knowledge &

Skills

Spec

ialty

Top

ics


ServiceTransition


Contin

ual S

ervice

Impr

ovem

ent

Continual Service

Improvement

ServiceOperation

ServiceDesign

ServiceStrategies

ITIL

ServiceTransition


Contin

ual S

ervice

Impr

ovem

ent

Continual Service

Improvement

ServiceOperation

ServiceDesign

ServiceStrategies

ITIL


Case StudiesTem

plates

Scal

abili

ty

Quick Wins

Qualifications

Study Aids

Knowledge &

Skills

Spec

ialty

Top

ics



Case StudiesTem

plates

Scal

abili

ty

Quick Wins

Qualifications

Study Aids

Knowledge &

Skills

Spec

ialty

Top

ics

Executive IntroductionSS Processes:• Strategy management• IT Financial Management• Service Portfolio Management• Demand Management• Business relationship management

ST Processes:• Transition Planning & Support• Change Management• Service Asset and Configuration Management• Knowledge Management• Release and deployment management• Service Validation and testing• Change Evaluation

SO Processes:• Event Management• Incident Management• Request Fulfillment• Problem Management• Access Management• Common Service Operation

Activities• 4 Functions


NO, for this time!

OGC Best Practices - Portfolio, Programme and ProjectManagement Maturity Model (P3M3®)

This time let’s focus on PPM!

Customerintroduction

CEZ introduction

• Leader on electricity production andsales in CEE region

• Largest company in the CzechRepublic regarding net income

• Annual reported figures for 2010– sales of electricity to end customers – 44.6 TWh

– Capital expenditure CZK 61.7 billions/2.52 EUR billions

– Return on equity net 22.4 %

– Net income CZK 47.2 billions/1.92 EUR billions

– EBITDA – CZK 89.02 billions/3.63 EUR billions

– Dividends declared – CZK 28.5 billions

– Year to year growth – 10 %

– Overall financial asset - 500 CZK billions/19.2EUR billions

– Overall more than 33 thousands of people

• Leader on electricity production andsales in CEE region

• Largest company in the CzechRepublic regarding net income

• Annual reported figures for 2010– sales of electricity to end customers – 44.6 TWh

– Capital expenditure CZK 61.7 billions/2.52 EUR billions

– Return on equity net 22.4 %

– Net income CZK 47.2 billions/1.92 EUR billions

– EBITDA – CZK 89.02 billions/3.63 EUR billions

– Dividends declared – CZK 28.5 billions

– Year to year growth – 10 %

– Overall financial asset - 500 CZK billions/19.2EUR billions

– Overall more than 33 thousands of people

Project objectives& solution

CEZ goals and objectives

• To implement portfolio and project managementprocesses for the ICT Services (IT “daughter” in CEZ) andfor CEZ PMO

• Limited ability to expand this solution for otherorganizational units

• Very close integration with CEZ ERP system – SAP

• Planned to use full scope of HP Project and PortfolioManagement Center/PPMC

• Enforcement to use 3rd party ECM (Enterprise ContentManagement solution) as the repository for theattachments

• To implement portfolio and project managementprocesses for the ICT Services (IT “daughter” in CEZ) andfor CEZ PMO

• Limited ability to expand this solution for otherorganizational units

• Very close integration with CEZ ERP system – SAP

• Planned to use full scope of HP Project and PortfolioManagement Center/PPMC

• Enforcement to use 3rd party ECM (Enterprise ContentManagement solution) as the repository for theattachments

CEZ methodologies & maturity status at thebeginning• Just high level project

management methodology• No existing Demand management,

neither portfolio management

• Processes in PPM space heavilydriven and influenced bybusiness HQ and especially bySAP program

• ICT Services as a daughter CEZcompany being responsible forprovisioning of ICT services had noProject management tool yet– just few of MSP clients

• No financial check of therunning projects

• No resource planning, neithertime management

• Distrust from key business users

• No audit trail for decisionbeing made

• Missing escalationprocedures/tools

• status of PPM processes in ICTServices – mess, many projectsfinished late, with unexpectedcosts, reporting in Excel –inaccurate, difficult

• no single repository of theproject documentation

• Just high level projectmanagement methodology

• No existing Demand management,neither portfolio management

• Processes in PPM space heavilydriven and influenced bybusiness HQ and especially bySAP program

• ICT Services as a daughter CEZcompany being responsible forprovisioning of ICT services had noProject management tool yet– just few of MSP clients

• No financial check of therunning projects

• No resource planning, neithertime management

• Distrust from key business users

• No audit trail for decisionbeing made

• Missing escalationprocedures/tools

• status of PPM processes in ICTServices – mess, many projectsfinished late, with unexpectedcosts, reporting in Excel –inaccurate, difficult

• no single repository of theproject documentation

CEZ requirements

• To get simple, single tool enabling to manage followingstrategic processes for CEZ ICT Services:

– Demand management (just level of strategic projects)

– Project management

– Program management

– (Project) Portfolio management

– Resource management

– Time management

• Enabling to keep IT Governance

• PPM should serve to certain extent as the viewer for userunfriendly SAP environment (integration with CATS and PS)

• To get simple, single tool enabling to manage followingstrategic processes for CEZ ICT Services:

– Demand management (just level of strategic projects)

– Project management

– Program management

– (Project) Portfolio management

– Resource management

– Time management

• Enabling to keep IT Governance

• PPM should serve to certain extent as the viewer for userunfriendly SAP environment (integration with CATS and PS)

HP offered the solution

ProgramManagementPortfolio ManagementProject

Management

DashboardHP Project and Portfolio Management Center

Portfolio Optimization

Foundation

Workflow Administration Security Web services

Demand Management

TimeManagement

FinancialManagement

ResourceManagement

Center Management for Performance CenterCenter Management for Quality Center

Project scope andengagementdescription

Project (s) timescale

• Phase I contained implementation of PPMC (DM, FM, PRM) incl.Integrations – SSO/LDAP, SAP HR, SMTP, SAP PS, ECM

• Phase II contained new version of existing processes/extension ofproject control entities, implementation of other modules – PGM,PFM, RM and TM, integration to SAP CATS & MSP

• Phase III contains new version of processes, extension to anotherdomain, extension of ECM integration

• Extended SW Support - provided on top of standard HP SW GlobalSupport by local HP OS

• Phase I contained implementation of PPMC (DM, FM, PRM) incl.Integrations – SSO/LDAP, SAP HR, SMTP, SAP PS, ECM

• Phase II contained new version of existing processes/extension ofproject control entities, implementation of other modules – PGM,PFM, RM and TM, integration to SAP CATS & MSP

• Phase III contains new version of processes, extension to anotherdomain, extension of ECM integration

• Extended SW Support - provided on top of standard HP SW GlobalSupport by local HP OS

Project deliverables (in all 3 projects)

• HP PPMC in English edition

– Customized workflows for Demand andproject (program) management processes –15

– Customized dashboards/portlets/reports

– 7 integrations – LDAP (SSO), SMTP, MSP,SAP HR, SAP PS, SAP CATS, ECM

• Consulting services for PPM

– Not provided on explicit customer request,however at least partially covered sincecustomer has had no particular experience

• Training

– No standard HP SW EDU training courses,but “train the trainer” concept

– Always focused on just 1 single particularPPMC module/process, ½ workshop

• Documentation

– Target concept (input from CEZ)

– Functional and TechnicalSpecification/FTS

– User’s Guide

– Administrator’s Guide

– Issue Log

– High level Test Plan

– Test scenarios/UAT

– Acceptance protocol

• SW Support, Pilot phase (Early LifeSupport) – extended local support

• HP PPMC in English edition

– Customized workflows for Demand andproject (program) management processes –15

– Customized dashboards/portlets/reports

– 7 integrations – LDAP (SSO), SMTP, MSP,SAP HR, SAP PS, SAP CATS, ECM

• Consulting services for PPM

– Not provided on explicit customer request,however at least partially covered sincecustomer has had no particular experience

• Training

– No standard HP SW EDU training courses,but “train the trainer” concept

– Always focused on just 1 single particularPPMC module/process, ½ workshop

• Documentation

– Target concept (input from CEZ)

– Functional and TechnicalSpecification/FTS

– User’s Guide

– Administrator’s Guide

– Issue Log

– High level Test Plan

– Test scenarios/UAT

– Acceptance protocol

• SW Support, Pilot phase (Early LifeSupport) – extended local support

Lessons learned

All is about ITIL principles

Products Processes

People

Concept of 4 P’s CSI model

Partners

Taken from ITIL V3 Service Design book

Taken from ITIL V3 Continual Service Improvement book

Peopleaspects

Products

People

Products Processes

Partners

People

People aspects

• “ABC” factors• In ITIL people are contained

in both Resources andCapabilities

• Change agent –management of changes

• Service champions• People motivation,

compensation & benefits,performance management

Challenges on CEZ project

• Scoping of the project• Two ‘masters’ on project• Initial distrust of key users• Lack of discipline at CEZ

project teams• Resistance to change• Training for end users• Motivation of employees• Quite often changing

requirements - > iterativecustomization, prototyping

• “ABC” factors• In ITIL people are contained

in both Resources andCapabilities

• Change agent –management of changes

• Service champions• People motivation,

compensation & benefits,performance management

• Scoping of the project• Two ‘masters’ on project• Initial distrust of key users• Lack of discipline at CEZ

project teams• Resistance to change• Training for end users• Motivation of employees• Quite often changing

requirements - > iterativecustomization, prototyping

Products/tools

Processes

People

Products

Partners

Role of tool within PPM

General

• Tools are good helpers, butbad masters

• “Fool with a tool is still afool”

• published by David Lindsay, HP, 1995

• Tools are good helpers, butbad masters

• “Fool with a tool is still afool”

• published by David Lindsay, HP, 1995

Role of tool within PPM

Challenges at CEZ

• The tool itself does not improve companyprocesses

• The tool shows exact figures based on thedata entered by humans (rubbish in/rubbishout)

• More administrative effort on CEZ PMO

• Necessity to train users not familiar with anykind of PPM tools yet

• Dependency on CEZ ICT Services regardingICT infrastructure

• Reporting -> complex custom portlets andreports

• Integration PPM with SAP and ECM

• „over engineered “ PPM solution

• Non standard resource managementnotifications

• Calculation of custom financial indicators –ROI, NPV, IRR

• The tool itself does not improve companyprocesses

• The tool shows exact figures based on thedata entered by humans (rubbish in/rubbishout)

• More administrative effort on CEZ PMO

• Necessity to train users not familiar with anykind of PPM tools yet

• Dependency on CEZ ICT Services regardingICT infrastructure

• Reporting -> complex custom portlets andreports

• Integration PPM with SAP and ECM

• „over engineered “ PPM solution

• Non standard resource managementnotifications

• Calculation of custom financial indicators –ROI, NPV, IRR

Example of the PPM processes - Portfolio Management

• Definition of the right portfolio(projects, programmes, existingassets/services) in the financial context(benefits and costs), time, resources

• “super” process overDM/PRM/PGM/FM/RM/TM processes –lifecycle approach

• Ability to establish proper risk and valuerating systems enabling to comparetotally incomparable project types

• Risk mitigation/minimization,maximization of added value

• Way of bettercommunication/liaisoning betweenIT/Operations/PMO and business units

• What-if analysis – what changes whenyou postpone project, change finance orresources?

• Based on portfolio planningoptimization – better overall planning,IT and Corporate Governance

• Definition of the right portfolio(projects, programmes, existingassets/services) in the financial context(benefits and costs), time, resources

• “super” process overDM/PRM/PGM/FM/RM/TM processes –lifecycle approach

• Ability to establish proper risk and valuerating systems enabling to comparetotally incomparable project types

• Risk mitigation/minimization,maximization of added value

• Way of bettercommunication/liaisoning betweenIT/Operations/PMO and business units

• What-if analysis – what changes whenyou postpone project, change finance orresources?

• Based on portfolio planningoptimization – better overall planning,IT and Corporate Governance

Partner’s aspects

People

Products Processes

Partners

Why HP?

• HP is perceived as the one of the key strategic partners for CEZ – lotof HW sold, ES projects, Technical Support for HW, SW Support, HPEducation etc.

• Project team having the right sense for quality and passion for customer,very informal way of communication

• We solved even some very specific requirements (integrations toFilenet and SAP)

• We were able to shade off the customer from significant SW Supportbugs

• We offered support on site in local language (done by our ES/OScolleagues)

• Our delivery was always with very good quality and timing

• We are collaborating on future development quite closely with thecustomer

• HP is perceived as the one of the key strategic partners for CEZ – lotof HW sold, ES projects, Technical Support for HW, SW Support, HPEducation etc.

• Project team having the right sense for quality and passion for customer,very informal way of communication

• We solved even some very specific requirements (integrations toFilenet and SAP)

• We were able to shade off the customer from significant SW Supportbugs

• We offered support on site in local language (done by our ES/OScolleagues)

• Our delivery was always with very good quality and timing

• We are collaborating on future development quite closely with thecustomer

Challenges at HP side

• Proper financial appraisal for the first engagement – PPMC PhaseI

• Permanently changing project teams on both HP and CEZ side– 3 PM at CEZ, 2 SA

– 2 SA in HP, replaced the whole team of TC

• Managing the scope of the project

– To certain extent Iterative/customer driven project implementation – not suitable forFP/FD projects

• Lack of matured technical consultants/experiencedprogrammers in certain phases of projects

• Proper financial appraisal for the first engagement – PPMC PhaseI

• Permanently changing project teams on both HP and CEZ side– 3 PM at CEZ, 2 SA

– 2 SA in HP, replaced the whole team of TC

• Managing the scope of the project

– To certain extent Iterative/customer driven project implementation – not suitable forFP/FD projects

• Lack of matured technical consultants/experiencedprogrammers in certain phases of projects

Processes

People

Products Processes

Partners

Processes

Process aspects

• ITIL, PRINCE2, P3O etc. aregeneric guidance which need tobe further developedrespecting customer specificrequirements (concept of ”adaptand adopt” & “best practices”

• It’s not enough to suggest anddesign processes in the companyas one shot approach, but theyneed to be further supported /developed /controlled /measured/ and improved

Process challenges at CEZ

• Procedural immaturity ofthe organization

• Lack of managementcommitment

• Lack of employee interest

• Company culture

• Organizational split aroundthe country, differentlocations

• ITIL, PRINCE2, P3O etc. aregeneric guidance which need tobe further developedrespecting customer specificrequirements (concept of ”adaptand adopt” & “best practices”

• It’s not enough to suggest anddesign processes in the companyas one shot approach, but theyneed to be further supported /developed /controlled /measured/ and improved

• Procedural immaturity ofthe organization

• Lack of managementcommitment

• Lack of employee interest

• Company culture

• Organizational split aroundthe country, differentlocations

Used project methodologies

HP Global Method

• Used initially in Phase I

HP SW Specific methodology

• Used subsequently

Not suitable for this kindof project

Initiate Design &BuildPlan Q&A

Analysis &Planning

Configuration &Customization

Education &Discovery

Testing,UAT

Migration Early LifeSupport Close

Pilot,Issue Log


Close

Knowledgetransfer

Documentation,training

Not suitable for this kindof project

Specific project methodology used for CEZ engagement

Initiate Design &BuildPlan Q&A

Analysis &Planning

Configuration &Customization


Testing,UAT

Migration Early LifeSupport Close

Pilot,Issue Log


Close

Knowledgetransfer

Documentation,training

Tasks• Workshop

s &Interviews

• Analysis• Project

planning• High level

documentation

• DevelopCommunication &TrainingPlan

• HW ready

• Functionaland Technicalspecs

• Security,users,org.units

• RT/RHT/WF• Dashboards/

portlets/reports

• Integrations• Tuning• Migration to

TEST• Train testers

• Developtestscenario

• Testing• Re-

config

• Creation ofUser’s andAdministrator’sguides

• Completingonline help

• Creation oftraining slides

• “train trainer”sessions

• Agreed outage• Migration to

PROD• Manual

operations• Operational

test• Communicatio

n to users• Support

arranged

• Supportprovided

• Issue Log• Small

changesdone

• Mediumchangesthrough CR

• Customersatisfactionsurvey

• Documentationpassed

• Closureof project

Tasks• Education

on newfeatures

• CalculateROI of theupgrade

• AssessUpgradeImpact

• Scopeproject

• Teststrategy

• HW sizing

• Workshops &Interviews

• Analysis• Project

planning• High level

documentation

• DevelopCommunication &TrainingPlan

• HW ready

• Functionaland Technicalspecs

• Security,users,org.units

• RT/RHT/WF• Dashboards/

portlets/reports

• Integrations• Tuning• Migration to

TEST• Train testers

• Developtestscenario

• Testing• Re-

config

• Creation ofUser’s andAdministrator’sguides

• Completingonline help

• Creation oftraining slides

• “train trainer”sessions

• Agreed outage• Migration to

PROD• Manual

operations• Operational

test• Communicatio

n to users• Support

arranged

• Supportprovided

• Issue Log• Small

changesdone

• Mediumchangesthrough CR

• Customersatisfactionsurvey

• Documentationpassed

• Closureof project

ContinualService

Improvement

CSI principles applied in practice in CEZ

• The process changes cannot be justset at the tool and documentationlevel, but needs to beinstitutionalized - J.Kotter’sprinciples

• In first phase you are never able toachieve 100 percent of results(Pareto rule), you need to doiterative improvements afterwards

• Small changes/improvementswritten into Issue Log and improvedcontinuously

• Without proper mapping/assessmentof your processes first, you cannot doproper and realistic planning and toachieve best results

• The specific process of handlingnew project requirements hasbeen developed at both sides

• Process flows suggested originallyin good will showed as notrealistic and were improved later- simplification

• Due to changes in CorporateGovernance policies donemodifications in handling risksand financial calculations –“course correction” in ITIL whenbusiness changes therequirements

• The process changes cannot be justset at the tool and documentationlevel, but needs to beinstitutionalized - J.Kotter’sprinciples

• In first phase you are never able toachieve 100 percent of results(Pareto rule), you need to doiterative improvements afterwards

• Small changes/improvementswritten into Issue Log and improvedcontinuously

• Without proper mapping/assessmentof your processes first, you cannot doproper and realistic planning and toachieve best results

• The specific process of handlingnew project requirements hasbeen developed at both sides

• Process flows suggested originallyin good will showed as notrealistic and were improved later- simplification

• Due to changes in CorporateGovernance policies donemodifications in handling risksand financial calculations –“course correction” in ITIL whenbusiness changes therequirements

Well, did we succeed in everything?

• Not in everything– HP failed in offer of consulting services in PPM

area first, but consistently got the credit

– Time management on level of projects, not projecttasks

– We did not finish integrations with other HPSW tools such as uCMDB and QC

– Localization has not been finally implemented

– In some cases the delivery istechnically/conceptually not 100 percentperfect – e.g. integration to ECM or CATS

– We have not persuaded the customer yet aboutnecessity to strengthen the infrastructure andmainly to migrate to the latest version of PPMC

• Not in everything– HP failed in offer of consulting services in PPM

area first, but consistently got the credit

– Time management on level of projects, not projecttasks

– We did not finish integrations with other HPSW tools such as uCMDB and QC

– Localization has not been finally implemented

– In some cases the delivery istechnically/conceptually not 100 percentperfect – e.g. integration to ECM or CATS

– We have not persuaded the customer yet aboutnecessity to strengthen the infrastructure andmainly to migrate to the latest version of PPMC

Added value forCEZ

Benefits for IT (CEZ ICT Services as the serviceprovider)

• clear overview about the whole projectportfolio, status progress of fulfillingindividual projects

• tracking progress of individualprojects/programs incl. the overall healthand managing exceptions

• Helping a lot to automate things,especially in the area of reporting

• Great support of processes, incl.enforcement of the company policies(discipline)

• common repository of proposals/projectswithin 3 domains with ability to managecorrective actions if needed

• Flexible reporting/dashboarding comparedto SAP ?!

• Integrations done are helping PPMCusers

– to automate things - reports,notifications, escalations, reminders etc.

– to have simplified access by using SingleSign-On feature (SSO)

– to get proper and up to date info aboutfinancials from ERP system

– to get updated info about reportedhours on projects

– Notifications about records on action list

– Reminders/escalations

– Client integration - flexibility to workwith MS Office tools/Excel, MSP + Adobe

• clear overview about the whole projectportfolio, status progress of fulfillingindividual projects

• tracking progress of individualprojects/programs incl. the overall healthand managing exceptions

• Helping a lot to automate things,especially in the area of reporting

• Great support of processes, incl.enforcement of the company policies(discipline)

• common repository of proposals/projectswithin 3 domains with ability to managecorrective actions if needed

• Flexible reporting/dashboarding comparedto SAP ?!

• Integrations done are helping PPMCusers

– to automate things - reports,notifications, escalations, reminders etc.

– to have simplified access by using SingleSign-On feature (SSO)

– to get proper and up to date info aboutfinancials from ERP system

– to get updated info about reportedhours on projects

– Notifications about records on action list

– Reminders/escalations

– Client integration - flexibility to workwith MS Office tools/Excel, MSP + Adobe

Business benefits

• Single “source of truth” for projectsin all 3 different domains

• Central tool forrequesting/approving/tracking of theirprojects proposals & projects for all 3domains

• Controlled access to theproposal/project records enabling toshow information just to authorizedgroups in CEZ

• Proper Risk analysis andmanagement of all 3 different typesof projects

• Tool helping to make propermanagerial/financial decisions

• Tool enabling to plan project/programfinances and to track actual financialcash flow

• Trusted environment, clearlydefined processes and roles

• Consistent procedures/processesfor handling business demand

• Every single action is being audited,notifications and reports

• Single “source of truth” for projectsin all 3 different domains

• Central tool forrequesting/approving/tracking of theirprojects proposals & projects for all 3domains

• Controlled access to theproposal/project records enabling toshow information just to authorizedgroups in CEZ

• Proper Risk analysis andmanagement of all 3 different typesof projects

• Tool helping to make propermanagerial/financial decisions

• Tool enabling to plan project/programfinances and to track actual financialcash flow

• Trusted environment, clearlydefined processes and roles

• Consistent procedures/processesfor handling business demand

• Every single action is being audited,notifications and reports

Final Wrap-up

• Critical success factors for the project

– Long term and win-win positioning with the customer

– Fair and consistent behavior at both sides

– Solution architect (EA architect) as non-dispensable role

– Passion for customer at HP side

– Sense for quality at both sides

– HP shared Best Practices – both in the are of tools and standards

• PPM is very important and complementary discipline to ITILbecoming still more and more critical for success of serviceproviders as providing support for achieving IT Governance

• Critical success factors for the project

– Long term and win-win positioning with the customer

– Fair and consistent behavior at both sides

– Solution architect (EA architect) as non-dispensable role

– Passion for customer at HP side

– Sense for quality at both sides

– HP shared Best Practices – both in the are of tools and standards

• PPM is very important and complementary discipline to ITILbecoming still more and more critical for success of serviceproviders as providing support for achieving IT Governance

Q&[email protected]&[email protected]

Backup slides

What do you need to cover by project managementmethodology?• Project Mission and Objectives

• Project Organization

• Work Breakdown Structure

• Detailed Schedule

• Financial Plan

• Risk Management Plan

• Quality Plan

• Communication Plan

• Change Management Plan

• Configuration Management

• Acceptance

• Warranty and Support Plan

• Project Mission and Objectives

• Project Organization

• Work Breakdown Structure

• Detailed Schedule

• Financial Plan

• Risk Management Plan

• Quality Plan

• Communication Plan

• Change Management Plan

• Configuration Management

• Acceptance

• Warranty and Support Plan

Personalintroduction

Vladimír Kufner – Personal introduction

• Role in HP SW Professional Serviceorganization

– Act as solution architect on HP BTOSW tools

– Act as senior process consultant inthe arena of both ITSM and ITG

• Process assessments

• Transformation workshops

• Process implementation –transformations

• Process improvements

– Act as accredited ITIL trainer forISEB/EXIN/APMG (work for HP EDU)

• Role in HP SW Professional Serviceorganization

– Act as solution architect on HP BTOSW tools

– Act as senior process consultant inthe arena of both ITSM and ITG

• Process assessments

• Transformation workshops

• Process implementation –transformations

• Process improvements

– Act as accredited ITIL trainer forISEB/EXIN/APMG (work for HP EDU)

Vladimír Kufner – Business profile, ITSM/ITG/ISO 20000

• Certifications– ITIL V1 Foundation certificate, 1998

– ITIL V1 Master certificate 1999

– ITIL V2 Manager’s certificate 2005

– ITIL V3 Manager’s Bridge certificate 2008

– ITIL Expert certificate 2008

– ITIL V3 CSI certificate 2009

– ITIL V3 SO certificate 2010

– ITIL V3 PPO certificate 2011

– CobIT Foundation certificate 2010

• Participation on Q&A review for ITILV2 Service Support, Service Deliveryand ICT Infrastructure managementITIL books in version V2.0

• Participation on revisions of the latestHP ITSM Reference model V3.0 and HPService Management Framework/SMF

• Occasional speaker on HP OpenViewSymposium/HP Discover EMEAconferences

• Accredited ISO/IEC 20000 consultant

• Accredited HP Education trainer for ITIL V2/V3 courses -EXIN/ ISEB/APMG

• Member of itSMF UK, member of itSMF CZ, ex-deputychairman, honorary member

• Every year presence on local ITIL/CobITitSMF/ISACA/ICTM and System Integration conferences

• Member of ITIL V3 International Examination board –focusing on CSI and MALC

• Translation of itSMF ITIL publications into Czechlanguage

http://www.itil-officialsite.com/Qualifications/ITIL3Examiners.asp

• Certifications– ITIL V1 Foundation certificate, 1998

– ITIL V1 Master certificate 1999

– ITIL V2 Manager’s certificate 2005

– ITIL V3 Manager’s Bridge certificate 2008

– ITIL Expert certificate 2008

– ITIL V3 CSI certificate 2009

– ITIL V3 SO certificate 2010

– ITIL V3 PPO certificate 2011

– CobIT Foundation certificate 2010

• Participation on Q&A review for ITILV2 Service Support, Service Deliveryand ICT Infrastructure managementITIL books in version V2.0

• Participation on revisions of the latestHP ITSM Reference model V3.0 and HPService Management Framework/SMF

• Occasional speaker on HP OpenViewSymposium/HP Discover EMEAconferences

• Accredited ISO/IEC 20000 consultant

• Accredited HP Education trainer for ITIL V2/V3 courses -EXIN/ ISEB/APMG

• Member of itSMF UK, member of itSMF CZ, ex-deputychairman, honorary member

• Every year presence on local ITIL/CobITitSMF/ISACA/ICTM and System Integration conferences

• Member of ITIL V3 International Examination board –focusing on CSI and MALC

• Translation of itSMF ITIL publications into Czechlanguage

HP Projects – PPMC implementations

Phase I• Plan to implement full scope with exception

of Deployment module, but then finishedjust integrations and Portfolio and Demandmanagement for two domains – ICT andOE

• PM was Vaclav Krejci (ES)• SA was originally Jan Pavelka, but later

replaced by Vladimir Kufner• Process senior consultant – Vladimir Kufner• Technical consultants – Sviatlana

Zakharenkava, Zdenka Srsnova, FilipHajek

• Partial participation of external partner forJava front-end client

• Partial participation of external partner ofSAP user defined extensions

Phase II• Rollout of Project management, Time

management and Resourcemanagement part

• PM is Vaclav Krejci (ES)• SA/process consultant Vladimir

Kufner• Technical consultants – Michal

Humensky• Partial participation from CEE - Kalin

Petrov (reports)• Partial participation from ITSM

practice– Michaela Kubesova (reports)– Marek Nechala (portlets, dashboards, CATS

integration)

• Partial participation external partner– Radim Tolasz

• Plan to implement full scope with exceptionof Deployment module, but then finishedjust integrations and Portfolio and Demandmanagement for two domains – ICT andOE

• PM was Vaclav Krejci (ES)• SA was originally Jan Pavelka, but later

replaced by Vladimir Kufner• Process senior consultant – Vladimir Kufner• Technical consultants – Sviatlana

Zakharenkava, Zdenka Srsnova, FilipHajek

• Partial participation of external partner forJava front-end client

• Partial participation of external partner ofSAP user defined extensions

• Rollout of Project management, Timemanagement and Resourcemanagement part

• PM is Vaclav Krejci (ES)• SA/process consultant Vladimir

Kufner• Technical consultants – Michal

Humensky• Partial participation from CEE - Kalin

Petrov (reports)• Partial participation from ITSM

practice– Michaela Kubesova (reports)– Marek Nechala (portlets, dashboards, CATS

integration)

• Partial participation external partner– Radim Tolasz

Part of this engagement is local specific SW Support contract provided by HP Czech OSorganization

HP Projects – PPMC implementations

PPM III implementation

• Running project, 2011• Focus primarily on reports and

customizations• Added new domain of STO• PM is Erika Cajthamlová• SA/process consultant is Vladimir

Kufner• Technical consultants – Sviatlana

Zakharenkava, Marek Nechala,Radim Tolasz

PPM Upgrade?

• Sent proposal• ???

• Running project, 2011• Focus primarily on reports and

customizations• Added new domain of STO• PM is Erika Cajthamlová• SA/process consultant is Vladimir

Kufner• Technical consultants – Sviatlana

Zakharenkava, Marek Nechala,Radim Tolasz

Customization Levels and Impacts

Lvl Customization Description Constraints & AdvantagesUpgrade / Support

Impact1 HP PROVIDED

HP developed and certified custom solutions.Examples: Special Ops Solutions such as MatrixPortlets, Sync between Budget Lines and StaffingProfiles.

Solution is delivered as-is. Enhancements orbug fixes prioritized based on totalcustomer demand.The goal is to incorporate most of these intostandard product. In extreme cases use ofsolution limits the frequency in whichcustomers can apply standard patches.

HP provides upgrade procedurewhich can be either manual orautomated. HP can retire customsolution when it becomes part ofstandard product. May requireconsulting involvement onupgrades.

2 MINORStraightforward customizations to supplement PPMfunctionality without modifying standard code orcreating data.Examples: Simple custom reports, Simple customportlets, Simple workflow execution steps.

Customer/partner must have skill set andknowledge to maintain. Usually lowmaintenance.

Not SupportedAnything developed outside thePPM Application may notautomatically upgrade. Forexample, data model changes inmajor releases may causeupgrade impacts.

MINORStraightforward customizations to supplement PPMfunctionality without modifying standard code orcreating data.Examples: Simple custom reports, Simple customportlets, Simple workflow execution steps.

Customer/partner must have skill set andknowledge to maintain. Usually lowmaintenance.

Not SupportedAnything developed outside thePPM Application may notautomatically upgrade. Forexample, data model changes inmajor releases may causeupgrade impacts.

3 MEDIUMMore complex customizations to supplement thestandard functionality without modifying core productor performing complex backend db updates.Examples: Complex portlets or reports, Custom DBobjects, Custom interfaces using supported APIs.

Customer/partner must have technical skillset and knowledge to maintain. Requiressignificantly more functional andperformance testing. May result in high costof ownership if custom solutions requirefrequent enhancements.

Not SupportedStandard APIs are supportedthrough upgrades, but customprograms are the customer’sresponsibility.

4 HIGH IMPACTChanges to core functionality and code.Examples: Changes to JSP pages, Custom code thatperforms non-API based data transactions, non-standard integrations.

Customer/partner must have technical skillset and knowledge to maintain. High levelof testing required for patches andupgrades. Higher risk of data corruption.May require re-application for every servicepack.

Not SupportedNot recommended. Shouldinvolve HP in making decisions tocustomize at this level.

Specific CEZcustomizations

Production environment

Server Integrations – detail picture

SA

PX

I

XMLimportutility

TimeSheets

PPM SAP

PPM Server Integrations in CEZ

Ope

nIn

terfa

ce

Org. Units

ResourceManagement

TimeManagement

CATS

HR module

XIIntegr.adapter

[PPM AS hostname]:8080/PPMBudgetWS ZPSV PSPPM PLNNKLDPROJ

ZPSV_PSPPM_CATS

Resources (Persons)

ZHRV_HRPPM_ORGJED

ZHRV_HRPPM_OSCIS04:00

04:00

03:30

03:30

JDBC

XML

Perlscript

kTMDataConversion.sh

SA

PX

I

WS SAP ProjectStatus, SAP ID

DemandService

Finance

WS Planned & ActualCosts

ProjectManagement

FinancialManagement

PS module

Project manager,CEZ Controlling

WS

Legenda:Customised

extensions toSAP R5

Non-standard/custom interface

to PPM/ECM

SAP, resp. XI,ECM

PPM 7.1, SP11

Note: arrow orientation does not display areal communication (hand-shaking), but justdata transfer direction

[PPM AS hostname]:8080/PPMBudgetWS/PPMBudget

PPMBudgetWS _ _

ZPSV_PSPPM_FINDPROJ

WS

PPM_PS [PPM AS hostname]:8080/PPM_PS/Services/PPM_PMService

WEB Services End Point

DemandManagement WS

DemandService

WS

[ECM AS hostname]:80/PD-ICT/services/PDICTStore

PPM

URL Links to ECMrepresenting individualdocuments/Folders

Local_exec WS

03:30

PD-ICT

[PPM AS hostname]:8080/PPM/services/PPMService

ICT Proposal: Request ID, Request nameICT Project: PM Email, Project ID, PM,Request ID, Project Name

SOAP

SOAP

Not automated(manual) integration

ECM

Filenet

Integrations - Overall picture

PPM SAPHR, CATs, PS

LDAP User authorisation

Time sheets

SMTP server(MS Exchange)

E-mail notificationsa eskalationsReports

Project budget& actuals

MS Project

Operational projectmanagement - uploads

Offline integration throughclipboard

Online integration/dataimport – one-directionalOnline integration/dataimport – bi-directional

People, org.units

ECM

Creation of URL links to ECMCreation of document structure in ECM

Wikipedia• Project and Portfolio Management

– is a term used by project managers and project management (PM) organizations, (or PMO's), to describemethods for analyzing and collectively managing a group of current or proposed projects based onnumerous key characteristics. The fundamental objective of PPM is to determine the optimal mix andsequencing of proposed projects to best achieve the organization's overall goals - typically expressed interms of hard economic measures, business strategy goals, or technical strategy goals.

– The key challenge to implementing an effective PPM process is typically securing the mandate to do so.Many organizations are culturally inured to an informal method of making project investment decisions,which can be compared to political processes observable in the U.S. legislature. However this approach tomaking project investment decisions has led many organizations to unsatisfactory results, and createddemand for a more methodical and transparent decision making process.

– Basic objective of PPM is to determine optimal mix and order of planned projects in order to achieveoverall strategic objectives of the organization – typically expressed by financial/commercial terms,business strategy objectives or technical strategy objectives.

– When implementing PPM we should respect all constraints imposed by management or external real-world factors (typically finance, available resources and time).

– Typical attributes we are analyzing in PPM processes for every project are following ones:• Total expected costs,

• Consumption of scared resources (either human or technical),

• Expected implementation times and schedule of investment,

• Expected nature, magnitude and timing of benefits to be realized,

• risks,

• and relationship or inter-dependencies with other projects in the portfolio.

• Project and Portfolio Management– is a term used by project managers and project management (PM) organizations, (or PMO's), to describe

methods for analyzing and collectively managing a group of current or proposed projects based onnumerous key characteristics. The fundamental objective of PPM is to determine the optimal mix andsequencing of proposed projects to best achieve the organization's overall goals - typically expressed interms of hard economic measures, business strategy goals, or technical strategy goals.

– The key challenge to implementing an effective PPM process is typically securing the mandate to do so.Many organizations are culturally inured to an informal method of making project investment decisions,which can be compared to political processes observable in the U.S. legislature. However this approach tomaking project investment decisions has led many organizations to unsatisfactory results, and createddemand for a more methodical and transparent decision making process.

– Basic objective of PPM is to determine optimal mix and order of planned projects in order to achieveoverall strategic objectives of the organization – typically expressed by financial/commercial terms,business strategy objectives or technical strategy objectives.

– When implementing PPM we should respect all constraints imposed by management or external real-world factors (typically finance, available resources and time).

– Typical attributes we are analyzing in PPM processes for every project are following ones:• Total expected costs,

• Consumption of scared resources (either human or technical),

• Expected implementation times and schedule of investment,

• Expected nature, magnitude and timing of benefits to be realized,

• risks,

• and relationship or inter-dependencies with other projects in the portfolio.

RM – most frequently met problems and theirsolutions

• Resource planning is being done separated fromthe time sheeting (Time management) –> do useone common system

• Lack of integration (automation) between RM, TM,FM and PRM –> again, go for integrated solution

• Lack of automation –> if culturally feasible, useevery available automation form

• Lack of senior management commitment –> getthem interested through coaching and stakeholdermanagement

• RM works either just bottom-up (time sheeting,short term task planning in PRM) or top-down(long term planning of available capacity, trainingsfor missing roles and skills, using different form ofstaffing), but not both together –> apply bothmethod simultaneously

• Do NOT do „over-engineering“ –> start simply andsequentially develop you own solution

• Just for IT/Operations - conflict between projectrelated activities and “normal operation”activities –> dedicate just part of the totaldisposable time and reserve some part (30percent) for operations

• Lack of online information for management –>do measurement, communicate and thenadequate decisions

• Lack of qualified managers –> nominate theright people into the right positions

• Unclear prioritization of planned activities(project tasks) –> do planning on proper leveland with proper work prioritization

• Theoretical guides and „best practices“standards as such do not help you –> learnfrom your own history (compare plannedvalues with actual and change adequately thesetting of supporting tool, but also yourprocesses)

• Internal “fight” for available resources –>establish the role of dedicated resourcemanager, ability to do external staffing etc.

• Requests for work are coming in differentforms and systems (personally, Email, PPMtools, Service desk tool) –> overall toolconsolidation into one, user friendly tool withclear prioritization, clear responsibilities andclear way of solving conflicts

• Resource planning is being done separated fromthe time sheeting (Time management) –> do useone common system

• Lack of integration (automation) between RM, TM,FM and PRM –> again, go for integrated solution

• Lack of automation –> if culturally feasible, useevery available automation form

• Lack of senior management commitment –> getthem interested through coaching and stakeholdermanagement

• RM works either just bottom-up (time sheeting,short term task planning in PRM) or top-down(long term planning of available capacity, trainingsfor missing roles and skills, using different form ofstaffing), but not both together –> apply bothmethod simultaneously

• Do NOT do „over-engineering“ –> start simply andsequentially develop you own solution

• Just for IT/Operations - conflict between projectrelated activities and “normal operation”activities –> dedicate just part of the totaldisposable time and reserve some part (30percent) for operations

• Lack of online information for management –>do measurement, communicate and thenadequate decisions

• Lack of qualified managers –> nominate theright people into the right positions

• Unclear prioritization of planned activities(project tasks) –> do planning on proper leveland with proper work prioritization

• Theoretical guides and „best practices“standards as such do not help you –> learnfrom your own history (compare plannedvalues with actual and change adequately thesetting of supporting tool, but also yourprocesses)

• Internal “fight” for available resources –>establish the role of dedicated resourcemanager, ability to do external staffing etc.

• Requests for work are coming in differentforms and systems (personally, Email, PPMtools, Service desk tool) –> overall toolconsolidation into one, user friendly tool withclear prioritization, clear responsibilities andclear way of solving conflicts

TM – most frequently met problems and theirsolutions

• People (resources) are overloaded –>improve your RM process and do NOToverload your resources more than 20percent more of the disposable time, doprioritization of work and delegation ofauthorities

• Resources are overloaded by operationsand have no time to work onprojects/conceptual work on development–> dedicate them certain percentage oftime in RM for these non-project relatedactivities

• The process of time reporting is annoyingand perceived as bureaucratic, tool for TMis not user friendly, resources spend everyweek big part of their time on reporting –>to choose proper time sheet granularity(time sheet policy) and the right/userfriendly TM tool

• Resources have tendency to report moreeffort than planned originally –> consistentcheck of PM’s

• Not enough (underestimated) plannedresources effort (this typically appears whenwe want to improve business case) –>comparison of planned and reported hours,learning from the history

• PM’s or architects planning the estimatedeffort have tendency to plan more thannecessary (as opposed to the previous casethis appears when there is no problem withmoney – typically business “strategic”projects) – “for sure approach” –> –>comparison of planned and reported hours,learning from the history

• People are pretty often disturbed by ad-hocdemand, pressure to work in “time-multiplex” on several projects in parallel –>better planning, respecting RM processpolicies, the smallest time switching periodis half a day

• People are not anyhow evaluated (andawarded) according their time sheets –>consider to establish a variable part of theirsalary depending on their performance,establish a link between TM/performancemanagement reporting and HR hiring

• People (resources) are overloaded –>improve your RM process and do NOToverload your resources more than 20percent more of the disposable time, doprioritization of work and delegation ofauthorities

• Resources are overloaded by operationsand have no time to work onprojects/conceptual work on development–> dedicate them certain percentage oftime in RM for these non-project relatedactivities

• The process of time reporting is annoyingand perceived as bureaucratic, tool for TMis not user friendly, resources spend everyweek big part of their time on reporting –>to choose proper time sheet granularity(time sheet policy) and the right/userfriendly TM tool

• Resources have tendency to report moreeffort than planned originally –> consistentcheck of PM’s

• Not enough (underestimated) plannedresources effort (this typically appears whenwe want to improve business case) –>comparison of planned and reported hours,learning from the history

• PM’s or architects planning the estimatedeffort have tendency to plan more thannecessary (as opposed to the previous casethis appears when there is no problem withmoney – typically business “strategic”projects) – “for sure approach” –> –>comparison of planned and reported hours,learning from the history

• People are pretty often disturbed by ad-hocdemand, pressure to work in “time-multiplex” on several projects in parallel –>better planning, respecting RM processpolicies, the smallest time switching periodis half a day

• People are not anyhow evaluated (andawarded) according their time sheets –>consider to establish a variable part of theirsalary depending on their performance,establish a link between TM/performancemanagement reporting and HR hiring

FM – most frequently met problems and theirsolutions

• Finding of „sponsor“ –> to explain the differencebetween corporate statutory accounting andproactive FM

• PM gets financial information too late (typicallywith offset of 2-3 months) –> utilize integrationwith ERP systems, automaticcalculations/indications of disproportion betweenplanned and actual costs, scope changemanagement on project

• „permanent cost cutting approach“ –> replace itby method “what for what” (added value/benefitsvs. costs)

• Organization works by method of “traditional”/ex-post accounting, no active approach –> replace itby pro-active FM with careful planning, cash flowcontrol, creating and validating business cases,running financial approvals etc.

• There is a huge percentage of project activitiesbeing done financially not effectively, company ispotentially losing money –> establish clearmeasurement and evaluations for both internalemployees and external companies, do properportfolio management/PFM

• Candidates for future projects are based just onpromises or with very optimistic estimates ofcosts which later prove unrealistic –> makeconsistently evaluation of project opportunitiesthrough business cases

• Investments done in hurry under notadvantageous conditions –> better cooperationwith partner and suppliers (Suppliermanagement), very careful proactive planning

• In some cases the change in the currentaccounting/procurement/controlling practices}e.g. change of financial granularity) needs to bedone –> always involve CFO level for this

• Finding of „sponsor“ –> to explain the differencebetween corporate statutory accounting andproactive FM

• PM gets financial information too late (typicallywith offset of 2-3 months) –> utilize integrationwith ERP systems, automaticcalculations/indications of disproportion betweenplanned and actual costs, scope changemanagement on project

• „permanent cost cutting approach“ –> replace itby method “what for what” (added value/benefitsvs. costs)

• Organization works by method of “traditional”/ex-post accounting, no active approach –> replace itby pro-active FM with careful planning, cash flowcontrol, creating and validating business cases,running financial approvals etc.

• There is a huge percentage of project activitiesbeing done financially not effectively, company ispotentially losing money –> establish clearmeasurement and evaluations for both internalemployees and external companies, do properportfolio management/PFM

• Candidates for future projects are based just onpromises or with very optimistic estimates ofcosts which later prove unrealistic –> makeconsistently evaluation of project opportunitiesthrough business cases

• Investments done in hurry under notadvantageous conditions –> better cooperationwith partner and suppliers (Suppliermanagement), very careful proactive planning

• In some cases the change in the currentaccounting/procurement/controlling practices}e.g. change of financial granularity) needs to bedone –> always involve CFO level for this

DM – most frequently met problems and theirsolutions

• There is no easy and consistent methodhow to ask for new/changed services orprojects from the business side –> establishunique, clear and simple DM process withclear procedures, selected tool and inputchannels

• There is no regular communicationbetween business and IT/operations/PMO –> set up regular meetings (e.g. for service orproject reviews) and agree/precise the wayof handling business requirements

• IT claims that understands the business andbusiness claims the opposite –> set thearrangement above

• It’s not clear way of making prioritization,analysis/evaluation and approval ofrequirements (incl. changes on projects) –>use PPM methods/processes and alwaysweigh added value of the new requirementswith respect to the business objectives

• Responses from IT/Operations/PMO areeither slow or inadequate –> establishcommon process framework beingresponsible for handling this(Demand/Supply approach)

• There is no reserve budget for newrequirements –> better prioritization,selection of the most important things,orientation on added value bringingprojects or activities, pressure on 3rd partysuppliers/vendors, careful „buy-develop“decisions

• There is no easy and consistent methodhow to ask for new/changed services orprojects from the business side –> establishunique, clear and simple DM process withclear procedures, selected tool and inputchannels

• There is no regular communicationbetween business and IT/operations/PMO –> set up regular meetings (e.g. for service orproject reviews) and agree/precise the wayof handling business requirements

• IT claims that understands the business andbusiness claims the opposite –> set thearrangement above

• It’s not clear way of making prioritization,analysis/evaluation and approval ofrequirements (incl. changes on projects) –>use PPM methods/processes and alwaysweigh added value of the new requirementswith respect to the business objectives

• Responses from IT/Operations/PMO areeither slow or inadequate –> establishcommon process framework beingresponsible for handling this(Demand/Supply approach)

• There is no reserve budget for newrequirements –> better prioritization,selection of the most important things,orientation on added value bringingprojects or activities, pressure on 3rd partysuppliers/vendors, careful „buy-develop“decisions

PRM – most frequently met problems and theirsolutions

• Not clear scope definition and scopemanagement of the project –> cleardefinition of deliverables from the earlybeginning and tracking this; managingproject by the right way according agreedPRM procedure

• Insufficient project planning and tracking(WBS, resources, costs) –> to do it properlyaccording approved and agreed PRMmethodology

• There are not clearcompetencies/responsibilities –> to definePRM procedures, incl. setting up oforganizational structures }e.g. SteeringCommittee) and process roles on project

• Information about finance are availableeither late or in insufficient level ofgranularity –> to establish FM procedures

• There are not properly evaluated potentialproject risks –> follow PRM procedure (RiskLog), establish a control of “four eyes” e.g.by PMO

• Lack of qualified resources –> to establishRM process and flexible staffing (e.g. insourcing, outsourcing etc)

• Insufficient motivation of team members –>to establish incentive schemas

• Lack of competencies/skills of either PM orteam members –> proper training, carefulselection of PM’s etc.

• And about MILION of other issues !!!

• Not clear scope definition and scopemanagement of the project –> cleardefinition of deliverables from the earlybeginning and tracking this; managingproject by the right way according agreedPRM procedure

• Insufficient project planning and tracking(WBS, resources, costs) –> to do it properlyaccording approved and agreed PRMmethodology

• There are not clearcompetencies/responsibilities –> to definePRM procedures, incl. setting up oforganizational structures }e.g. SteeringCommittee) and process roles on project

• Information about finance are availableeither late or in insufficient level ofgranularity –> to establish FM procedures

• There are not properly evaluated potentialproject risks –> follow PRM procedure (RiskLog), establish a control of “four eyes” e.g.by PMO

• Lack of qualified resources –> to establishRM process and flexible staffing (e.g. insourcing, outsourcing etc)

• Insufficient motivation of team members –>to establish incentive schemas

• Lack of competencies/skills of either PM orteam members –> proper training, carefulselection of PM’s etc.

• And about MILION of other issues !!!

PGM – most frequently met problems and theirsolutions

• Customers have problem to distinguish betweenprojects and programmes –> to establish companyrelevant definition and purpose of PGM within thecompany and to define adequate processroles/authorities and competencies

• There is a potential conflict between Programmemanager and project manager regarding

– the budget for project

– Time schedule

– Solving of inter-projects issues

– Who is responsible for projects –> see above

• Time period of programmes differ usually from projects(typically 2-3 or even more years). This can bring“burning out” –> establish some system of qualitycontrol (such as CSDI in ITIL or Six Sigma, TQM etc.)

• Conflicts between different programme stakeholders –>try to consolidate company business strategy; establishStakeholder management

• Funding programmes since this is supposed tobe done for period longer than fiscal/financialyear –> annual planning with forecasting for 2-3years, proper project/programmes prioritization

• Managing programme team members is noteasy – switching between individual projectswithin Programme, part time job, multitasking –> identify key stakeholders and try to keep themotivated.

• Fight for resources for projects belonging to the sameprogramme –>

– to do proper evaluation of projects and adequateprioritization

– To establish full portfolio management coverage

• Too many projects are started in the same timeresulting in multi-tasking for resources causingat the end of day very poor quality –> do not beover-ambitious; apply RM practices with respectto existing constraints

• Missing “PGM best practices” (while PRM isarea quite good understood and described witha lot of BP), PGM is different, perhaps due to thePGM schizophrenia – see Wikipedia definition ->start with PRM and continuously try toformulate some key strategic initiatives and toalign them to corresponding programmes later

• Programmes are sometimes defined quitevaguely – how to transform programmes intoparticular projects? –> work with the businessstrategy; use properly project business cases and properevaluation of their value vs. risks and costs

• There are doubts about programmes whetherthey really bring some value after years –>continually make evaluations, celebrate quickwins and partial delivery, discover “low hangingfruits” first

• Customers have problem to distinguish betweenprojects and programmes –> to establish companyrelevant definition and purpose of PGM within thecompany and to define adequate processroles/authorities and competencies

• There is a potential conflict between Programmemanager and project manager regarding

– the budget for project

– Time schedule

– Solving of inter-projects issues

– Who is responsible for projects –> see above

• Time period of programmes differ usually from projects(typically 2-3 or even more years). This can bring“burning out” –> establish some system of qualitycontrol (such as CSDI in ITIL or Six Sigma, TQM etc.)

• Conflicts between different programme stakeholders –>try to consolidate company business strategy; establishStakeholder management

• Funding programmes since this is supposed tobe done for period longer than fiscal/financialyear –> annual planning with forecasting for 2-3years, proper project/programmes prioritization

• Managing programme team members is noteasy – switching between individual projectswithin Programme, part time job, multitasking –> identify key stakeholders and try to keep themotivated.

• Fight for resources for projects belonging to the sameprogramme –>

– to do proper evaluation of projects and adequateprioritization

– To establish full portfolio management coverage

• Too many projects are started in the same timeresulting in multi-tasking for resources causingat the end of day very poor quality –> do not beover-ambitious; apply RM practices with respectto existing constraints

• Missing “PGM best practices” (while PRM isarea quite good understood and described witha lot of BP), PGM is different, perhaps due to thePGM schizophrenia – see Wikipedia definition ->start with PRM and continuously try toformulate some key strategic initiatives and toalign them to corresponding programmes later

• Programmes are sometimes defined quitevaguely – how to transform programmes intoparticular projects? –> work with the businessstrategy; use properly project business cases and properevaluation of their value vs. risks and costs

• There are doubts about programmes whetherthey really bring some value after years –>continually make evaluations, celebrate quickwins and partial delivery, discover “low hangingfruits” first

PFM – most frequently met problems and theirsolutions

• There is a communication barrier betweenIT/Operations/PMO and individual businessunits –> to establish regular meetings,gaining a sponsor on business side, to justifyeverything by using businesslanguage/objectives and using objectivefinancial criteria

• Business makes decisions without properdiscussing with IT/Operations/PMO aboutpossible initiatives –> IT/Operations/PMOmust offer new, advanced, innovative andalternative solutions how to enablebusiness growth, establishing of commonteams

• Portfolio management is being rejected ascertain kind of bureaucracy –> necessary toexplain meaning and long-term value

• In organization is a resistance againstobjective financial methods and indicators(ROI, NPV, IRR, EVA, IT BSC) –> explaining,training, incentives

• There are some „political“ influences whichprevail over objective evaluation –> ???,Stakeholder management, improvecommunication, try to liaison with thebusiness etc.

• There is no backward project „review“focusing on real, actual project benefits –>to compare implemented projects, theiractual costs and consumed resources andbrought benefits, based on this to improvePPM processes/procedures

• There is missing PFM tool (eventually thehighest level of technology is Excel) –>should not be bad in general, but for mostof cases we need to properly plan portfoliofrom different aspects – business value,risks, cost expected, resources required,time required and we need some modelingtool for that. Use proper specific PFM tool.

• There is a communication barrier betweenIT/Operations/PMO and individual businessunits –> to establish regular meetings,gaining a sponsor on business side, to justifyeverything by using businesslanguage/objectives and using objectivefinancial criteria

• Business makes decisions without properdiscussing with IT/Operations/PMO aboutpossible initiatives –> IT/Operations/PMOmust offer new, advanced, innovative andalternative solutions how to enablebusiness growth, establishing of commonteams

• Portfolio management is being rejected ascertain kind of bureaucracy –> necessary toexplain meaning and long-term value

• In organization is a resistance againstobjective financial methods and indicators(ROI, NPV, IRR, EVA, IT BSC) –> explaining,training, incentives

• There are some „political“ influences whichprevail over objective evaluation –> ???,Stakeholder management, improvecommunication, try to liaison with thebusiness etc.

• There is no backward project „review“focusing on real, actual project benefits –>to compare implemented projects, theiractual costs and consumed resources andbrought benefits, based on this to improvePPM processes/procedures

• There is missing PFM tool (eventually thehighest level of technology is Excel) –>should not be bad in general, but for mostof cases we need to properly plan portfoliofrom different aspects – business value,risks, cost expected, resources required,time required and we need some modelingtool for that. Use proper specific PFM tool.

Why HP?

– Experience in over 1000 successfulimplementation/transformation projects.

– Over 80 education centers worldwide that are authorizedITIL examination centers and Experience in training over100,000 IT professionals in ITIL/ITSM and HP Software.

– ITIL/ITSM education solutions covering v2 & v3 ITILcertifications, HP software, project & portfolio managementand IT governance.

People– 6 Fellows and 12 Members of the Institute of Service

Management, 6 ITIL® Luminaries.

– More than 5,000 ITIL certified IT service professionals in over170 countries.

– ITIL certified business critical consultants.

– Over 15 years of IT experience, specializing in ITSM levelsupport.

Process

Experience, Breadth and Depth

– Experience in over 1000 successfulimplementation/transformation projects.

– Over 80 education centers worldwide that are authorizedITIL examination centers and Experience in training over100,000 IT professionals in ITIL/ITSM and HP Software.

– ITIL/ITSM education solutions covering v2 & v3 ITILcertifications, HP software, project & portfolio managementand IT governance.

Technology

– 6 Fellows and 12 Members of the Institute of ServiceManagement, 6 ITIL® Luminaries.

– More than 5,000 ITIL certified IT service professionals in over170 countries.

– ITIL certified business critical consultants.

– Over 15 years of IT experience, specializing in ITSM levelsupport.

– Current contributing authors of ITIL V3/2011:• Service Strategy, Service Operations, Service Transition books• ITIL glossary• Process model development team

– Involvement with development of ISO/IEC 20000 and otherinternational standards, including ITIL v2.

– Membership/board of directors, founders of itSMF chaptersworldwide.

Industry– The global leader in service management and time to value

for over 4000 customers

– Unparalleled breath and depth of management capabilitiesspanning, strategy, applications and operations

– Integrated Lifecycle solutions that deliver collaboration,quality and cost effective IT service management

1. Establish a sense of urgency

2. Create a guiding coalition

3. Develop a vision and strategy

4. Communicate the change vision

5. Empower broad-based action

6. Generate short-term wins

7. Consolidate gains and producemore change

8. Anchor the new approaches inthe culture

1. Workforce is too complacent

2. Absence of change agents

3. Don’t know what tocommunicate

4. Creating awareness of thechange

5. Mitigating obstacles for the newvision

6. Gaining trust and acceptancequickly

7. Declaring victory too soon

8. Maintaining changes firmly inthe corporate culture

Challenges Solution a la Kotter

8 steps to leading change – at the group level (John Kotter)

Change Management Concepts

62 14 October 2011

1. Establish a sense of urgency

2. Create a guiding coalition

3. Develop a vision and strategy

4. Communicate the change vision

5. Empower broad-based action

6. Generate short-term wins

7. Consolidate gains and producemore change

8. Anchor the new approaches inthe culture

1. Workforce is too complacent

2. Absence of change agents

3. Don’t know what tocommunicate

4. Creating awareness of thechange

5. Mitigating obstacles for the newvision

6. Gaining trust and acceptancequickly

7. Declaring victory too soon

8. Maintaining changes firmly inthe corporate culture

*Source: John Kotter, Leading Change, Harvard Business School Press, 1996.

ABC – Introduction

• Instrument being used by Dutchchapter of itSMF, Gaming Worksand EXIN

• The basic objective is to influencenatural people’s behavior ondesired behavior demandedby company business needs

• Company culture is primarilyinfluenced by top management,long-term concern

– Personal attitude isdependent on people natureand national/religion habits,but can be influenced byperformance measurement andevaluation, motivation; short-term concern

– Acronym ABC stand for• Attitude• Behavior• Culture

• Instrument being used by Dutchchapter of itSMF, Gaming Worksand EXIN

• The basic objective is to influencenatural people’s behavior ondesired behavior demandedby company business needs

• Company culture is primarilyinfluenced by top management,long-term concern

– Personal attitude isdependent on people natureand national/religion habits,but can be influenced byperformance measurement andevaluation, motivation; short-term concern

– Acronym ABC stand for• Attitude• Behavior• Culture

ABC are 3 main factors, but also potential issues you need to get undercontrol.

If you ignore this, you can’t speak about any “best practices”, but ratherabout „worst practices“ and none standard can help you!

Software Development Methodology

Is ITIL just a theory or viable pragmatic approach? A ... · PDF fileIs ITIL just a theory or...

Documents

Transcript of Is ITIL just a theory or viable pragmatic approach? A ... · PDF fileIs ITIL just a theory or...