15
Mar 16

Introducing the New Organizational Model

New Organizational Model DiagramThe above diagram is my new organizational model which I have referred to in several previous postings. I developed this after several years of reflection and study starting with my MBA work in 2001. I was especially inspired by my Ph.D. work in developing a new model of public leadership and, later, on my study of the lean startup movement.

The new organization is designed to be agile in every aspect from the work products, leadership, and workforce. The organization is also transparent and designed for maximum information flow. Finally, the mission, vision, and strategy is baked into all that the organization does and drives the organization forward.

I will expand upon various components in future postings, but, for now, I want to give an overview of the complete model.

Starting with the upper box with the five chief officers: A common theme in organizational studies is the danger of silos and fiefdoms. There are also the problems with forming a senior leadership team that works together for the good of the entire organization. Therefore, in the new organization, there are only five chief officers that form the senior leadership team.

  • The Chief Executive Officer (CEO) – chairs the senior leadership team and is responsible for keeping the organization aligned with the mission and vision by keeping the strategy engine working effectively.
  • The Chief Alliance Officer (CAO) – combines the traditional functions of the chief human resources officer and chief information officer. Responsible for managing the organizational talent and the organizational APIs platform.
  • The Chief Knowledge Officer (CKO) – responsible for managing the knowledge and learning workflow of the organization. Also oversees the training and development of the organization’s talent.
  • The Chief Brand Officer (CBO) – responsible for overseeing the organization’s brand: internally and externally. Helps the CEO manage the public-facing side of the organization’s mission and vision.
  • The Chief P4 Officer (CPO) – Oversees the portfolios, programs, projects, and processes of the organization’s Business Engine.

In the middle of the model is the “Business Engine.” The Business Engine is where the work is done by the organization. Instead of a factory floor with fixed production lines, the Business Engine is a makerspace with both a physical presence and virtual presence. Work is performed by a network of project teams that are loosely organized into portfolios and programs. There are few fixed processes, and these processes will be heavily-automated using artificial technology systems using blockchain technologies and deep learning algorithms. The teams will use agile project management, human-centered design, and adaptive case management to manage the work.

Surrounding the Business Engine are four critical components. The most important component, of course, is the “Talent” box with the four types of employees. These types are based on the Alliance model of employer-employee agreements. At the bottom is the Organizational APIs Platform in which the core APIs that run the business infrastructure are available for the talent and teams to build their personalized tools and apps upon. Surrounding the Business Engine on both sides are open data streams that provide the performance metrics of the organization and allows for easy knowledge-sharing and collaboration in the organization. Embedded in the Business Engine are strategy information radiators (Ambient Strategy) that provide constantly-updated information on how well the organization is fulfilling the mission, vision, and strategic goals.

Pulling the organization forward is the “Strategy Engine.” On top of the Strategy Engine is the “Mission and Vision” alignment compass which helps the align all of the organization’s activities toward the mission, vision, and strategic goals. What powers the planning process for the Strategy Engine are the twin concepts of organizational agility and organizational health.

There is a lot of this model that is borrowed and a lot that is new. I don’t believe there is an organization that follows this model but, I believe many organizations could benefit from adopting parts of the model. I look forward to expanding upon the various parts of the new organizational model. I welcome your comments, criticisms, and suggestions.

20
Mar 15

Innovating Policy Making with Project Management and Data Science

Last Friday, I wrote about 6 Six Sig’s posting on what policy making can learn from project management. I had similar thoughts when I created Lean Scope Project Management. I even used a proposed Veterans Administration program to demonstrate how project management can be used to implement a policy.

Along the same lines, I am preparing a paper and presentation for the 2015 University of Maryland Project Management Symposium (June 8-9, 2015). I will discuss how to use data science techniques and process mining to create better project management measures. The idea is to establish more advanced and robust project intelligence techniques. I recently spoke about my ideas in an interview with John Hansen in his blog, All About Requirements (English version | Dutch version).

What I am seeing is that the same ideas for creating project intelligence measures could also inform the new field of policy informatics. I have begun some work in this are with my creation of Agile Predictive Policy Analysis (APPA).

I am looking forward to how much synergy arises from combining policy making, data science, and project management.

29
May 14

Video Briefing on Lean Scope Project Management

Click on the picture below to view the video (opens in a new window). I welcome your comments and suggestions. Thank you,
Bill Brantley

Video Intro

27
May 14

Preview of Lean Scope Project Management - Scope Management and Stakeholder Management

I will present my Lean Scope Project Management methodology on Wednesday to the Project Management Institute’s Government Community of Practice. On Thursday, I will release a YouTube video explaining Lean Scope Project Management. I look forward to the comments of project management practitioners and human-centered design practitioners.

The origin story of Lean Scope Project Management (LSPM) came about when I took a two-day course in human-centered design (HCD). I have to admit that I was initially skeptical of design as it did not seem to have the detailed methodology that project management or business analysis has through their respective published bodies of knowledge. Thanks to the class by trainers from the LUMA Institute, I learned that there is a method to design that is just as methodical as project management. In fact, it seemed that HCD could complement project management in two vital areas.

The first area is creating a project scope. Bigelow (2012) calls scope the “fuzzy constraint” of the triple constraint. He argues that defining scope has always been problematic for project managers because of the multiple dimensions of scope (both product and project). Burek (2006) advocates using “joint application development” (JAD) to create a complete scope statement that relies on extensive stakeholder engagement. I agree with Burek but believe that HCD is a better method than JAD for dealing with the fuzzy constraint.

Stakeholder engagement is the second area in which HCD excels. There are several methods to discover stakeholders and to engage them in the design process. That is why LSPM uses HCD in the Design Sprint and Prototype Sprints phases. The design methods help to identify stakeholders, involve them in the project scope planning process, and encourages buy-in for the project outcome. HCD is especially helpful in highly-innovative projects where the solution may be clearly-known,but the methods for creating the solution are not.

In my next posting, I will have a link to the YouTube briefing on LSPM. I hope you view the briefing, and I look forward to your comments.