ITANA Meeting Minutes - March 17, 2011
---------------
Attending
Jim Phelps, University of Wisconsin-Madison (chair)
Jim Behm, University of Michigan
Steven Carmody, Brown University
Erik Dahlquist, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Scott Fullerton, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Matt Kolb, Michigan State University
Chris Siegel, University of Michigan
Karen Hanson, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Eric Lundberg, University of Washington
Steve Olshansky, Internet2
Kieth Hazelton, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Paul Hobson, University of British Columbia
Tony Chang, University of Washington
Gary Prohaska, University of Washington
Keith 
, University of Washington
Jim Leous, Pennsylvania State
Cindy Wells, University of Michigan
Ann West, Internet2
Cheryl White, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Ann Kitalong-Will, Internet2 (scribe)
---------------
Action Items
(AI) - All - if you are using capability maps, or thinking of developing some for your organization, keep the list/Jim informed for future topics on the calls.
---------------
University of Washington's Use of Capability Maps (Tony, U of Washington)
In response to Jim's question about use of capability maps. UWashington's was started about a year ago.
Business capabilities derived in business domain of enterprise architecture. wanted to explore beginning about a year ago using Forrester articles (see last page of handout); also includes a link to the book they read as a study group. The capability maps they are using are being used in a pilot sense.
Slide 2: Business and IT alignment
Communicates why we're going down the path of Business architecture and why it's at the forefront of what we want to deliver to the university.
Slide 3: Business Architecture Framework
Business architecture is entered around capability maps, but there is a creation process, quality assurance and there are certain people who are responsible and accountabile for these maps to keep them up-to-date and used successfully in their concept of business architecture.
Slide 4: Breakdown of the types of maps that were important to create and understand the capabilities.
- Enterprise Capability Map - highest level. Includes value proposition and audience.
- Domain map (finance, students, HR) - the business unit.
- Detailed matrix - data that helps IT align communication with business, helps to make IT decisions with business partners
- Interaction - identifies integration points between domains.
Next slides are examples of the values of these capability maps
Slide 5: Enterprise Capability Map
What's most powerful about using the capability maps is that they are driven by business. Shared common language we're starting to build among IT team members. Beginning to understand the business domain in greater depth, helps to understand the context and communication between IT and the different units.
"Learning" is highlighted - being used as the example throughout the presentation
(AI) - Jim - will explore having Forrester doing a related presentation to ITANA.
Important point about capabilities: historically at University of Washington IT, a lot of focus has been on the processes of IT (how business does its work), versus what the business does. At this level, we need to focus on the capability that business does rather than the actual process. Like a "why" business does something - e.g. not how admissions is done, but why we have this capability called "admissions."
Slide 6: Learning Capability Map.
"Admit" highlighted as an example. As a communication tool, these artifacts help us hone in on the important points of the conversation.
Slide 7: Detail matrix - The level where a lot of work gets done, includes metrics column.
"Admit" used as an example.
- We proposed this as a way we want to work with our customers, to help us understand them better (their goals, their language). What roles are needed to support the process? Supporting HR list went straight into our roles creation.
- IT needs to maintain those processes. What systems are we trying to integrate here?
- Questions to consider in the process: Who will be a stakeholder? What metrics will you impact?
- Operational metrics are most powerful: these are the 2 metrics that will most help the University; both represent University of Washington goals (greener, budget in terms of using time/people efficiently)
- Organization column - helps us understand our customers (business units) better.
This slide provides a quick scan of the scope of the project. As a tool for communication, this helps to get us on the same page and speaking the same language as the business partner.
Slide 8 - Test exercises, capability interaction matrixes.
People exploring business capability maps on how to manage the interactions between groups. Note that this slide has not been fleshed out fully, and needs more to be able to get a stronger understanding of the value proposition.
Slide 9 - Supporting capability maps.
These are the things we need to keep capability maps supported from a business architecture perspective, make sure the business capability maps are valued, high quality, and used in an effective way with our business partners.
Slide 10: People/Roles
It takes a team to keep this area sustainable - leadership, program managers, business managers, architects.
Slide 11 - Books & Articles Information
Open Discussion:
Points to consider:
- These maps seem to be something that could be done in small teams to test out, use to evaluate vendors, etc. Provides a set of requirements that can inform and add value to projects.
- University of Washington is testing the concept by applying it to some large and small projects, to better define where they need to take the maps as they develop them. The most powerful aspect is its use as a communications tool with business partners.
- Follow-up report-out would be interesting to include on a future call, possibly in about 6 months.
- Consistency is key: use same format across different business domains.
- Questions: Do businesses already use this tool? Shouldn't we be using or adapting capability maps? How do you place consistency across business domains so you can make real enterprise strategic decisions across the organization?
- Regarding Slide 7: U of Washington is taking the capability maps and connecting different capabilities to the roles matrix, along with application diagrams and systems connecting back to capability maps. Operational metrics help to support the work by showing it helps to improve operations.
- Regarding Slide 6: Similar to Forrester conference discussion in regards to learning capability maps, understanding capabilities can help to make funding/budgeting decisions; IT decisions driven by business, but led to the discussion between the two groups (IT, business). ("heat maps" focus on "hot" projects - those of strategic importance)
- One area that will continue to be a challenge is to introduce the capability maps to the business side, and finding a working language to create cross-functional synergy between the groups; it's been viewed that IT should own the maps and fill them out for each project. The hope is to move the maps to the next level by integrating them more with the business side and strategic planning.
(AI) - All - if you are using capability maps, or thinking of developing some for your organization, keep the list/Jim informed for future topics on the calls.
---------------
Next Call: Thursday, March 31, 2011
2:00 p.m. (ET) / 1:00 p.m. (CT) / noon (MT) / 11:00 a.m. (PT)
Overview
Content Tools