I read a little article then went over to the OPM website to read it for myself. OPM has a new strategic plan out and it is interesting. We designed the goals and strategies contained within this plan to help other Federal agencies achieve their missions and produce superior results. The strategic goals are presented in an order that follows the life cycle of a Federal employee. The "Hire the Best" strategic goal concentrates on improving the Federal hiring process. OPM’s "Respect the Workforce" strategic goal focuses on employee retention through training and work-life initiatives. The "Expect the Best" strategic goal aims to provide the necessary tools and resources for employees to engage and perform at the highest levels while holding them accountable. Finally, the "Honor Service" strategic goal acknowledges the exemplary service of Federal employees through well-designed compensation and retirement benefits.
Overall, I don't think there are any surprises here, but I must confess a little disappointment with one area. The "Expect the Best" has this description:Ensure the Federal workforce and its leaders are fully accountable, fairly appraised, and have the tools, systems, and resources to perform at the highest levels to achieve superior results
The strategies seem OK, but the Indicators miss the mark in my opinion. When we consider that managers are going to focus on hitting the indicators so that they can claim green on the inevitable scorecard, I would have thought some more specific indicators would be developed.
I think I have written before of my affinity for the Business Analyst Body of Knowledge (BABOK). Part of the reason I appreciate the work so much is because of the thoroughness by which is prescribes process. Consider this table from Chapter 2, the Enterprise Analysis section:
In order to entertain the notion of performing an Enterprise Analysis you must already have everything on the left side. The work of an Enterprise Analysis delivers everything on the right side. Last week I asked for help in what the deliverables should be in a thorough Business Process Re-engineering Control Account, well, I think my starting point is going to be the inputs and outputs for the "Creating and Maintaining a Business Architecture".
I know this may surprise people, but I don't know everything. I'll give you a second to recover from that idea. I actually have a question that I hope my friends can help me with. My question is, If I am performing Business Process Re-engineering work, how do we know we are done, and how do we know if we have done a good job?Essentially what I'm looking for are the artifacts of a thorough BPR and the measures used to verify that the work has been effective. I realize that this area is generally very squishy, but any insight into it is valuable. So please let me know. The area I'm focusing on is the BPR that occurrs before the requirements phase of a systems project. To paraphrase a former professor of mine, If you automate a bad business process, all you get is a faster bad business process. As such I'm focused on defining and describing the work that will make the business process better before engaging a significant development project.
Google is very patiently growing their new social media outlet, Buzz. I am now convinced that it will compete head to head with Facebook. They just got me to create my Google Profile, and I didn't even realize it was related to Buzz until afterwards. It was simple to link the profile to this blog, as well as my LinkedIn profile and my GovLoop profile. And just like that, it was finished. I also connected it with my Gmail account. Yes, I have probably had my Hotmail since 1996, but all things must come to an end and I am certain that by the end of this year I will be using my Gmail as my primary personal email account. So just keep that in mind. Anyway, busy times for me, I'm spending all day writing a myriad of different things. More news on this later when I have something to share.
I've been thinking about something in recent weeks. I've been thinking about how many Project Management classes I've been to with an instructor who says something like, "I'm teaching you the PMBOK, but the PMBOK isn't how you do things in the real world." Why is that? Why is it that we glorify the PMBOK as the PM bible, but isolate it as a theoretical exercise instead of a meaningful text to help us in day-to-day activities? If the practical value of the PMBOK is that low, why is it valued as the standard for disciplined Project Management practices? Or, conversely, if it is the standard for disciplined PM practices, why do people regard it as a theoretical text with limited real world applications? You can't have it both ways. I have been thinking that the failing of the PMBOK is in how to operationalize the practices it prescribes. Let me take a moment to describe what I mean. Project Management is like writing code, programming. You can read all the books in the world about how to program in Visual Basic, but they won't mean anything until you actually sit down and develop your first Hello World. Similarly, the PMBOK is like a book on programming in VB. It will give you the tools to do the job, but it is the application of that knowledge that brings the experience, and that is where the difference lies. The PMBOK by itself can create a dangerous Project Manager. You will have the tools to perform the work, but lack the experience of applying the tools. It is only through both a careful understanding of the processes AND the experience of applying those processes that a Project Manager has an opportunity to be successful.
Many people in the government IT sector are aware of the Federal IT Dashboard. What you may not be aware of is the follow-on effort known as TechStat. I was invited to a recent TechStat meeting in which an investment that I have been a stakeholder on was reviewed. This particular investment has had a troubled history. But in its defense, it is a monumental project. It involves 5 different offices and will retire a legacy (mainframe) system. The number of moving parts is astronomical. This has given rise to a large number of fairly serious risks. Some of those risks have been avoided or mitigated, but some of them have been realized. Anyway, this project was reported to the Federal IT Dashboard like all major investments. But this one stuck out like a sore thumb. It was re-baselined twice during fiscal year 2009. I think it is acceptable that if you re-baseline a project more than once, you should expect a higher degree of review and the CIO, Program and Project Managers certainly got it on this on. I was surprised by Mr. Vivek Kundra. He asked very direct questions himself and clearly had an area of expertise that he was comfortable reviewing. My recommendation if you are ever required to participate in one of these TechStat reviews is that you be very prepared to respond to the PMBOK knowledge areas in detail. Mr. Kundra will hammer you on those areas. His staff was very knowedgeable about the connections to other related systems and the history concerning the budget and funding of the project. In terms of preparation, do not try to develop a deck and think that you are going to be able to run through your show. Instead focus on the areas that you anticipate questions, develop a slide or two that will help you to answer that question. Because you will not be able to anticipate the order of the questions you must have an index to the content that you have prepared and be ready to jump around. TechStat was potentially useful to the 15 or 20 other federal agencies that were there. Some common mistakes were identified and those stand a better chance of being avoided because of this review.
OK, so I know that I have gone on and on about how cool the Droid is. But the discovery I made last week blows all the past cool things away. A commercial came up in which the nerdy FIOS guy had made the installation and the father of the household used the FaceBook feature in FIOS to post a status message. 3 "Booms" later, the entire family is there and everyone is looking at their TV for Facebook content. I'll admit the FB app is pretty good. The graphics are not the best but you can watch TV and see notifications at the same time. It's kind of a divided screen.
No, that isn't the cool part. That is what I would expect from a service that provides both Internet and TV. The cool part is the integration between the wireless business unit and the TV-Internet business unit. Integration between the Droid and the TV is the point at which they can develop a significant competitive advantage. Their first step in this direction is the FIOS remote control app: http://phandroid.com/2010/02/18/android-app-controls-your-verizon-fios-tv/
If Verizon can further integrate the wireless business in with their home Internet and TV business then there is a real opportunity for them. They need to focus on pushing their Video OnDemand to the wireless business. This will allow for a ton of content to be accessible on their mobile platform. Anyway, I found it to be really cool that there is an app that would control my set-top box. Play Station, I am amazed that there isn't a Play Station 3 application that does the same thing.
