

  All Discussions  |  

  Hello Post  |  

  Direct Messages  |   

  Categories  |  

  How-To(Forum)

FRANKENORG!

DD

Hello again all,

Another of the main topics of our BIG conference is FRANKENORG! That has 3 aspects to it – collate examples of business integrated governance generically, BIG usage specifically and to gather aspect of usage from our wider community.

We would like to support appreciation if how BIG Concepts, Principles and Components have been used before the BIG CIC compiled knowledge into the BoK, and since – by our community of Members and LinkedIn Group members. This topic is about confidence to engage.

The outline agenda is here – where we have a placeholder for the Frankeorg section

I’ve bounced this around with a few people – what do you think?

Our BIG working assumption related to making change is that it begins with a protagonist that wants to do something. Somebody has to put their head above a parapet.
They see BIG, and wonder about it, and whether it is credible
The wonder if BIG has been applied to their situation

A key aspect to the Frankenorg session is to present a set of real drivers, example sponsorship scenarios, solution visions, organisational scope, what was done – sharing difficulties on the way and benefits of going BIG (although it might be small scale)

While this will deliver a broad and shallow scenario – we expect to provide depth with further blogs and presentations that presenters may hare, or present on a “day 2”

So where are we.

Some of you have access to this ppt. If you don’t – pls let me know) FrankenOrg.pptx

3 questions:

Do you want to help shape this part of the BIG Conference?
Do you want to help deliver this aspect to the conference?
Would you like to engage as a partner on this BIG Subject matter?

Please get back to me with your interest privately if you prefer, as this work is now starting.
Thanks everyone 😊
DD

ChrisB

DD While this will deliver a broad and shallow scenario – we expect to provide depth with further blogs and presentations that presenters may hare, or present on a “day 2”

My view is that we really don’t need yet more ‘shallow’ words about BIG, and that the Frankenorg should instead provide an opportunity to give people a sense of real achievements using BIG concepts that have the ring of authenticity about them. They should be able to ask real questions and get real answers, even if we can’t disclose company names in some cases for non-disclosure reasons. I think we need to start making BIG real for people and get past high level and generic splurb.

I think we should encourage people to take an interest in BIG and give them a reason for ‘putting their head above the parapet’ if you like, and I would liek to see us focus on getting them to give serious thought to BIG, really invest their interest in BIG, and give them a sense of purpose, a feeling they can bring something positive to their organisation by exploring BIG further.

I have a few case studies I can present as part of this if needed:

Zain - implementation of SXO/PPM for multinational telecoms org - P3M and strategy domains
National utility org (±40,000 staff) - Strategy implementation domain across ±200 units spanning initial implementation and update across ⅘ years - strategy and finance domains
National Strategy Governance - Pilot study to implement strategy governance and performance review across government organisations - covering several Ministries/academies with associated research papers presented at International Institute of Administrative Sciences (IIAS) - strategy, data and governance domains
IT/BAU governance integration for large multinational mining organisation requiring every business unit with a budget across 14 separate mines (hundreds of units and ±100,000 staff) to pay for their IT services (in real terms - not just book entries) provided by a third party IT service (outsourced), and providing them with a way to understand the cost of every type of business function they used, and every transaction, so they could govern their day to day operational tasks & costs far more effectively, and could now collaborate with IT simply and easily to do this. IT, data and BAU domains

ChrisB

I am available to help with this.
I suggest we start by mapping out principles addressed and scope of accountability nodes implemented across the organisation (what domains/areas covered e.g. P3M, BAU, Products, etc.) for our various case studies, and then we can decide which ones to use to build a map for Frankenorg and illustrate cases clearly.
I believe that to be successful this presentation must stay authentic and that we need to be able to answer detailed questions about the cases by calling on the original implementor to answer as needed, and that we must therefore be very clear about which case study is being used where - i.e. there must be a clear mapping of Frankenorg scope and accountability map to original cases, and we need to be transparent about any gaps that may exist in our Frankenorg.



  All Discussions  |  

  Hello Post  |  

  Direct Messages  |   

  Categories  |  

  How-To(Forum)