

  All Discussions  |  

  Hello Post  |  

  Direct Messages  |   

  Categories  |  

  How-To(Forum)

Dec 12 Event - BIG Ability Webinar

DD

Dear all, there are a number of things we need to discuss around the session

Sharing what we all did - so we can improve
Opinion on what to improve the actual session
Are there other sessions with greater purpose related to this one?
Should we make this a more en masse event?

I’ll trigger some threads to spawn those thoughts

DD

What I did - DD

What I did was:

Pull the triggers below into the Group A.xlsx
We talked through the top 3 and commented
We looked at the example roles, and identified a couple more

The first 3 steps took about 10 mins!! It was hard not to get sucked into the interesting content

We went to the Readiness Sheet – I pointed out where to download it from, and pointed at the YouTube presentation of principles.
We opened the sheet and I quickly explained the structure.
We looked at item 1 “Strategy is necessary to achieve purpose”
We discussed that “The principle is met partially, inadequately” – as in – people agree the need, and have some top level content – but debated whether purpose was linked to strategy, and whether this was sustained systematically.
We talked about a group considering this and the benefit of standing up the principle and enabling stakeholders to realise stuff…
We stepped across the sheet and explored the sub elements to Principle 1, and discussed what it meant, but also brought the “So what” into the conversation – as in – “so what are we going to do about this” – and then pointed out the final column where we could start to define the enabling components (noting that there may be more components needed against one “so what”.

We did not write much down (I did some) – but I believe the attendees understood the process

Be clear on “your why”
Do homework on stakeholders, co-protagonists and possible sponsor
Prepare engagement tools to capture current state e.g. the readiness Model,
build consensus to do ‘something’ with conversations
We started to think about the capability building blocks needed

DD

DD
What did others do? Did you focus more on capturing, explaining BIG, or helping people to grasp how they could “do it”
My opinion is that this worked – as it got people into the BIG Website and readiness spreadsheet and the mindset of using them.
I did not use the canvass based approach – I look forwards to hearing how that worked?

DD

DD
What different?
Depends on purpose.
The purpose was to inspire attendees to engage their organisations in the first steps to leverage the BIG Model to address their strategy delivery issues.
This session was not a mini consulting session to work the attendees problems.
It was not a selling session for consultants / trainers / solution vendors.
However – it would be easy to adapt and lengthen this session structure for both of those purposes.
Message to people - you’ve seen the process – lets help you spend half a day on this with your fellow protagonists / sponsor – to do capture, analysis and implication.

DD

DD
Doing it en masse?
Although we only got a little time – the small groups enabled people to have a say and ask questions
To do this en masse – I think the interaction time would disappear.
However - I can see doing more poll and presentation based would generate more publicity and some data – and we can use tools to capture votes / comments etc – That would benefit the APM Governance Interest Network / BIG CIC as a source of insights.
My view is that it is up to Partner Organisations need to define their BIG Propositions, and the CIC needs to note original sponsors, but list active organisations who are helping us to develop BIG, promote BIG, and ultimately – deliver BIG – along with their BIG credentials (exam passes, examples, propositions etc.)

ChrisB

DD It is possible that the readiness spreadsheet provides a more direct introduction to the BIG model but my feeling is that we can do better than either of these with some more planning and thought.

ChrisB

DD If done properly the interaction will not disappear, and we will simultaneously get much more individual contribution to each exercise, and hence interest, thought and ‘how would this work for my org’ and related questions, and buy-in.

ChrisB

DD My view is that it is up to Partner Organisations need to define their BIG Propositions, and the CIC needs to note original sponsors, but list active organisations who are helping us to develop BIG, promote BIG, and ultimately – deliver BIG – along with their BIG credentials (exam passes, examples, propositions etc.)

I agree.

ChrisB

I did the following using the canvas approach:

1. Explained the need to build a good story and reach consensus with enough key stakeholders and a sponsor to get a BIG implementation rolling
Also explained that it is probably going to be necessary to think about pains as well as value to be gained from implementing BIG, because pains are useful when others recognise or are prepared to admit to them, but you need value when that is not the case in order to get buy in.
Asked them to suggest which stakeholders could be removed for the list in the template and which should be added.
Then went on to the pains/gains elements and covered some of those. There was some confusion between strategy drivers and BIG drivers I think, and it took some time to clarify this.
This took about 15 mins - too long but allowed some participation that I think we useful to all.
Then quickly explained why and how to use the Pain Canvas to gather detail and context across multiple components to help build a good story and identify components necessary in the BIG solution.

What would I do differently next time?
Spend more time up front describing the journey and component to position the First Steps better

Did it work?
I think it did but not as well as it could have with more planning/rehearsal up front.

Suggestions:

It definitely can be done en masse - I am planning a conference to do something more comprehensive and practical for attendees now - expect April time frame.
It does need a different mechanism to allow better interaction and individual contribution/thought as well as consolidation, feedback and discussion.
Of course it needs more time - I don’t think the time is an issue as long as value is on offer.

simon

1st thought is
Well done Dave & everyone 🙂

also: I agree all the above 🙂

also

There are many paths to success that I see others travelling happily and profitably that I would not have chosen

A slight aside on forum s/w use/conventions 🙂

All the contributions above are posts 🙂 made with the “Reply” button - and that’s fine - they are not threads…
I’d have combined them and used “# Heading” and “## Heading” etc (which can be inserted w/ the “H” in the menu bar or the paragraph in the table-cells-largecaret-down) sub-menu at the start of a line to structure the post

I’m adding a “> ” before a block of lines to put them on a background BTW & a blank line to end it

To create threads (Discussions) you use the “Start a Discussion” button within a category (Tag)

Today I’ve learnt

Some of the “? what needs to go in the How-Tos?” I’m developing 🙂
Maybe what the session delivered for folk (?)

How I’d do what I think was intended

As I don’t know how well folk know BIG - A knowledge leveller - Present Fig 10 Pg 40 of the BoK with commentary “When formulating shared experience of how to achieved Integrated Gov the founders describe how arriving at strong, understood, agreed and dynamic governance processes is a journey of the steps illustrated in Fig.10 Pg 40 of the BoK. Further discussions identified some truths we call principles and Concepts that guide the phases (Steps). Processes and artefacts are needed to. Groupings of Components Methods & Models”
When preparing to start the journey the crew needs to think “Where are the opportunities for gain, what are our current (& anticipated) pains we want to remove (avoid) - the why? So Who are all(?) the people that matter in those conversations? - the vital few”
Exercise one: Deliverable: a matrix of stakeholders on one axis versus gains and pains on another Time available 10 minutes. Note: Be ready to share when we reconvene
Exercise two: Deliverable: Who gets the gains/ Who feels the pains?, Who can has to act to realise/ avoid each? What are they doing now? What needs to be added/ subtracted/ resourced/ enabled/ ... to allow the journey to commence? Time: xxx minutes/ Try one matrix cell Note: Be ready to share Difficulties and Duration etc
etc

DD

With respect to turnout yesterday – I think it would be a good idea to speculate why out of the 60+ people registered, 20 attended.

Time in the morning?
Too much / not enough chasing re-attendance?
Overwhelmed by pre-read? There is content there with links – plenty of background
???

DD

Event content – what is your view?

I’ve looked at the advertised content – we covered it
We did not re-cover what BIG is – this was clearly stated as assumed known – was that reasonable?
Looking at “why are you here” - in the intro – not sure people got what was coming?
I think the “pains you are facing” section produced typical pains. Interestingly – the menti on protagonists / sponsor - good appreciation of the seniority needed – but “end user” surprised me 😊
Did most of us spend more time on collecting data or simulating the process?
The readiness model - @Martin Samphire did it make sense to people?
Pains canvass - we provided a blank one - any good?
I think Chris and I spent more on the first part of the task - was this the same for others

What specifically would you do differently? (for this theme)

My view is that an hour it is too short to expect much stuff to be produced. If we think value can be gained by simulating the process again - to produce something useful to people - I don’t think putting strangers together works unless there is a lot more time.

IMO these sessions could usefully produce

a discussed pot of pains from the group - benefit gained from confidence ‘you are not alone’
a discussed set of stakeholders - benefit gained from the experience others in thinking about approaches

It could cover, but not develop (???)

a start up process - with a section to allow attendees to compare and contrast ask questions
an example mapping pains to components - I don’t think there is utility in trying to simulate this. IMO this is a client workshop - not a public event

I also think an event which focused on the specific differences between a typical PMO / PMO Manager and Business Support function / BIG Sponsor would be helpful



  All Discussions  |  

  Hello Post  |  

  Direct Messages  |   

  Categories  |  

  How-To(Forum)