A Patent on the Outsourcing Process for Maintenance? You Cannot Be Serious!

Have a look at this and make up your own mind. Seriously, is this an innovation? Is it non-obvious? Is it an invention? Is there no prior art?

www.google.com/patents

And don't ignore China

And if anyone thought I'd been ignoring China in the cases and theory sessions, believe me, China is to be reckoned with. China is not India, it is very very different, and the Sparkfun blog illustrates for me how and why. China is all about things, hardware and manufacture. It reminds me of my impressions of Japan in the 90's, the clustering and volumes of business in Denki-Towns in Osaka and Tokyo and anywhere else (trans. Electric town: a commercial area dedicated to electronics and high tech, e.g. Akihabara, Tokyo)

Anyway, read Nate's Return to Shenzhen to get a feel for what it's like.
http://www.sparkfun.com/2

Shared Services Discussion - ServiceFrame

Class discussion with Daniel Berman. 12/April/2011

Daniel Berman is a founder and Head of Product Development for ServiceFrame, a SaaS based provider of sourcing governance software. Daniel is a Science graduate of Trinity College, and worked for a number of consulting and technology businesses before founding ServiceFrame in 2009, including PwC, AOL Technologies, Accenture and Palladium. During this time he worked in Software Development, Systems Integration and Outsourcing. Daniel is an Authorised Evaluator for eSCM - a Sourcing Capability Model for IT enabled Sourcing.

ServiceFrame's web-based software monitors the outsourcing or shared services contracts that companies have with external service providers for functions such as IT, human resources or finance. Organisations can use the software to measure these agreements on an ongoing basis against several criteria, including cost or quality of service. ServiceFrame claims its software significantly reduces the manual effort involved in collecting and assessing governance information, allowing companies to spend more time on managing the relationships with suppliers more effectively.

Notes:

• ServiceFrame (www.serviceframe.com)
• ServiceFrame material on YouTube
• Article in the Irish Times (irishtimes.com Friday April 8th, 2011)

Exercise: Distributed Agile Planning Game

Agile release iterations deliver multiple features and improvements in response to customer requests and/or project requirements (Kroll, 2007). One of the key elements of the scrum iteration is the planning activities that take place at its commencement. The goal is the organisation establishes a clear view of feature specification and value, understanding of architectural implications, and possible design solutions, and estimates of effort to facilitate the planning process between those representing the customer (or the business) and those responsible for development (Beck, 2000). The following figure suggests both how this can be part of both an up-front and an on-going process (fig. 1).

Goal
To demonstrate and experience the process of planning in a distributed team environment.

Overview

For the purpose of this exercise the following roles and activities are defined...

Roles/Identities:

• Product Owner
• Architect
• Lead Developer
• Scrum Master
• and additional developers if needed (Joe, Mary, Wu)

Activities for the PLANNING GAME

• Feature Discussion (5 minutes)
• Architecture discussion (~5 minutes)
• Design-delivery discussion (~5 minutes)
• Decide backlog including iteration deliverables, project size etc. (~10 minutes)

Materials

• Role cards
• Feature:Architecture:Deliverable diagram card
• Rules card
• A1 work sheets
• Marker pens and post-its

Part 1. Instructions  ~50'
This exercise is quite involved and difficult to understand first time, give sufficient time for the groups to produce a planning chart.

1. Divide the class into an even number of groups.
2. Handout materials and cards to each group (this can be done in advance of the class)
3. Groups assign roles.
4. Commence and conclude the first run of the group-centred PLANNING GAME. Allocate approximately 25' for this stage.
5. Each group produces a product backlog list with tentative delivery dates (Gantt style project schedule) using the A1 worksheet, post-its etc.
6. Review results with the whole class.

Discussion ~10'

What helped establish shared understanding?

How might you share knowledge in a commercial setting?

What tools and technologies facilitate?

Part 2. Instructions  ~50'

1. Divide equal numbers of either 'Clients' or 'Suppliers'
2. Now assign pairs of groups - Blue with Yellow - to conduct the second run of the game in a distributed-teams mode. 
3. Pairs of groups spend 5 minutes to introduce each other and roles.
4. Groups return to their work areas (opposite sides of the room or in different rooms).
5. Paired groups to discuss and agree a new product backlog and tentative delivery date for the first and/or subsequent iterations. Allocate approximately 15' for this stage. Paired groups may meet in person, via phone/skype, chat/text.
6. Each groups three points that worked well, three points that could be improved.
7. Paired groups report progress to the whole class.

Discussion ~10'
Do you think of the planning exercise as a problem with a fixed solution?
Do you think of the exercise as a process (on-going or one that could continue later)?
Once the groups were split into clients and suppliers did geographic separation improve or disimprove the planning process?
What kinds of things act as impediments to managing distributed teams?

References
Beck, K. (2000) Extreme Programming Explained : embrace change, Reading, MA, Addison-Wesley.
Kroll, P. (2007) OpenUP In a Nutshell. IBM Rational.
Schwaber, K. (2004) Agile Project Management with Scrum, Redmond, Washington, Microsoft Press.

Managing Distributed Teams

What is a 'distributed team'?

Why are distributed teams such a key part of outsourcing initiatives?

What tools are out there to help me manage a distributed team?

• Basecamphq project management software (...as a service, monthly fee) see basecamphq.com/
• Pivotal Tracker for Agile project management (...as a service, monthly fee) see pivotaltracker.com/
• activeCollab for project management (installable or as a service, mixed pricing) see www.activecollab.com/

Research and Further Reading

• Agile Game Development with Scrum
• What sort of Games can we play with teams?
• What electronic scrum/kanban board do you use and recommend for distributed teams?

SLA: If it looks like a contract and smells like a contract?

The typical SLA (Service Level Agreement) looks and smells like a contract, but is it a contract?
Have a look at these examples and make your own mind up (from Vinny).

Some SLA examples for Microsoft's Windows Azure Cloud Services Platform.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsazure/sla/

These contracts service 'compute' capability, 'storage', and specialised applications like data, web content, and apps.

Notice the following: Contract-like structure (terms, definitions, exclusions, ), provision to claim 'credits' against 'downtime', and measurement methodology including parameters.

However, it's not quite a contract, it's more of a promise (that the vendor can change whenever) and in these case with a bonus (or penalty in the case of the supplier) "here's what I give you back if I fail to deliver". An SLA is nice to have, I might even pay something for it, it may even be referred to by a contract, but it isn't a contract!

Governance or 'how to manage the alliance'

The 'management' perspective on sourcing and global sourcing incorporates many tools, frameworks, methods etc. but tends to leave the 'management' model itself underdeveloped, presumably because firms already know 'how to manage', i.e. align and control resources. To phrase this differently, we assume management know how to manage, therefore remedies, techniques, and structures proposed for global sourcing are presented as unique or appropriate to the global sourcing context. Management simply needs to apply these novel or customised techniques in their own organisational contexts. Management simply wants new tools, the activities of management itself, "the acts of harnessing and controlling human activity to achieve desired goals or objectives", remains unchanged.

In the case of sourcing initiatives (projects) through to sourcing industries (addressing or creating markets for sourcing projects and services) we can bring focus back onto the overarching activity of management under the heading 'Governance'. Governance is the administration of activity, of people, projects, and resources. Governance retains the notion of its politics, of hierachy, of the concentration of resources and their control. Thompson (2003) refers to governance as action concerned with creating the conditions for ordered rule and collective action, but that it can be employed across multiple organisational forms: hierachies, networks and markets. Oshri et.al (2009) define governance as "the processes and structures that ensure the alignment of strategies and objectives of the parties involved" (Oshri et.al:112, 2009)

For sourcing initiatives governance capabilities are defined in terms of client and supplier perspectives by Oshri et.al, (2009). For the client organisation they are the processes that "align the client's objectives and strategies with the vendor's delivery system" (Oshri et.al:57, 2009). Governance from a supplier's perspective is "the dynamic alignment of the activities of the IT function with those of the overall organisaton." (Oshri et.al:84, 2009)

Reverting back to earlier research into the ITO (IT Outsourcing) industry, 'outside service management models' (Clark et.al, 1998) fall into five types: User Managed (functional manager), IS Managed (divisional), Vendor Managed (supplier), Committee Managed (e.g. a joint board or similar), Mixed Management. Each of these different types require differing forms of management or governance. Governance structure according to Clark et.al (1998) deals with and varies across three areas: Contract, Governance Costs, Governance Mechanisms. Contracts may be lengthy and detailed or short and general. Governance mechanisms can span close meticulous oversight through intensive compliance monitoring, through to 'light touch' intent monitoring. Costs and the need for cost control vary accordingly in direct proportion.

Aside: The very idea of 'Management', its purpose, meaning, legitimacy, culture, and consequences, has been widely and continuously debated by practitioners, theorists and researchers. Few deny the need for management as an activity, however the apparent necessity for Management as a specialisation is debated; see (Grey, 2005) for a gentle introduction to the issues of management of organisations.

References:

• Grey, C. (2005) A Very Short, Fairly Interesting and Reasonably Cheap Bookabout Studying Organizations, Sage Publications Ltd.
• Clark, T., Zmud, R. & Mccray, G. (1998) The Outsourcing of Information Services: Transforming the Nature of Business in the Information Industry. IN WILLCOCKS, L. P. & LACITY, M. C. (Eds.) Strategic Sourcing of Information Systems. Chichester, England, John Wiley & Sons.
• Oshri, I., Kotlarsky, J. & Willcocks, L. P. (2009) The Handbook of Global Outsourcing and Offshoring, Palgrave Macmillan.
• Thompson, G. F. (2003) Between Hierachies & Markets: The logic and limits of network forms of organization, Oxford University Press.