Difference between revisions of "Doctrine Patterns"

Revision as of 15:14, 3 November 2017

These are patterns that are universally useful. Although they are all useful, there is a priority to their usefulness. Start with the Phase I patterns first, and work to adopt the later phases after earlier phases are more or less mastered.

Phase I

Know your users

e.g. customers, shareholders, regulators, staff

Challenge assumptions

speak up and question

Use appropriate methods

e.g. agile vs lean vs six sigma

Use a systematic mechanism of learning

bias towards data

Focus on user needs

Understand what is being considered

Remove bias and duplication

Use a common language

necessary for collaboration

Think small

know the details

Phase II

Be transparent

A bias towards open

Focus on the outcome, not a contract

e.g. Worth based development

Think aptitude and attitude

Strategy is iterative, not linear

fast reactive cycles

Move fast

An imperfect plan executed today is better than a perfect plan executed tomorrow.

From chapter 18 in the book:

We understood that there would be inertia to the changes we were proposing and that existing culture and structures could well rise to combat us. We put in place an initial concept of work streams that targeted different areas. The idea was that if we ever put this in place then we’d have 100 days or so to make the changes before resistance overwhelmed us. [1]

Use appropriate tools

e.g. mapping, financial models

Think small

as in teams

A bias towards action

learn by playing the game

Be pragmatic

It doesn't matter if the cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice

From chapter 18 in the book:

We accepted that not everything would fit into the structure or work streams that we had described. A majority would and it was the cost reduction and improvement in those cases that would generate the most savings. However, it was important to acknowledge that a one-size fits all approach would not work and will be vulnerable to inertia. Pragmatism to achieve the change was more important than ideology. We also had to maintain the existing IT estate whilst acknowledging the future will require a fundamentally different approach based upon agile, open and effective local delivery. We would have to not only audit but sweat the existing assets until they could be replaced.[2]

Manage inertia

e.g. existing practice, political capital, previous investment

Inertia patterns

Use standards where appropriate

Distribute power and decision making

Think Fast, Inexpensive, Restrained, and Elegant (FIRE)

Effectiveness over efficiency

Manage failure

Phase III

Provide purpose, mastery & autonomy

Do better with less

Continual improvement

From chapter 18 of the book:

Such an approach had to be transparent and measured in terms of cost. It had to provide challenge for what was currently being built. From this we developed the idea of a scrutiny board which later became spend control under OCTO. It wasn’t enough to simply reduce spending; our focus was on dramatically reducing waste whilst improving public services. We couldn’t do this without measurement.

We understood that this would not be a big bang approach but an iterative process – a constant cycle of doing better with less. To this end, we proposed the use of open data with a focus on the Government becoming more transparent. We also added the use of open source including the practices associated with it and the use of open standards to drive competitive markets. [3]

Be the owner

Take responsibility

Set exceptional standards

Great is just not good enough

Optimise flow

remove bottlenecks

Strategy is complex

There will be uncertainty

Commit to the direction, be adaptive along the path

crossing the river by feeling the stones

From chapter 18 in the book:

To enable the change, we needed a clear and effective message from authority combined with a commitment to change. However, in the past this has been notoriously difficult as only one minister in the Cabinet Office (Tom Watson MP) prior to 2010 had any real commitment to understanding technology. However, with a change of Government there might be an opportunity with a new ministerial team.

To support of all this, we proposed a structure based upon the innovate – leverage – commoditise model. The structure included innovation funds operating at local levels, a scrutiny board encouraging challenge along with a common technology service providing industrialised components. The structure was based upon concepts of open, it was data driven with emphasis on not just defining but measuring success. It was iterative and adaptive using constant feedback from the frontline and citizens alike. To support this, we would have to develop in-house capabilities in engineering including more agile like approaches. We would also need to build a curriculum for confidence and understanding of the issues of IT for mid ranking to senior officials and ministers. We would need take a more modular approach to creating systems that encouraged re-use. We would need to be prepared to adapt the model itself as we discovered more.[4]

A bias towards the new

Be curious, take appropriate risks

From chapter {{{1}}} in the book:

[[Category:Chapter {{{1}}}|Doctrine Patterns]]

We focused on an outside-in approach to innovation where change was driven and encouraged at the local level through seed funds rather than Government trying to force its own concept of change through “big IT”. The role of central Government was reduced to providing engineering expertise, an intelligent customer function to challenge what was done, industrialised component services, encouragement of change and showing what good looked like.[5]

Be humble

Listen, be selfless, have fortitude

Think big

Inspire others, provide direction

From chapter 18 of the book:

We need to get out of the mindset of thinking about specific systems and tackle the whole problem. We needed to break away from these isolated individual systems. We needed to change the default delivery mechanism for public services towards online services using automated processes for most citizens. We needed an approached that focused relentlessly on delivery to the citizen and their needs.[6]

Seek the best

Phase IV

Exploit the landscape

Design for constant evolution

There is no core

Everything is transient

List to your ecosystems

acts as future sensing engines

From chapter 18 in the book:

We viewed the existing centralized approach as problematic because it was often remote from the real needs of either public service employees, intermediaries or citizens alike. We envisaged a new engineering group that would work in the field and spot and then nurture opportunities for change at the frontline, working closely with service delivery providers.[7]

There is no one culture

e.g. Pioneers, Settlers, Town Planners

References

Example internal link