organizational analyses 2500 Problem Solving Case Study and Proposal Report
Organisational Analysis
Organisational Maturity
‹#›
Aims
To build on your understanding of process modelling
To understand concepts of organisational maturity
To examine organisational maturity frameworks
‹#›
Organisational Metaphors
Organisational maturity as a biological metaphors
Organisations described using lifecycle metaphors
Terms such as growth, development, death and recycle.
Analysis forms a common phase of many lifecycle methodologies
‹#›
Analysing Organisational Maturity
The concept of “organizational maturity” is becoming common
The meaning is vague, interpreted in different ways
As process maturity
As innovation and learning
As biological metaphor of the organisation – death
Kenny, J. (2006). Strategy and the learning organization: a maturity model for the formation of strategy. The Learning Organization, 13(4), 353-368.
‹#›
Indication of an Organisation’s Potential for Success
The concept of “maturity” has been used in different measurement contexts
Personal level as leadership maturity, e.g.
CEO Responsibility #1: Own the Vision
CEO Responsibility #2: Provide the Proper Resources
Organisational Level
Measures of “collective” learning
Measures of “collective” competencies
‹#›
Analysing Organisational Maturity
Measures an organisation’s potential for success
Context-specific – usually industry-driven
Organizational maturity “is the level of organization's readiness and experience in relation to people, processes, technologies and consistent measurement”
Tends to be consultancy driven
Measurement as an instrument of technical rationality
‹#›
The Context of Maturity frameworks
Maturity frameworks or models are concepts of “best practice”
A particular sector or industry has vested interest in performing well
Driven therefore by professional bodies
The notion of repetition and reinforcement, the promotion of good or best practice
‹#›
Examples of Maturity Frameworks
We will examine two frameworks for evaluating organisational maturity
Strategic Management Maturity Model (SMMM)
Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI)
‹#›
Strategic Management Maturity Model
The Strategic Management Maturity Model (SMM) was designed by and for busy managers who need a quick assessment of where their organization stands in terms of strategic management, to monitor progress in improving maturity of strategic management, and to allow benchmarking across organizations, or departments within one organization, in order to identify best practices.
‹#›
Dimensions of the Strategic Management Maturity Model
SMMM contains assessments of performance along different dimensions of strategic management:
Leadership
Culture and values
Strategic thinking and planning
Strategy alignment
Performance measurement
Process improvement
Sustainability of strategic management
‹#›
‹#›
Process improvement and Organisational Maturity
We will now focus on process improvement and develop some ideas of organisational maturity
Builds on the toolsets you learnt earlier
Process improvement as the basis of maturity frameworks
‹#›
Process Maturity
Remember SCOR?
That framework recognises that several different types of practices exist within any organization:
Leading or Emerging practices
Best practices
Common practices
Poor practices
The dominant frameworks for Organisational Maturity are predicated upon an assumption of process driven organisations.
‹#›
Capability Maturity Model Integration
What is the dominant discourse around CMMI?
CMMI helps you develop your organizational capabilities by learning new behaviours that can help you improve performance, speed, quality and profitability.
Provides strong process management capabilities across the enterprise and translates to efficiency—and positions your organization to outpace the competition.
‹#›
CMMI – Prevailing Narratives
CMMI Institute is the global leader in the advancement of best practices in people, process, and technology. The Institute provides the tools and support for organizations to benchmark their capabilities and build maturity by comparing their operations to best practices and identifying performance gaps.
“For over 25 years, thousands of high-performing organizations in a variety of industries, including aerospace, finance, healthcare, software, defense, transportation, and telecommunications, have earned a CMMI maturity level rating and proved they are capable business partners and suppliers”
‹#›
CMMI Maturity Levels
What are CMMI “Maturity Levels”?
Maturity levels consist of a predefined set of process models.
Maturity levels are measured by the achievement of the specific and generic goals that apply to each predefined set of process areas.
‹#›
Maturity Frameworks – General Features
‹#›
Maturity Level 1 - Initial
At maturity level 1, processes are usually ad hoc and chaotic. The organization usually does not provide a stable environment.
Success in these organizations depends on the competence and heroics of the people in the organization and not on the use of proven processes.
Organizations often produce products and services that work; however, they frequently exceed the budget and schedule of their projects.
Organizations are characterized by a tendency to over commit, abandon processes in the time of crisis, and not be able to repeat their past successes.
‹#›
Maturity Level 2 – Managed
Process discipline reflected by maturity Level 2 ensures that existing practices are retained during times of stress, i.e. managed
The projects of the organization have ensured that requirements, processes, work products, and services are managed
Processes are planned, performed, measured, and controlled
The status of the work products and the delivery of services are visible to management at defined points
Commitments are established among relevant stakeholders and are revised as needed.
The work products and services satisfy their specified requirements, standards
‹#›
Explaining Level 2 Organisational Maturity
Processes are captured, understood and visible
Visible and managed
Made tangible, real, through modelling formalism previously discussed
Communicated, people use process models as references
‹#›
Maturity Level 3 – Defined
At maturity level 3, processes are well characterized and understood, and are described in standards, procedures, tools, and methods.
At maturity level 3, processes are typically described in more detail and more rigorously than at maturity level 2. At maturity level 3, processes are managed more proactively using an understanding of the interrelationships of the process activities and detailed measures of the process, its work products, and its services.
A critical distinction of level 3 maturity is the scope of standards, process descriptions, and procedures. At maturity level 2, the standards, process descriptions, and procedures may be quite different in each specific instance of the process (for example, on a particular project).
‹#›
Maturity Level 3 – Explained
Standards, process descriptions, and procedures for a project are tailored from the organisation's set of standard processes to suit a particular project or organisational unit.
As a result, the processes that are performed across the organisation are consistent except for the differences allowed by the tailoring guidelines.
‹#›
Maturity Level 4 – Quantitatively Managed
The emphasis of maturity level 4 is the predictability of process performance. At maturity level 3, processes are only qualitatively predictable.
At maturity level 4, the performance of processes is controlled using statistical and other quantitative techniques, and is quantitatively predictable
Special causes of process variation are identified and, where appropriate, the sources of special causes are corrected to prevent future occurrences
Quality and process performance measures are incorporated into the organization’s measurement repository to support fact-based decision making in the future.
‹#›
Maturity Level 4 - Explained
At maturity level 4, processes are concerned with addressing special causes of process variation and providing statistical predictability of the results. Though processes may produce predictable results, the results may be insufficient to achieve the established objectives
‹#›
Maturity Level 5 – Optimising
Maturity level 5 focuses on continually improving process performance through both incremental and innovative technological improvements.
Processes are continually improved based on a quantitative understanding of the common causes of variation inherent in processes.
Quantitative process-improvement objectives for the organization are established, continually revised to reflect changing business objectives, and used as criteria in managing process improvement.
The effects of deployed process improvements are measured and evaluated against the quantitative process-improvement objectives. Both the defined processes and the organization's set of standard processes are targets of measurable improvement activities.
‹#›
Maturity Level 5 – How Does Optimisation Occur?
A distinction between maturity level 4 and maturity level 5 is the type of process variation addressed
At maturity level 5, processes are concerned with addressing common causes of process variation and changing the process (that is, shifting the mean of the process performance) to improve process performance (while maintaining statistical predictability) to achieve the established quantitative process-improvement objectives
‹#›
Industry Framework for Quality
DMAIC model for process improvement. DMAIC is commonly used by Six Sigma project teams and is an acronym for:
Define opportunity
Measure performance
Analyze opportunity
Improve performance
Control performance
‹#›
Optimisation Occurs when you have “Processes that DMAIC”
Six Sigma is a business improvement methodology that focuses an organization on:
Understanding and managing customer requirements
Aligning key business processes to achieve those requirements
Utilizing rigorous data analysis to minimize variation in those processes
Driving rapid and sustainable improvement to business processes
‹#›
In Conclusion…
| Level 1 Performed | Level 2 Managed | Level 3 Established | Level 4 Predictable | Level 5 Optimizing | |
| People | Success depends on individual heroics. “Fire fighting is a way of life.” Relationships between disciplines are uncoordinated, perhaps even adversarial. | Success depends on individuals and management system supports. Commitments are understood and managed. People are trained. | Project groups work together, perhaps as an integrated product team. Training is planned and provided according to roles. | A strong sense of teamwork exists within each project. | A strong sense of teamwork exists across the organization. Everyone is involved in process improvement. |
| Process | Few stable processes exist or are used. | Documented and stable estimating, planning, and commitment processes are at the project level. | Integrated management and engineering processes are used across the organization. | Processes are quantitatively understood and stabilized. | Processes are continuously and systematically improved. |
| Technology | The introduction of new technology is risky. | Technology supports established, stable activities. | New technologies are evaluated on a qualitative basis. | New technologies are evaluated on a quantitative basis. | New technologies are proactively pursued and deployed. |
| Measurement | Data collection and analysis are ad hoc. | Planning and management data is used by individual projects. | Data is collected and used in all defined processes. Data is systematically shared across projects. | Data definition and collection are standardized across the organization Data is used to understand the process qualitatively and stabilize it. | Data is used to evaluate and select process improvements. |
‹#›
References
CMMI Product Team. (2002). Capability Maturity Model® Integration (CMMI), Version 1.1. Pittsburgh PA: SEI CMU.
Archie Lockamy III, Kevin McCormack, (2004) "The development of a supply chain management process maturity model using the concepts of business process orientation", Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 9 Issue: 4, pp.272-278
Gordon Stewart, (1997) "Supply‐chain operations reference model (SCOR): the first cross‐industry framework for integrated supply‐chain management", Logistics Information Management, Vol. 10 Issue: 2, pp.62-67
Paulzen, Oliver; Doumi, Maria; Perc, Primoz; and Cereijo-Roibas, Anxo, "A Maturity Model for Quality Improvement in Knowledge Management" (2002). ACIS 2002 Proceedings. 5.
Jeroen de Mast, Joran Lokkerbol, 2012, An analysis of the Six Sigma DMAIC method from the perspective of problem solving, In International Journal of Production Economics, Volume 139, Issue 2,, Pages 604-614,
‹#›