The previous chapters are full of governance activities and checkpoints that apply to enacting solution delivery. Additional governance activities depend on which solution delivery methodology is selected. Typically, additional governance activities include tracking and regularly communicating status, as well as continuously improving and optimizing processes and procedures used by the team.
As discussed in Chapter 8, the communications plan should detail how much, to whom, and what status information is needed by the team and by the various stakeholders. Ideally, providing status is a two-way, free flow of information. Sharin status does not need to be formal or complex. Table 12-3 provides a simple example of tracking deliverable status.
Table 12-3. Example of a Deliverable Status Matrix
Document | Author/Lead | Lead Reviewer | Deliver Date | Tech Signed Off | Business Signed Off | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AD Migration Plan | Bassem R. | Brian W. | 26-Apr | X | X | |
AD Detailed Design | Bassem R. | Brian W. | 1-May | X | X | |
Exchange Design | Frank G. | Jim S. | 2-May | X | X | |
AD Test Plan | Bassem R. | Kimm F. | 11-May | 22-May | 3-Jun | |
Infrastructure Master Test Plan | Peter R. | John F. | 14-May | Very overdue | ||
AD Migration Logistics | Brian W. | Bassem R. | 18-May | 27-May | TBD | Need to schedule Biz sign-off |
Infrastructure Pilot Plan | Scott W. | John F. | 1-Jun | May need to slip 2 days | ||
Exchange Test Plan | Frank G. | Kimm F. | 3-Jun | |||
AD Test Logistics | Brian W. | Bassem R. | 4-Jun | |||
Exchange Test Logistics | Jim S. | Frank G. | 7-Jun | |||
Exchange Deployment Plan | Jim S. | Frank G. | 7-Jun | |||
Exchange Migration/Consolidation Plan | Frank G. | Jim S. | 25-Jun | |||
Exchange Migration/Consolidation Logistics | Jim S. | Frank G. | 7-Jul | |||
Current as of 6/01/2006 |
In addition to documenting status, it is a recommended practice to share status interactively with stakeholders on a regular basis (e.g., monthly stakeholder steering committee meetings). It is also recommended to provide status on the team’s collaboration site.
Similar to how Microsoft Solutions Framework (MSF) espouses an incremental and iterative approach to solution construction, MSF espouses an incremental and iterative approach to process and procedure improvement throughout a solution delivery life cycle. Because books and books have been written on continuous improvement (known as kaizen, as referenced in Chapter 3), this section provides just a cursory introduction to the topic.
As a team becomes familiar and comfortable with making continuous improvement part of their normal work, they will realize that through small, gradual changes, they are able to evolve and refine all aspects of solution delivery as opposed to disrupt it with larger and/or sudden changes. A process improvement need not be complex. It could be as simple as streamlining a status report template. Other typical areas of improvement include the following:
Improving estimating and planning accuracy
Refining matching of team member skills with required tasks competencies
Simplifying the method and reducing the time needed to share information
Eliminating (or at least greatly reducing) unnecessary communications
Minimizing elongated review cycles
Reducing unproductive governance
3.133.152.198