Maturity Information Management 3 - Elsevier · This concept is what we are applying to the information and content spectrum. Naturally, with the maturing of technologies for dealing

27Making Enterprise Information Management (EIM) Work for Business. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-375695-4.00003-5Copyright © 2010 by Elsevier Inc. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.2010

CONTENTS

IMM—Basic Way to Look at Usage ...........................................................................................................30 Perspectives on Maturity ..........................................................................................................................30

Usage and Content Basis ....................................................................................................... 34 Capability Basis .................................................................................................................... 34 Organization Basis ................................................................................................................. 34 Assessment Instruments ........................................................................................................ 34

Summary .................................................................................................................................................35 References ..............................................................................................................................................35

Information Management Maturity 3

CHAPTER

How does your organization exploit data and content now? If you had to place a grade on this, would you give yourself an A or an F? And what would you measure to

assign this grade? If we are going to manage information, we need to measure it. You cannot manage what you do not measure.

Excerpt from Business Case for EIM

OBSERVATION IT managers will wring their hands and cry that “ no one understands ” when they try and implement projects or programs that require some aspect of managing data, and the business customer claims no effect, or missed expectations. “ We can’t measure the value of this stuff, you tell us if it is working, ” will be at the post-implementation review. When this happens, someone gave up on defi ning a way to measure success. Information Management Maturity (IMM) develops the foundation for these measures.

This chapter will examine one of the key shapers and metrics of the EIM program — IMM. It is assessed early in any effort to create an EIM program. It is also assessed frequently after the program goes into operation. The actual process of IMM assessment is addressed later, but the concept of information maturity is key to understanding the results of any assessment that you may execute or have executed for you. That is why this chapter appears early in this book.

CH003.indd 27CH003.indd 27 5/3/2010 9:51:56 PM5/3/2010 9:51:56 PM

28 CHAPTER 3 Information Management Maturity

IMM shapes your EIM program, as it will infl uence the nature of ongoing governance, the size and characteristics of projects, and even the types of technology to be acquired. Lastly, if you are going to tie organizational value to IAM, you will need to know the level of IMM your organization requires.

The means and nature of how an organization uses data and content is expressed as a measure of its IMM. IMM is a relative measurement, not a scorecard. It is a statement of relative ability. Obviously, some companies do more with data and content. 1 But one company appearing with a dif-ferent maturity than another does not mean it is “ better. ”

The concept of organizational maturity in the context of data may seem superfl uous or a synonym for “ current state. ” After all, EIM by defi nition is an acknowledgment that you are not where you need to be. Why dwell on where you are in great detail? There are two reasons:

1. Maturity is not a “ score. ” There are not universally good or bad levels. Every organization has an appropriate level of maturity. You need to understand what levels work with your business model. You may be at or have defi ned the level of information maturity required to be effective in your market. If so, your EIM program would address other aspects of EIM to help accomplish your goal. Or you may be many levels away from where you need to be. Then the EIM program must emphasize improving information maturity as a major goal.

2. Knowing where you are and the level you need to be means an appropriate program vs. a whiz-bang technology push with hazy objectives. But a “ current state ” examination is usually a collection of facts regarding “ what is not right. ” To say that data quality is “ bad ” may be an appropriate fi nding, but there are numerous other criteria, such as the regulatory environment, where an objective evaluation of what “ bad ” actually means is important. Since information and content is everywhere, a current-state inventory without a root-cause analysis or a blend-ing and presentation of all fi ndings is simply a pile of facts without relevance to setting future direction.

Maturity , however, has some more dimensions than how exotic your analysis and interpretation of data is. The assessments early in an EIM program also need to accommodate the culture, the busi-ness environment, the current state of IT (in terms of capability and infrastructure), the usefulness of existing content, the effectiveness of leadership in providing business vision, and the potential for communication and collaboration within the organization. Table 3.1 presents a summary of the EIM assessments and how IMM factors in.

It is essential that these assessments take place. Situations may dictate emphasizing one over the other, but at minimum there has to be an anecdotal understanding of where the organization sits in relation to the spectrum of IM. The EIM program cannot succeed without determining a target matu-rity level and an organizational vision of how it wants to use and exploit information assets. A key point to remember here: it is not enough to tell business units to go “ do better data. ” This can be interpreted as analysis, quicker transactions, or more spreadsheets! A more precise statement of how content is to be used is required. And you cannot produce that statement without knowing where you are.


29Information Management Maturity

Most of the time IMM is reported as a relative number, like a location on a scale or a scorecard-type metric. Most CxOs are interested in the scorecard-type metric, so they can see how they compare within their market. Others are interested in discerning what it will take to move to a different state of maturity if so desired.

Table 3.1 EIM Assessment Areas

Assessment Areas for IMM Sample Factors Affecting IMM

Capacity to change How does the culture view the use of data and content currently? How numerous are the silos? Is there incentive to move to a more integrated picture of data and content?

Business alignment Is the organization a leader or follower? Are there urgent business issues creating pressure to act immediately? Is the business regulated? If so, how highly charged is the relationship with regulators? Is this business ready for EIM?

Technology readiness How is IT regarded by other areas? Is the “ plumbing ” adequate to meet a future vision where more data and content is moving around? How much “ shadow IT ” is there? Is the IT staff ready for EIM?

Data and content usefulness Is the quality of the existing content portfolio considered accurate? Is there the need for external data? Have privacy and security been a concern?

Awareness of risk Is management aware or able to quantify risk inherent in data and content? Are risk management or mitigation strategies considered when doing IT planning?

Enterprise boundaries Is there an EIM aspect to outsourcing? Are there regulations for data movements between countries? What is the awareness and tactics for dealing with these and other globalization issues?

Leadership Do the business leaders convey strategic and tactical plans well? Is there a business strategy that can be reviewed? Do executives care about data?

Collaborative potential Based on culture and other factors discussed earlier, how well can this organization use managed content if it existed? Can we wring all the benefi ts out of EIM?

Information and content usage Does the business exploit data using analytics? Is content managed formally? Can we support workfl ow? What standards are there? Is the organization immersed in producing reports?

TIP FOR SUCCESS

Consultants are useful for assessments, as experience in surveying many organizations always leads to a better survey. If consultants are not on the radar, there is a maturity template in the Appendixes you can copy. However, it is recommended to get external help with interpretation of the results, given the implied objectivity a consultant brings.



One thing that you should not see is a statement that you are “ good ” or “ bad. ” It is most likely that few organizations will ever appear to be the most mature. In fact some organizations, based on the nature of what they do, may have no need to be at the high end of whatever scale is used.

We assessed a consumer products company information area that was created by merging two large organizations. The nature of the post-merger information environment was such that the acquired company was deemed to have “ better ” IT, so the acquiring company was told to move toward the acquired company’s platforms and BI applications. The IMM assessment confi rmed the reality was that neither company’s mid-management really wanted to go through the changes, and were doing their best to hide their respective projects. The internal strife ultimately led to a political battle, where the acquiring company shut down the “ acquiree’s ” IT area, moved it across the country, and still tried to fi t the acquired company’s BI applications into the old culture. Eight years after our EIM strategy was delivered, they still cannot implement a uniform view of their organization. In a large organiza-tion, there will be disparate capabilities in staff, technology, and capability. Given EIM, by defi nition, is cross-organizational, a move up the maturity scale will require intimate knowledge of where the current differences and strengths lie.

IMM — BASIC WAY TO LOOK AT USAGE Some education is necessary at this point. If you mention the term capability maturity, or CMM to anyone connected with IT, chances are they will understand, or at least be aware, that the CMM represents a relative scale of capability for development and management of software. The entire concept of the CMM was origi-nated at Carnegie Mellon University in the 1980s under the oversight of a U.S. Air Force funded contract. 2

This concept is what we are applying to the information and content spectrum. Naturally, with the maturing of technologies for dealing with data and content, BI, and knowledge management, there is now discussion related to a maturity spectrum for IM and BI, an Information Management Maturity Model (IMMM) (sorry).

A signifi cant aspect of any discussion around maturity is that business and other types of orga-nizations, at a grassroots level, are beginning to see that there is a predictable curve of information and content production and usage that can be climbed. After the current and desired states of matu-rity are known, an enterprise must then develop principles, guidelines, and governance that affect all aspects of IT to drive it up the curve. A survey of the current thinking reveals it to be more focused on increasing levels of sophistication of information usage and embraces more of a business tone.

PERSPECTIVES ON MATURITY There are as many IMM scales as there are consultants offering the service. Some of them will emphasize the speed of using and exploiting data, i.e., moving from a once-a-month report to real-time indicators. Others focus on the organization (people, process, and culture) and avoid underlying technology. Others base the score on effective usage of content, basing the score on business usage contrasted against business effectiveness. Rather than declare one or two correct, it is better for the executive to see and understand how we can measure maturity, and therefore measure EIM progress. Furthermore, the IMM is NOT a measure of IT effectiveness, but refl ective of the entire enterprise.


31Perspectives on Maturity

Tables 3.2 – 3.4 explain maturity levels for the four perspectives shown in Figure 3.1 . Each per-spective, again, emphasizes an aspect of the business. It may be effective to present two perspectives, develop your own hybrid, or pick the one that is most representative of your organization. Later, Part 2 will get into details around each perspective, but here they are now for comparison purposes.

TIP FOR SUCCESS

You must understand these perspectives if you are to assume a leadership role of any sort in EIM. Remember, the IMM not only offers a glimpse of where you are, but can be used to present very clearly where you want to be. You carry the banner of corporate image, business vision, and mission. Information maturity is an important part of that banner.

Table 3.2 IMM Usage and Content Basis

Content Basis Usage Basis Description

Events Make it happen An organization is primitive, using forms and process-level data gathering. Consider a start-up business or small family-owned business.

Transactions Make it happen faster

Data is a lubricant. Business events become transactions that are captured. For example, a Point of Sale (POS) system at each outlet for a retail chain.

Reporting What happened? Transactions are gathered and summarized to inform the organization of what has happened. This is the most common use of structured data. However, you are still at the lubricant stage.

Analyzing Why did it happen? This level is where most organizations believe they are. Transactions (business events) are collected and evaluated post facto. Trends, correlations, and statistics enter into data use. At this point, a company may actually base business actions on the result of historical analysis. Executives may now believe they are entering the “ Fuel ” stage for information use.

Predictive What will happen? Organizations extend their historical analysis into predicting events, then compare the actual result to the predicted. This is really the entry point for the “ fuel ” stage of data management. Note that, most likely, nothing is done with documents or workfl ow-related content except print it, use it, and fi le it. Analysis of unstructured data is still manual.

Operationalize Make it happen by itself

An organization becomes confi dent enough in its patterns and behavior where some events (think MRP systems) are understood enough to be triggered automatically. At this stage, we also see unstructured content (e-mails, documents, paper work orders) generated, and a new level of content management and data is born. Some semblance of compliance or governance will appear from outside of IT.

Closed loop What do I want to happen?

The operations and event creation are based on triggers derived from analysis. Where in the operationalize phase we create events based on a threshold that was defi ned, this phase defi nes new thresholds based on desired results. The organization is getting intelligent with its structured data. This is truly a fuel stage. In addition, e-mails, memos, and other internal content are recognized as areas of value and risk, and we start to govern and defi ne an expected level of business behavior.

(Continued)



Table 3.3 IMM Capability Basis

Stage Description

Initial The organization is entrepreneurial; individuals have authority over data, so processing is fragmented. Chaotic and idiosyncratic are common adjectives. There are few users, any business rules or criteria for behavior are nonexistent. Obviously, data quality is far from integrated, and data handling is costly.

Repeatable Departmental data becomes the norm. Processes for consolidation and reconciliation may exist to improve the context of data. All data and content are defi ned internally (vs. using industry standards). Usage is still reactive. Any cleanup or sophistication in usage, such as analysis, is departmental, specialized, and costly.

Defi ned The organization starts to consider an enterprise view, and looks for some sort of integration across applications and silos. A desire for data accountability evolves. Strategic alignment to the business becomes an activity in IT. Standards are developed, and sharing and reuse become watchwords. Data quality becomes formal and may centralize. Data usage becomes more common, less specialized. Facilities to track usage, meaning, and maintain data assets evolve. Effi ciency of data management improves, costs decrease.

Managed Data and content assets are tracked, lineage of all content is understood and documented. Analytical results are used to close process loops. Availability for use may become real time vs. monthly or weekly reporting. Personnel can be interactive and collaborate on content and data. E-mails, documents, and web content are also managed, and can be called up alongside “ rows and columns. ” Data quality is built into processes vs. corrected post facto. Data and content management is integrated into the companies ’ culture and value chain.

Optimized There is no need to determine if information assets are managed effectively — they are woven into the fabric of the organization. Real-time innovative use of content is ubiquitous. There are effective measures in place, so allow IM to be continuously improved to support business innovation. The organization can place a value statement on its content, if not the balance sheet. Knowledge bases exist, and the distinction between structured data handling and unstructured data handling dissolves.

Collaborative How do I make it happen better?

We start to blend the structured and unstructured content. Even if the organization has functional silos or distinct business areas, content and data are made available together, and functions cooperate with data, vs. hoard it.

Foresight What should we do next?

The organization has data that measures its data and content; we reach a “ meta ” stage where we can, in effect, have the organization learn and remember, based on collaborative patterns, workfl ow, analytics, etc., store these learned behaviors, and react accordingly.

Table 3.2 (Continued)

Content Basis Usage Basis Description


33Perspectives on Maturity

Table 3.4 IMM Organization Basis

Style Description

Operate

Skills combined with charisma win Power of information mavericks Information processes and tools are individual and informal Individual agendas drive competitiveness

Consolidate

Teamwork within functional units Streamlined and measured processes Functional agendas Multiple versions of the truth Departments implement applications

Integrate

Workers think enterprise-wide Workers understand their impact Enterprise agenda IM formalized Collaboration among peer group

Optimize

Constant market alignment Incremental improvement Capture tacit knowledge Focus on edge-cases Infrastructure provides context

Innovate

Innovative mentality Diversity of experience New business models Risk management Change is expected

Information management maturity spectrums

Usage basis

Content basis

Capability basis

Scale

Organization basis

Capacity to change

Business alignment

Data and contentusefulness

Technologyreadiness

Leadership

Collaborativepotential

Informationmanagement

Make ithappen

Make ithappenfaster

Whathappened?

Why did ithappen?

What willhappen?

Make ithappen by

itself

What do Iwant to

happen?

How do wemake ithappenbetter?

What shouldwe do next?

Events Transactions Reporting Analyzing Predictive Operationalize Closed loop Collaborative Foresight

Initial Repeatable Defined Managed Optimized

Operate Consolidate Integrate Optimize Innovate

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

The Xs show therelative IMM scoresof a surveyedenterprise

FIGURE 3.1 IMM Perspectives



Usage and Content Basis Usage basis emphasizes how information is used. Content basis emphasizes the type of content used. These are used by my fi rm, and we use both simultaneously. Note that the fi rst two columns are two views with similar descriptions, one is content based, the other is usage based.

Capability Basis This next scale is based on the same levels of maturity used in IT to manage internal process matu-rity for software development. Capability basis focuses on the nature of interaction with information. I insert it in this book because the terms may be familiar, and many areas of your company may understand them. The stages are a little less distinct, but may be applicable or more acceptable to your organization. They tend to lean more toward your processes and handling of data and content.

Organization Basis The last example is in the context of organization evolution and behavior, with a focus more on the people and process personality of an enterprise. Thanks to SAS Institute, Cary, NC, for their permis-sion to work on this and use it in this book. 3 SAS has a set of criteria to assess organizations and assist them in evaluating their current investment in IT for their current maturity level. Note that the emphasis is not necessarily to force an evolution, rather understand where you are and maximize that level of understanding before moving forward.

Figure 3.1 is provided to contrast how each view (all have strengths and weaknesses) might map if aligned with a set of sample scores from an assessment.

Assessment Instruments A few notes on how to oversee this exercise to make it effective and relatively painless. A business leader cannot burden busy staff with hours of interviews to assess current EIM capability. It will seem repetitious, for one thing. “ We have been saying this for years. Why repeat it? ” is a refrain commonly heard. This is a data point for IMM. It means for sure that there are some silos because they are being vocal. Granted there have been complaints about data and content. But no one has complained about the lack of enterprise governance over data. The complaints have been local in context. So inter-views only reinforce isolation. Again, IMM is an enterprise metric. Departmental IMM will not con-tribute much to the baseline you are trying to identify. Interviews and meetings will occur after the assessments when results are presented, verifi ed, and you start to develop a consistent view of current capacity and ability to manage information and content on a formal basis.

TIP FOR SUCCESS

Consider this technique. Do not have any interviews to assess the current level of maturity. Use other methods and then present results. You will get much higher engagement when managers see all the results in an enterprise context. You need to force business staff to think holistically. In my practice, we only interview the highest placed executive we can get to, usually the CEO or business unit leader. If we cannot get their perspective, we usually “ dumb down ” EIM to more of a business alignment exercise, and we use quantitative data and benchmarks to do the IMM assessment.


35References

A committed management team can complete this assessment rapidly, usually within one to two weeks after design and approval. The most effi cient approach has been a focused online survey. These are not casual lists of questions; they are engineered instruments, limited to what can be done within 15 minutes. In addition, we use demographic categories to be able to differentiate responses across multiple levels of management and the organization. In this manner, we are able to monitor response rates (middle management ALWAYS drags its feet) by audience. There are examples of survey instru-ments in the Appendices.

SUMMARY The maturity of the organization in the context of data and content usage, quality, alignment to the business, and other factors is a crucial concept to understand if you are serious about EIM. Everyone (even within the same industry) will most likely have or desire a different type or fl avor of maturity in terms of using data. Company A makes widgets but wants to be most innovative, so it may require more capability in the areas to enable R & D. Company B makes widgets and desires to be the most customer intimate. Therefore, they may need to master the management of their basic reference data, like customer and sales records. Understanding the gap between your needs and capabilities permits a more effi cient and measurable EIM program. If you do not know where you are, you cannot develop a plan to get where you want to be. But IMM goes beyond a current-state analysis. IMM sets the met-rics for measuring the amount of convergence. IMM means institutionalizing IAM principles. Using the sports analogy from Chapter 2, IMM measures the distance to traverse from playing “ football ” to playing “ soccer. ” The nature of the IMM assessment creates baseline attributes for future measure-ment of EIM success.

References

3. Copyright © 2006; SAS Institute, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduced with permission of SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC, USA.

2. Specifi cation 2167A, CMU/USAF.

1. Davenport, T. H., & Harris, J. G. (2007). The nature of analytical competition. In: Competing on Analytics . Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.


Documents

Maturity Information Management 3 - Elsevier · This concept is what we are applying to the information and content spectrum. Naturally, with the maturing of technologies for dealing