IT VM for BAs - A Closer Look (Part I) - 300823.pdf

IT Value Maximisation
for
Business Analysts
A Closer Look At The Elephant
Part I – The Basic Principles
for
IIBA UK North & Scotland
David P Jacobs BSc, MBCS, BVMS
29th August 2023
Copyright © MaxVal Consultancy Ltd, 2023. All rights reserved.
www.Maximum-Value.co.uk
1

2

3
Oh dear, oh deary me…
This makes me think of
burgers and chips and
Fish Finger Syndrome…
why a 1 hr wait?!

www.Maximum-Value.co.uk 4
Background
Polls 1-3
Deciding on best methods/approaches
The challenge/s we all face
The questions we need to answer (x3 sets)
The answers:
What value is
How value arises (at design time and run time)
The ingredients of value
How the ingredients work together, (poll 4)
Introduction to the business value equation (BV EQ)
Poll 5: are we getting better at value maximisation?
Parting thought – top challenge
Contact details
Q&A
Bonus slides including Agenda for A Closer Look (Part II) in
January 2024, Part III in spring 2024 and beyond…
Agenda

5
Career (day job)
1973 to 1976 BSc Hons Management Science, Warwick University
Business School
1976 (1970) to 1985 marketing information analysis and research
1981 to 1997 computer analysis/programming
1997 to 2023 business analysis (with project leading/management)
R&D
1980s conceived Business Value Maximisation Framework (BVMF®)
1990s gave birth to BVMF®, first article published (1995)
2000s put BVMF® though its childhood and teens
2010-2019 matured BVMF® into the world of work…
2020 to 2023 refined BVMF® into adulthood, now growing and maturing!
The Combined Journey
70s/80s understood how organisations use business data and
management information
80s started computer analysis/programming to become one of the
infamous business/IT hybrids (gap bridgers)
80s/90s expanded the hybridism/gap bridging skills to be multifaceted
90s+ focused the multilingual gap bridging, a means to an end, on the end
itself, the maximisation of value, success and ROI from IT and ’digital’!
Background

6
Poll 1
Who is (most)
responsible for
maximising value,
success and ROI from
IT/’digital
transformation’?

7
Poll 2
What type of result are we aiming at?

8
Poll 3
What are the best methods/approaches
for maximising business value, success
and ROI from IT/’digital transformation’?

9
Method Selection
to determine the best methods for
maximising BV (Q0)
The question of whether to use waterfall, agile,
wagile, V model, prince2, etc. should not be the driver,
not the first question considered (it depends on a
number of factors…)
A blanket approach of adoption in an
org/company/business is unlikely to be optimal –
standardisation is rarely beneficial in net terms when
deployed for its own sake
None of the available/existing approaches/methods,
used singly or in combination, vanilla or tailored, will
be as optimally strong/powerful as when underpinned
by the fundamental principles of (IT) business value
maximisation, encapsulated by BVMF®

10
Types, Aspects & Dimensions
Macro/big picture/high Mid-level Micro/detail/low
General/generic Specific
Predictable Less predictable Unpredictable
Design time Dvt & Test time Run time
Predicted/expected/forecast Actual
Tangible Less tangible Intangible
Quantifiable Less quantifiable Unquantifiable
Quantitative ‘Handled’ Qualitative
Conceptual/abstract/logical Concrete/physical
Negative Zero Hygiene Positive +, ++, +++
Dependent Less dependent Independent
Objective … Subjective
Absolute … Comparative
Ongoing/at a point in time Incremental/delta
Objectives part met Objectives Met Objectives exceeded
First past the post (possibly waterfall) Proportional (possibly agile)
Perceived … Real/actual
High propensity Medium propensity Low propensity
High representivity Medium representivity Low representivity
Landscape Value Characteristics (LVCs 1)

Expectations and Reality
Software/Functionality
IT FUNCTIONALITY
Business Value/
Net Benefit
Net Gain/Loss
Start of
Computing
Time 2000 2020…
IT
Capability/
Performance
Technology/Hardware
IT TECHNOLOGY
The 1934 Model
Expectation
Dichotomy!
1950
Do not match!
11
Technology
curve

Continuous steps
of project,
programme &
support work*
Time
Technical
Capability
The Step Diagram
Value
Value
Value
Value
To optimise value against (high)
expectations and to hit the moving
target, we need to cut steps into the
Technology capability (growth) curve
Technology
curve
12
This helps you
optimise your efforts
against a moving
target…
To balance/optimise, for
each piece of
work/increment/iteration,
time vs progression in tech,
func and bus objectives
achievement… including
architectural catch up…
* A celluloid film’s 24
frames a second looks
like seamless moving
pictures…!
Our industry is(still)
young – tech
capability is rising
exponentially and,
ditto potentially
business value, but
manifestly we have
a (long) way to go
with bus value
max… here’s one
way to proceed…

13
Bridging the Gap
Business/
real world/
people
IT/
computers
Colour
Shades
of Grey
Analog
Fuzzy
Human
Tolerant/
flexible
Business
process
(organisa
tional
activity
path/sequ
ence)
IT
functional
IT
technical
Black
and
white
Digital/
Binary
Exact
Robotic
Intolerant
/inflexible
Predefined
<-- Antithetic! -->
Human activity
Information (various types)
Information Technology
Computer
hardware
Markets
It’s hardly surprising that bridging between
business and IT is such a challenge!
The Activity/Role Spectrum
(simplified)
Slow to change/be changed
Quick(er) to change

14
There are very many ways
to get this wrong, and only a
few ways to get it right;
sometimes only one!
The Mightily
Cruel Ratio
David P Jacobs, 2022

15
Elephant Maxims
The IT value jig-saw has pieces missing
or not fitting properly
A set of golf clubs is not the primary
determinant for the golfer winning or
losing the match/tournament
You would not drive your car all the way
to work in reverse (although
occasionally reverse gear is valid, even
essential)
You can’t bake a great cake without
knowing what kind of cake is required,
what the ingredients are and how to
mix and cook the ingredients optimally

The First Question (Q1)
what do I need to focus on, think about
and, most importantly, do …
… practically and pragmatically?!
If I want maximum business value (MBV)
from IT enabled process, ‘digital’
transformation, BAU, CI, etc.
for my stakeholders/value interested
parties (VIPs)…

Specifically… (Qs2)
• What is value?
• How does value arise?
• Where will the value come from (how much is
there to be had?)
• What are the elements that need to be combined
(the value cake’s ingredients)?
• How best/optimally to combine the
elements/ingredients?
• How do you get more value?
• How do you avoid getting less value?
• How do you measure/quantify value?
17

When moving from a currently manual or
IT/’digitally’ supported situation to a future
auto-assisted one:
Will we be better off?
By how much will we be better off?
What’s the likely net gain – and (latterly)
did we get it?
How do we make sure we’ll be the best
off possible?
How will we stay the best off possible?
18
Furthermore…(Qs3)

19
Right, let’s put our thinking caps on…
… factoring in some Aristotelian syllogism, a few bits of
Plato’s writings on Socratic Questioning and a bit of basic
philosophical logic… plus 30 years of research and
development coupled with first, second and third hand
experience with some very good project results along the
way, here we go…

What is Value?
The achievement/meeting of business/organisational goals,
objectives and expectations of stakeholders/value interested
parties (*VIPs)
PLUS
The exceedance** of business/organisational goals, objectives
and expectations of stakeholders/value interested parties
(VIPs)
* VIPs include all parties affected, involved in any way; their
positions reconciled optimally
** I want to maximise the harder to predict value as well as the
easier to predict value
It’s not easy to predict all value and it accrues (or gets wasted) at
micro level – ‘business cases’ have tended to be “macro-assumptive”
and bounded/limited …
Value is net benefit – all tangible and less tangible costs and benefits
must be factored in/weighed up - it is possible to ‘equate’ the two
www.Maximum-Value.couk
20

IT Technical
IT TECH
IT Functional
IT FUNC
Business process/org activity path/seq
BP/OAP/S
Business value
BV
Enables
Enacts
Delivers
21
Produces
the value
What IT
is/how IT
works
What IT
does
Improved
revenue/margin,
productivity,
information
quality, cost
reduction, etc.
How value arises
at run-time, fully ‘automated’

How value arises
at run-time, auto-assisted
IT Technical
IT TECH
IT Functional
IT FUNC
Bus process/org activity path/sequence
BP/OAP/S
Business value
BV
Enables
Enacts
Delivers
Manual
MAN
22
This includes
‘pure’ human
activity not
associated with
the IT system but
may be auto-
simulated …
MAN Pure
MAN/IT, and
(mechanical)
equipment
function
This includes
‘pure’ BP/OAP/S
which is not
auto-assisted
and BP/OAP/S(IT)
which is
This includes
auto-
assistance at
various levels
by software
and fully
‘automated’
processes
The BP/OAP/S-IT
part of this
process can only
be what it is
because of the IT
enablement
Equipment
function
(electronic,
mechanical)

How value is conceived and
designed at design time, auto-assisted
IT Technical
IT TECH
IT Functional
IT FUNC
Business process/org activity path/seq
BP/OAP/S
Business value
BV
Is delivered by
Is enacted by
Is enabled by
Manual
MAN
23
Equipment
function
(electronic,
mechanical)

IMPROVE
MAINTAIN
D
O
H
O
W
Business Mission/Vision/Goals
Business Aims, Objectives & Measures: OKR, KPI, SLA, OLA, CSF, KSFs
Conceptual Information System (CIS) infox4 + (pure) manual + eqpt
Optimised Business Process/Activity Path/Seq (BP/OAP/S)
Value Conception and Design
Layers of Focus (LoF)
IT ‘Requirements’ (‘Functional’ and ‘Non-Functional’) IT FUNC + IT TECH
IT Functional Design (logical, conceptual x process/data)
IT Technical Design (physical)
IT Code, Test, Train, Deploy
IT Proactive Support, Maintenance
and Enhancement
Value
Conception
and
Design
Business Value
(predicted to manifest at run time)
Non-Contiguous Overlay / Business Process/Activity Path/Seq Space
W
H
A
T
24
Required
Business
Process/
Org Activity
Path/Sequence
Strategic, Tactical, Operational (TOM), Architectural Considerations
WHO
WHY
The layer cake, chain
links, dependent jig-
saw pieces…
Thanks are due to A Maslow,
Cranfield University, R Wallsgrove
and most brides and grooms …

25
Ingredient description Ingredient name
Business process/org
activity path/seq (incl. creation BP/OAP/S 25?
and use of information INFO)
Human activity (and EQPT) MAN (‘pure’ and 10?
IT related) 10?
IT functionality IT FUNC 25?
IT technicality/technology IT TECH 10?
Morale, PR, image, reputation,
goodwill, perception, kudos,
prestige, motivation (less tangible) MISC 5?
Cost (£s absolute/reduction delta) COST 15?
* These value ingredients are not completely mutually exclusive; it depends how you look at them… also
we must factor in mechanical equipment’s (non-IT’d) functionality …
% of total
value to be
realised*
Where will our value come from?
What will the ingredients be?
How much value can we get from each
ingredient, i.e., what’s the Propensity?*

Estimating the Power of Re/’Automation’
What do we expect the value of
‘IT FUNC(-N)’ to be?
I.e., how much value (uplift in bus process/org act path/sequence
performance) do we expect to get?
26
In an averagely worthwhile, acceptably successful project,
to what extent do we (expect to) boost the reengineered
business process’s ability to do its job by using (improved)
‘automation’… as a starting point/general guideline,
consider projects over the last 20 years…
+10% (*1.1)
+25% (*1.25)
+50% (*1.5)
+75% (*1.75)
+100% (*2.0)
+Other?
Answers to this will be revealed in a future presentation …
What is the general
number?
What do we want our
number to be – on our
specific project/s?
How will we get
there?
(Will we be faster, more
accurate, better quality, more
available/accessible/
centralised? Are we prepared for
the negatives as one tiny fault
can cause huge damage? And
wrt visibility, computerised
functionality (and errors) can be
harder to see for the humans
involved…)
Poll 4

Introduction to the
Business Value Equation
(BV EQ)
27

28
How much better off do we
expect to be?
The Business Value Equation (1)
Net Business Gain (or Loss)
is/will be proportional to
the Performance of the
Reengineered/Reviewed Business
Process/Org Activity Path/Sequence
as helped (or hindered) by the
IT Functionality
as supported (or degraded) by the
IT Technicality/Technology
plus (or minus) a miscellaneous element of
Image, Morale, Reputation, etc…
…all subject to Cost

29
This combines the value factors (ingredients) together
numerically to show how much value we expect to achieve (at
design time) and do achieve (at run time) and … how very easy
it is to do more harm than good!
We have:
Net Business Gain/Loss (NBG/L) is proportional to the power of the
reengineered business process/org activity path/sequence (BP/OAP/S-R/A)
as boosted (or hindered) by IT functionality (IT FUNC)
as enabled (or degraded) by IT technicality (IT TECH)
plus or minus less tangible/qualitative factors (MISC)
all minus cost (COST)
Symbolically:
NBG/L ∝ BP/OAP/S(R/A) * (IT FUNC * IT TECH) +- MISC - COST
Terms: R=reengineered/reviewed/redesigned, A=auto-assisted/’automated’
Value = net benefit/gain, ISBV = Information Systems Business Value
Gross (theoretical) ISBV = IT FUNC, Net (Actual) ISBV = IT FUNC * IT TECH
IT Effectiveness/performance for IT TECH = Uptime * Efficiency/Effectiveness, e.g.,
90% up * 90% efficient/effective = 81%...
Assess absolute/ongoing value (at T0/1) or incremental value (from T0/1 to T1/2, or
from T{N} to T{N}+1) against the 4 stages of business process:
1 Manual [20] > 2 Reengineered (purely manual) [25] > 3 Reengineered (aware IT will be
used, data centralised, etc) [30] > 4 Auto-assisted (sped up, more reliable, etc) [40]…

Poll 5
How much better do you think
you’ve become over the last 45
minutes at understanding, identifying
and manifesting IT business value?
30
Much better
Somewhat better
A little better
Same/No better
Worse
Other/specify in Chat
Don’t Know

31
What is your (remaining/outstanding)
top challenge in respect of
maximising business value, success
and ROI from IT?
To gain optimum value, success and
ROI from digital transformation,
BAU, CI and all IT/software
supported org/bus activities
Parting Thought
(for Q&A, etc)

David P Jacobs
Business Value Maximisation Specialist (BVMS)
Email DavidJ@Maximum-Value.co.uk
Tel 07799 036652, 01932 248027
Philippa (Pip) Randall-Nason
Executive Assistant/Client Support
Email PhilippaN@Maximum-Value.co.uk
Tel 07834 638373
Web www.Maximum-Value.co.uk
32
The bonus slides that follow include more detail on today’s models and
techniques, some ‘upfront’ on models and techniques to be covered in Part
II (January), Part III (spring 2024) and beyond, and a list of MaxVal’s
services…

Agenda for ‘A Closer Look, Parts II & III’
coming in January and spring 2024…
33
Name Function
Business Value Equation (part II) Helps you to see how the Value Ingredients (VIs) work with each and
combine to produce value. Shows you the stark reality of how easy it
is for your IT systems to bring your org/bus to its knees and how hard
it is to have it all singing a fabulous song (you CAN do it as long as
you underpin your work with some principles of IT bus val max
Conceptual Units of Benefit (CUB)
LadderTM
If you’re using MoSCoW, this will enhance the socks off your
‘requirements’/functions prioritisation with its powerful component
relationship segmentation and value tagging (VT)
Football Team Management
(FTM)/Optimal Human-Computer
Interaction/Interplay (OH-CI)
Helps you formulate the most powerful football team to play the game
with an optimally blended set of players, some human, some
computers (robots, i.e., computerised players)
Business Practice and Contingency
(BP&C)
Makes sure, at Run time, all your hard work pays off. I.e., that IT
systems do not, at run time, degrade your business processes rather
than enhancing them; it’s very easy to ruin your business with IT that
doesn’t work
Crossword Diagram A model for decompositional analysis of manifest value/success that’s
supports you in divining where the IT systems are better than they
were and where they are not so you can fix and/or improv them. A
great way to structure and progress CI.
Various key concepts like Two Node
Factors such as Push/Pull (P/P),
Macro/Micro, On-point/Incremental value,
etc. Plus approaches to effective value
analysis like The Six Factor Cadence,
The Croydon Facelift, etc.
There are plenty of two node concepts in BVMF® and here we look at
the main ones. Macro->Micro, Design time->Run time, Functional-
>Technical, Estimated-> Actual, etc.
Also, some techniques for effective analysis and communication.
Introduction to the systematic
application and assessment of value
using BVMF®
The IT Effectiveness SpectrumTM as a tool to assessing IT Business
Value Capability (ITBVC)TM and planning to improve it

To optimise the value of each STEP
in the Step Diagram
34
Decide for each STEP how high you will shoot for
technical, functional and process improvement – and
how long the STEP will be.
It’s not about Waterfall, Agile or a hybrid approach;
it’s about continuous progress.
For example, are you in a business marketplace
where first past the post applies, or, where a more
proportional reward system applies?
What time scales are required?
Waterfall <-> Agile is a spectrum and each piece of
work may be different in this respect
Use the Value Landscape Characteristics (LVCs) to
help decide which approach will be best for a given
piece of work

35
Types, Aspects & Dimensions
Value Landscape Characteristics (LVCs 2)

36
Who is Business Value Maximisation
Framework (BVMF®) for?
Business Analysts (BAs)?
Project Managers (PMs)?
Product Owners (POs)?
Product Managers (PMs)?
Actually, anyone interested and involved in gaining much
more value from IT, digital transformation, i.e., business
analysts, project managers, product owners, portfolio
managers, programme managers, IT managers, IT
directors, senior developers/technicians, CIOs
(misnomer?), CxOs, business SMEs/secondees, business
change/organisational design managers, relationship
managers, etc.
Business value maximisation specialists (BVMSs)
working with BVMF® can help us all how to work together
in this endeavour to engender MBV

MaxVal’s Services
37
Service Status Chargeable
Introduction to Business Value
Maximisation Framework (BVMF®)
Available N
Value Clinic (60 minutes) with
basic IT BV Capability Assessment
Available N
Business Analysis primer (recap on
basic BA skills)
Available Y
Foundation training in BVMF® (15
hrs, certification as BVMS)
Available Y
Intermediate training in BVMF® Under
development
N/a
Ad hoc
Advanced training in BVMF® Under
development
N/a
Ad hoc
Consultancy (supported by Do IT
Better Consortium) with/out BVMF®
Available Y
Value based career coaching and
mentoring
Available Y

38
Further analysis of
‘The challenge’
VISIBLE LESS VISIBLE
Human Beings IT/Computer Systems
Instantly flexible/changeable/updateable Takes hours, days, weeks, months, years to change
Penetrable Im/less penetrable
Complexly ‘layered’ with almost infinite dimensions to thinking and
working
Multi layered
Can change t(r)ack in a microsecond; can change the question, paradigm,
etc
Predefined to ask the questions based on X Y Z will never happen or X Y Z
may happen under P Q R circumstances
Conscious – has sense of ‘sanity’, what’s likely and what’s not likely Not conscious.
Has no innate sense of sanity/common sense; only does what it’s
programmed to do – to follow predefined paths/sequences. Can be made to
simulate consciousness and sanity but it’s a repeatable procedure. This can
have great positive value to save humans crunching billions of gigabytes of
data – like AI for example…
Is reality.
Has perceived reality and actual reality in contention.
Has emotion and logic often in contention
Simulates reality (depending on Representivity (REPR) i.e., application area)
- is artificial depending on REPR i.e., background and frontline REPR
Reasons (with the rational part of brain) Can be programmed to ‘reason’ but it’s a simulation/emulation
Feels (with the emotional part of brain) Doesn’t feel – if your bank debits you £1million instead of £1 the computer
system will only pick that up if it’s been programmed to do so, to keep an
eye on range of txns. If not, the £1billion will ‘happily’ go thru until a human
being notices it. This is where BVMF®’s FTM/OH-CI module comes in useful.
Can tell you what’s wrong (if you ask the right question) Reverse engineering invariably required to work thru the less/invisibility,
impenetrability factor/s and the hard-to-see complex layering
Processes thoughts simultaneously in a myriad of ways, directions,
intensities, etc
Crunches (lots of) numbers very fast to simulate certain aspects of
reasoning, artificially…

39
Why /
Who
Along with the Why, one must consider the Who, especially on business
IT projects because people involved have different perspectives and
desires and you need to reconcile these two factors, or you can end up
with more contention than you started with!
What Next comes the What. What you need to do to bring about the vison,
objectives of the project.
How After the What, comes the How. Interestingly, when I have experimented
with examples of what and how, I have seen that there is a recursive
hierarchy present. I.e., every What has associated with it at least one
How, sometimes more. And then, each of those component Hows forms
a What to another set of Hows lower down the hierarchy. What and How
are slightly similar but subtly different… i.e., from the above we could
conclude that a How is (just) the detail of its prefatory What… maybe not
always but extremely often it seems.
When /
Where
These two may be important and can certainly make or break a project
or exercise but are possibly not as critical as the why/who/what/how.
However, never say never (as the Sean Connery film was entitled in 1983
in his James Bond comeback, admittedly with an Again on the end of
the Never Say Never). So, anyway, don’t underestimate the value of
when and where!
The Six Factor Cadence
Recently published in Brainz Digital Magazine as part of article
www.brainzmagazine.com/post/riding-the-storm-of-scepticism-and-apathy-
for-innovators-entrepreneurs-and-pioneers-part-iii
To see more of my Brainz articles, click Read more from David! and scroll down.
The first ‘Riding The Storm’ article (of 3) tells the story of my journey to develop BVMF® at
Riding The Storm of Scepticism and Apathy for Innovators, Entrepreneurs and Pioneers

40
The Six Factor Cadence
Key points (good for BAs!) that often
aren’t aired…
Why
Who
What
How
Where
When
Context is
almost
always
everything

41
Pros and Cons of Methods
Method Pros Cons Notes
Waterfall Predetermination is good.
Leaf level process model
plus data model plus
glossary provide value
Slow to deploy value.
Not the whole story
* Elephant missing
BPR implicit
Agile More business focused ** Promotes that working
software is the objective
veering away from real BV
It’s not the software that
produces the value! Golf
clubs don’t play themselves
Agile More collaborative Knee jerk reaction to
waterfall.
Confusing terms: product,
‘requirement’, feature…
user stories not clear on
the ingredients of value
Confused team structure
and roles: PO (no BA!), Prod
Mgr, etc.
Hypocritical on outcome vs
output; 15k to 136k
deployments at Amazon
Agile More granular Not the whole story * Elephant missing
Agile More responsive to
changing requirements
Lost some of the
con/sequential logic of
waterfall
Threw the baby out with
the bath water
Agile Handles emergence ‘better’ Emergence is only valid in
certain situations
BVMF’s Value Landscapes
help evaluate best methods
Wagile/hybrid/blended Good compromise, more
realistic
Not the whole story * Elephant missing
Prince2, BRM, MSP, MoV,
BABOK, etc…
They are trying to bring a
logical approach
UML/Use Cases Better on interplay between
human beings and IT func
Human/system interplay ok
*Elephant = the
fundamental,
underlying principles
by which IT leads to
business value
**Explicit/deliberate/
active obfuscation vs
Implicit/incidental/pass
ive
inference/implication/
effect

A few more of BVMF® models, concepts
and techniques…
42
Name Function Status
Representivity Correspondence/alignment between real world
process and data and how appropriately they
are represented in an IT system
Foundation and
Intermediate training
Predefinition,
currency/changeability and
control (P, C/C & C)
Degree of control a user has within a given
time scale, including immediacy of mutual
communication (IOMC)
Under development
Sole working vs team sizes Optimisation of the balance between the single
mind and larger teams
Under development
The IT Effectiveness
Programme
Systematic way to improve value maximisation
capability using the IT Effectiveness Spectrum
assessment tool
Intermediate/Advanced
Assess, Boost, Check
(ABC)
Way to boost value when it threatens to falter;
works in conjunction with Crossword Diagram
Foundation
Croydon Facelift Optimised way to work and communicate with
users/SMEs and other involved parties
Drafted, under trial
Functional Creativity To help the business community to envisage
required IT functionality
Foundation
Taking the Rap To help business managers avoid surreptitious
inclusion of work practices into new systems
Foundation/Intermediate
Value focused
‘requirements’ definition
To develop atomic, value focused
‘requirements’ for each value ingredient
Foundation/Intermediate
Specific terminology
definition
Yield more value from accurate terms
definition with glossaries that equate business
and IT terminology
Foundation

43
Example Based on Predicted and Actual Output,
at Design and Run time
The existing business process (BP/OAP/S-0) is outputting 25 widgets a day; when
reengineered (BP/OAP/S-R), it outputs 30 widgets a day
Now, when ‘re/automated’ (to BP/OAP/S-RA), the business process’s output will be
equal to:
The output of the existing reengineered business process BP/OAP/S-R at 30
widgets
As boosted (or hindered) by the new IT functionality IT FUNC-N i.e., 30 * the IT
functional boost factor (expressed as N.NNN), e.g., 30 * 1.333 = 40
As supported/enabled (or degraded) by the new IT technicality IT TECH-N i.e., *
100% at full tilt (more likely to be 90% efficiency for 90% of the time i.e., 81%)
So, the equation we are looking at is: 30 * 1.333 = 40 * 81% = 32 …
The new level of ‘re/automated’ output (BP/OAP/S-RA) = BP/OAP/S-R * (IT FUNC-N *
IT TECH-N)
…we will ignore the other ingredients (MAN), MISC and COST for the time being…
Given that we are now outputting 30 widgets a week in our newly reengineered
process, and we assume that IT-TECH-N will be 100% (is that realistic?) … how
much good will we do by introducing or upgrading the ‘automation’ of this process?
Upper and lower limits of the
variables are important…

Transforming Output into Net
Business Gain/Loss (BV EQ 4)
Process Initial
widgets
output/
volume
IT FUNC-
N
* N.NNN
IT
TECH-N
* NNN%
Resultant
output
Net Business
Gain/Loss
over
BP/OAP/S-R
% Gain/
Loss
over BP/OAP/S-R
BP/OAP/S-0
un-reengineered
process
25 25 N/a
BP/OAP/S-R
reengineered
process (baseline)
30 30 0 0
BP/OAP/S-RA 30 1.333 100 40 10 +33.3 (unlikely)
BP/OAP/S-RA 30 1.333 81 32.4 2.4 +8
BP/OAP/S-RA 30 1.333 75 30 0 0 (‘automation’
completely nullified)
BP/OAP/S-RA 30 1.333 72.25 29 -1 -3.33 (worse than
the BPR’d level)
BP/OAP/S-RA 30 1.333 66.67 25 -5 -20 (back to prior to
the BPR)
BP/OAP/S-RA 30 1.333 50 20 -10 -33.3 (worse than
ever was!)
BP/OAP/S-RA
includes less
predictable/exceed
expectations
output
30 1.5 81 36.5 6.5 +21.7%
NB these numbers do not take (MAN,) MISC and COST into account…
you can add MISC, turn it into money, take away COST, get to profit…
44

45
Considerations
Be aware whether you’re measuring delta/change value or
absolute/ongoing value… i.e. the incremental value of moving from T1 to
T2, say from 30 to 40 widgets a week at a unit cost of £5 down to £4.50, or
the ongoing value of 40 widgets a week at a unit cost of £4.50…
We assume here that the full effect of IT FUNC operates on BP/OAP
boosting (or hindering) it. Depending on the degree and nature of any
‘automation’ the effect of IT FUNC will typically not be 100% but may be
85% for example…
Successive releases of business process and IT systems include changes
to processes (BP/OAP/Ss) and IT systems and so some value gains will be
due to pure process (BP/OAP/S) upgrade irrespective of any improvement
in IT FUNC
What we want/expect from IT FUNC and what we get are two different
things, usually! Design time expectations may not be realised at Run time
You will likely struggle to apply this equation at a fully granular level (you
can work down from high level process all the way to function, screen and
even field level, in theory) but doing it at a sensible level will invariably
yield great dividends in Business Value

46
Systematic
Application of
BVMF®
1 Identify
value ingredients
and organisation /
project
objectives
2 Design
business
process/org
act path/seq 3 Design IT
Function-
ality
6 Use,
Assess,
Repeat 5 Create,
Mix, Cook,
Serve…
4 Design IT
Technology
Application of
BVMF® is by:
1) Ad
hoc/troubleshooting
or
2) Systematic
assessment and
improvement of
value maximisation
capability
BVMF® has several
dozen models and
several hundred
concepts, principles,
guidelines and
techniques (CPGTs)
arranged into modules

47
The Conceptual Units of Benefit (CUB) Ladder (1)
What degree of value can we expect from each project, project
element, sprint, etc; at best, and at worst? How do the functions,
“requirements” or project components relate to each other?
0
1
N
3
2
-N
Functional Hygiene factors
Technical Hygiene factors
Software generation upgrades
Technical patches
Network maintenance
Virus control
Higher echelons of value
Significant, dramatic growth
Business creativity exploited
Continuing improvement
Worth
doing, some
benefit
Running to
stand still,
negligible
positive
benefit
What we’re
aiming at!
Users ‘satisfied, acceptable ROI’
Cost ‘containment’
Improved support to business
Traditional ‘automation’
Software/project ‘success’
Conceptual
Units
of
Benefit
Limited
Value
Unlimited
Value
Hygiene
value
Little
value
Damage!
Infrastructure
Housekeeping/
Basics
Connectivity
Positive Value Low
Positive Value High
Better
Value
Positive Value Medium

The Conceptual Units of Benefit
(CUB) Ladder (2)
0
2
3
BP/OAP, IT FUNC
BP/OAP, IT FUNC, IT
TECH
BP/OAP/S, IT FUNC
Conceptual
Units
of
Benefit
Enabler/Dissatisfier/Hygiene/Basic
No Value (Neutral)
Negative Value (Waste)
Positive Value Factor: Low
Satisfier/Motivator/Normal/Want
Positive Value Factor: High
Satisfier++/Motivator++/Wow
Positive Value Factor: Medium
Satisfier+/Motivator+/Exciter/Delighter
48
1
Score ‘requirements’, functions and project elements at design and run
time. Use as adjunct to MoSCoW coupled with who, why, what, etc.
BP/OAP, IT FUNC, IT
TECH
Worthwhile (expectations met)
Exceedingly Worthwhile (expectations exceeded)
More than Worthwhile (expectations met/exceeded)
BP/OAP, IT FUNC, IT
TECH
BP/OAP, IT FUNC
You can also consider MAN,
MISC and COST. And try for
granular application…
With grateful
thanks to
Hertzberg, Kano,
VSA&M and Lean.
Beware, these CUB
scores continually
move downwards –
sad fact of life!
Tech debt, vulnerabilities, live issues
Epics, features/themes, user stories

49
Would you compose your
team, like this? Or like this?
Optimal Human-Computer Interaction
using “Football Team Management”
to balance our team for maximum performance
Value arises from the combined strength of the players…
Boeing did this very badly with their 737 Max MCAS system. Pilots and system were
NOT blended together in an effective fashion. Pilots were not properly trained, and
the ball (of control) could not be passed from system to human effectively at the
crucial (run) time when human override was required. Sadly, 346 people died.
BVMF® has a variety of models and techniques to help address this
challenge including Interfacial Sins Avoidance (ISA), macro to micro
correspondence (MTMC), value focused functional design (VFFD), etc…

50
Sins Avoidance (FTM 2)
To Avoid Value Loss at Micro Level
(micro value must play out macro value or (too
much) value will be squandered)
• Don’t force the user to enter incorrect information - e.g.,
displaying mandatory drop-down lists where no one value is
the one the user requires! Ask the right questions.
• Don’t wipe the user’s data - the user completes a whole
screen of information and hits Save, error/s are flagged up
(user may need to scroll up to find them) and most or all of
their data has been wiped out or altered
• Don’t make the user guess; be specific - e.g. tell them the
required form of an entry before input, rather than
highlighting an error after it has occurred (did Boeing make
the 737 Max pilots guess?!)
• On a brighter note, a great example of how to do it is the
Royal Mail’s post code finder – it’s a joy!
Be clear what info you ask for, what you will do with it and help the user to be confident you will use it constructively
Avoid conflation with
imposed consequence/s

IT is potentially highly
dangerous… the more you
‘automate’ the more damage
occurs when things go
wrong, as they often do! Many
organisations still don’t get this.
In 2017, British Airways cancelled
726 flights when their check-in
system failed – there was nothing
wrong with the planes! Cost £80m.
In 2018, a report said, “TSB lacked
common sense before its IT
meltdown”. Cost £100m.
From 1999 to 2020, the Post Office
persecuted and jailed many of its
sub-postmasters for fraud which
turned out to be the fault of its
Horizon IT system. Cost £100m.
Business Practice and Contingency
(BP&C) helps deal with this…
51

52
Although Peter Drucker
said “You can only
manage what you can
measure” which is broadly
true, you can maximise
each successive tranche
of value using
comparatives and sensible
‘handles’…

53
Continual Improvement with
the Crossword Diagram
For ‘putting a handle’ on value, to identify and rectify low value
scores, to make sure the new world is much better than the old
Make
and sell
widgets
+
SOP
0
Manufacturing
+
Purchasing
+
Customer
Service
++
Maintain
Invoices
++
Maintain
Customers
+
Maintain
Credit
Details
0
Maintain
Payments
-
Comparatives:
++ = much better
+ = better
0 = same
- = worse
-- = much worse
Scores represent actuals or estimates of performance
of business process BP/OAP/S as helped by IT FUNC
(by function) as enabled by IT TECH.
Optionally feed in BV Equation, CUB Ladder scores
and Football Team Management (FTM) identifying
lower scoring areas and variables in order to
maximise predictable and less predictable value.
Use KPIs (against OKRs) and extend them.
Decompose
into 4 cells
and score
each cell…
Add in recent
dimensions of what to
analyse, how to
measure/assess,
granularity… can also
include Man, Cost,
Misc. BP/OAP/S horiz
and vertical, then
FUNC, then TECH,
then other variables..

54
Crossword Diagram
Dimensions of Application
Make
and sell
widgets
+
SOP
0
Manufacturing
+
Purchasing
+
Customer
Service
++
Maintain
Invoices
++
Maintain
Customers
+
Maintain
Credit
Details
0
Maintain
Payments
-
Decompose
into 4 cells
and score
each cell…
1 by BP/OAP/S
2 by elements:
MAN
IT FUNC
IT TECH
MISC
COST
4 at design, test, run
time…
5 at/for each Step
(iteration/increment)
3 by IT FUNC
levels: module,
function,
form/screen,
field,
validation/logi
c/business
rules/coded
process
Assessment Criteria:
Time to enter data and accuracy of MI
Effectiveness of process and IT
functionality
Presence of ‘bugs’
Need for surrogates, workarounds…
Presence of sins (errors) at micro
level… etc…

55
Some Illustrations of the Power
A construction company, a retail merchandising
brokerage, a telecoms organisation and a university have
all had deep rooted business-IT problems resolved or rife
opportunities exploited by BVMF®
The MaxVal website has case studies and
more client comments on it…
The European Purchasing Manager of a multinational
manufacturer said, “Your business value approach has
helped to get us more value than we thought possible.”

56
Eras of IT Business Value
and the 20-year time lag
Era Date Characteristics & Events Use Methods & BVMF Results
0 1960-
1979
Mainframes, IBM, DEC PDP Payroll, batch Basic Average.
Pundits sceptical
1 1980-
1999
1996
Minis, Micros, Desktops, Apple, Visicalc,
Vax/Vms (DEC), Unix, MS DOS, email,
dawn of internet/web
Research shows business-IT hybridism is
highly powerful
Saying there’s problem/telling the truth is
too controversial (FT IT Review)
IT doesn’t serve business well
RDBMS, client
server, 3GL,
4GL/GE
JAD/RAD
SSADM
Waterfall
BPR
Successful multi
faceted business-
IT ‘hybridism’
leads to birth of
BVMF®
Poor success
Takes too long
Not business focused
Many failures
1 1999 IBM survey on results of ERP
BCS Business-IT Bridging Group starts
Agile invented
ERP, BPR Software
implementation
Organisations are
missing out on value by
not reviewing their
processes
2 2000
2003
David Taylor, President of IT Dirs Assoc,
says “We need a whole new approach.”
BCS finally admits there is a problem
“We need
something
different”
I said ‘Yes David,
that’s why I’ve
developed BVMF!’
Agile authors think
software is the problem
2 2000-
2019
Agile, Microsoft prevalence
Business becomes client of IT (you
hope…)
IT starts to serve business as a supplier
to a client
SQL Server
MS Dynamics
DevOps (hm…)
BVMF® refined
IT gets more business
focused, continuous,
granular (hooray) – but
misses the main story;
agile ‘smudges’ value
3 2020-
2039
We are here!
Business-IT collaborate, become
partners which leads to much more
value
Digitisation
and ‘digital’
transformation
Increased interest
arises in BVMF®
In Era 3 – we are finally
getting there…

57
Aspects of Value
Ways of looking at value and
understanding it
Two key Landscape Value Characteristics (LVCs)
Above or below the value (Conceptual Units
of Benefit) line:
• Hygiene value
• Positive value
• Negative value
• Arbitrary value (starts neutral, becomes
potentially Negative)
Proportionality:
• First past the post; all or nothing
• Proportional

58
Business Value Maximisation Framework
(BVMF®)’s Structure of Components
Analysis of problems, symptoms and causes
Macro level, outline solutions (models and
modules) with pointers to micro level solutions
Micro level solutions: concepts and principles (understanding
the problems and focus needed) and guidelines and techniques
(things to do to resolve the problems), structured into modules
Functional
Concepts
Principles
of
Automation
‘Bridging’
skills, the
value role
Decision
Strategy
Business
Practice &
Contingency
Culture
&
Assimilation
Concepts, Principles, Guidelines & Techniques (CPGTs)
Value
Identification &
Maximisation
Models, modules and techniques are being continually
developed and refined…

Business Value Maximisation
Framework (BVMF®)
Is a comprehensive set of fundamental, underlying principles by which IT
business value is maximised, practically and pragmatically
Underpins and transcends Waterfall, Agile, Wagile, Prince2 and other
approaches and methods, significantly, even dramatically, increasing net
business (organisational) gain
Consists of several dozen models (more than 100 when variations are
included) and several hundred (approx. 450) techniques (concepts,
principles, guidelines and techniques; abbreviated to CPGTs) – the models
clarify the problem/challenge and point to a solution at a macro level; the
techniques are things you focus on and do to solve the problem/s
Uses understandable, everyday analogies to illustrate its principles and yet
has been developed from more than 35 years of first, second and third hand
experience and research, all reconciled and verified using standard
philosophical logic like Socratic questioning and Aristotelian syllogism
coupled with techniques like hypothesis and observatory and inductive
refinement. Case studies are also continually providing input and feedback
Is as much an ethos, attitude and approach (business value focused) as a set
of models and techniques

60
Why Business Value Maximisation
Framework (BVMF)® is different
It’s the only fully dedicated, fundamental,
understandable and usable set of principles for IT
business value maximisation known to exist
It does not reinvent the wheel – you use it with
Waterfall, Agile, Wagile, Prince2, everything… and
it makes those approaches/methods significantly,
even dramatically, more effective
It’s been developed from first, second and third
hand experience coupled with philosophical logic
and reasoning (per Aristotle, Socrates and Plato) –
practice leads to hypothesis/theory which leads on
to improved practice and the cycle repeats – it
never stops progressing

Key Points about BVMF®
61
BVMF® does NOT replace existing/traditional/conventional
methods, practices and roles – it augments, completes, focuses
and refines them. It sets out the principles of value maximisation
providing a pragmatic framework to help implement “solutions”. It
seeks to SIMPLIFY rather than complicate.
BVMF® fundamentally aims to address IT enabled business process
but is also substantially appropriate to other software enabled
technologies like aircraft operation, building management systems
and IoT. It can also be useful on non-IT projects.
This slide pack has been a basic introduction. BVMF® has much more to offer as
it contains:
• Several dozen models (in PowerPoint) – these define the problems and offer a
macro level ‘solution’ for the micro activities (CPGTs) to support
• Several hundred concepts, principles, guidelines and techniques (CPGTs) (in
PowerPoint and Word) – these are the micro level points you think about,
focus on and do to enact the macro level ‘solutions’ presented in the models
• A number of models and approaches to implementing BVMF® within a
systematic programme to augment the default ad hoc, tailored approach
where you choose to use any of the framework’s tools to help you raise your
Information Systems Business Value (ISBV)TM

IT VM for BAs - A Closer Look (Part I) - 300823.pdf

More Related Content

Similar to IT VM for BAs - A Closer Look (Part I) - 300823.pdf (20)

More from IIBA UK Chapter (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

IT VM for BAs - A Closer Look (Part I) - 300823.pdf