Fear and Loathing in Project Management

How to insulate your data warehouse project team from potentially devastating business decisions

By Michael L. Gonzales

Continued from Page 1

Applying the DIF Approach

I didn't plan to replace all the point-to-point integration code using the "big-bang" approach. Instead, my senior data architect, Jaime Gonzalez, and I established a conscious method that considered the following issues:

• Collapsing redundant processing
• Upgrading or replacing existing applications
• Addressing enterprise information needs.

Our intention was simple: Focus on the most pressing integration challenges in an effort to provide some immediate relief to IT and its user communities. The only concern was how to clearly identify, define, and rank process and data flows. Because this situation was a political minefield, we wanted to make sure that we were confident in our findings and our subsequent recommendation to the executive committee. The first model, shown in Figure 2, illustrates the overall steps we took to identify, define, quantify, and rank the project iteration opportunities. I have outlined the necessary steps as follows:

1. Antecedent documentation and known problems. Too often, consultants or IT personnel new to a project simply charge ahead - assuming nothing has been done or documented. Instead, the team must first fully investigate the existing documentation and interview IT subject matter experts (SMEs).

2. IT SME workshop. Users may see only one area of significant concern, but the real issues may be the result of other, less obvious components not visible to the user. So first conduct a joint application development (JAD) session with IT SMEs to get their perspective on what iteration opportunities exist. Invited participants nominate candidate processes and give brief explanations and tentative solutions. The SMEs should write each nomination on a flip chart and tape it to a wall for everyone to see. An example of a candidate nomination is:

• #1 Candidate
  Depreciation program and process is inefficient.
  
• Explanation
  The current process requires the rekeying of data between applications.
  
• Proposed Solution:
  Integrate G/L data for automatic feeding.
  

Also, you can enhance candidates with added information such as trouble calls or downtime trends.

3. Select candidate processes. Document and publish your candidate list. If the JAD session generated too many candidates, you can add a filter to reduce the number. For example: Can you complete a candidate within 90 days? This filter can quickly reduce the candidate list.

4. Get IT scores. Invite IT SMEs to complete the set of three surveys for each candidate in the list (see "The DIF Surveys"). The surveys identify the level of dysfunction (how ineffective and inefficient the process is), impact (how many other processes or applications the candidate affects) and feasibility (how likely are you to succeed in simplifying the process) of a particular candidate.

5. User workshop. After the IT SMEs have selected and scored their candidates, conduct a JAD session for your user community (UC) SMEs. The session begins with the candidates suggested by IT SMEs to which your users will contribute their own candidates. UC SMEs will complete DIF Surveys for IT as well as their own candidate nominations. You can then invite IT SMEs to score the UC recommendations.

6. DIF matrix. This matrix is the core of the model, which documents the survey results of candidate processes from each participant. Total the scores per participant and find the average based on the number of respondents. See the sidebars, "The DIF Calculation" and "DIF Matrix."

7. Average DIF scores. When IT and UC SMEs have completed DIF surveys for all candidate processes, average the scores. Now each candidate process - whether introduced by IT or users - will have a single, overall DIF score. Potential project starting points will be those candidate processes that have the highest overall DIF score.

8. Select according to score. Rank candidate processes by their overall DIF score. However, the project leader can add a weight based on extenuating factors. For example, you can apply extra weight to all candidates that use available resources to complete. This feature gives project leaders some influence over the process.

9. Submit to management. In the final step, submit recommendations to executives based on quantifiable, statistically valid scoring. Decision makers now have a conscious approach for identifying a project starting point as well as laying out the subsequent iterations.