Business Process & Improvement

ISO 27701:2019 - ISO Standard for Managing Information Security and Data Privacy of Personal Information

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Fri, 2 Feb 2024 21:18:00 +0530

ISO 27701:2019 provides the approach and structure to an organization for building its PIMS (Personal Information Management System).

Like ISO 9001 pertains to QMS (Quality Management System) and ISO 27001 pertains to ISMS (Information Security Management System), ISO 27701 pertains to PIMS.

The primary aim of PIMS is to provide a comprehensive system which can take care of the management of information security and data privacy of personal information (either identified or identifiable) in a systematic and structured manner.

ISO 27701 is considered to be an extension of ISO 27001.

When it comes to personal information, ISO 27001 is supposed to take care of security aspects whereas ISO 27701 is supposed to extend that further to additionally take care of privacy aspects.

An organization needs to first implement ISO 27001 which lays down the foundation for implementing ISO 27701.

From certification point of view too ISO 27701 certification is possible only on top of ISO 27001 certification.

CMMI Version 3.0, the newer version of CMMI which adds three new domains to the CMMI model

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Wed, 3 May 2023 07:04:00 +0530

CMMI Version 3.0 or V3.0 or v3 is the newer version of CMMI.

The newer version, CMMI Version 3.0 or V3.0 or v3, adds three new domains to the CMMI model

Data management
People management
Virtual work

The previous version of CMMI, CMMI Version 2.0 or V2.0 or v2, was released in 2018.

The central idea behind the emergence of CMMI V2.0 was to provide a single, extensively comprehensive and truly integrated framework with a highly fluid and customizable structure.

This would, by design, allow plug and play of the various model components to better align with the business needs and operating model of any organization.

The above, in turn, effectively offered organizations lot of flexibility to "pick and choose" what they thought was the appropriate combination of the available domains in the CMMI model.

CMMI V3.0 was released in Apr2023 and it further extends the footprints of the CMMI model.

The current major content updates to the CMMI model brings three new domains into the fold - data management, people management, and virtual work

Data management domain

Provides guidance and best practices for managing the complete life cycle of data management in an organization
The scope of applicability runs through the identification of the need to collect certain data to defining the operational measures, data collection, storage, validation, processing, analysis and use to its disposal and archiving.
This, interestingly, can be viewed as the bonsai version of the erstwhile DMM model which was discontinued/retired effective Jan 2022.

People management domain

Provides guidance and best practices for managing the organization's workforce and its alignment with the business objectives and execution strategy
The scope spans through setting up the mechanisms and tools to enable people using defined processes to deliver against the business objectives.
This, interestingly, can be viewed as the bonsai version of the erstwhile PCMM model which was discontinued/retired effective Jan 2022.

Virtual work domain

Provides guidance and best practices for optimally leveraging virtual, remote and hybrid arrangements for managing work
The scope spans through different combinations of varied scenarios like work from anywhere, work from home and work at office.

The recent model content updates got released in April 2023.

The first set of interested existing lead appraisers are expected to get their credentials upgraded and become certified lead appraiser for CMMI V3.0 by Q4 2023.

If this happens as planned, appraisals for new domains will start getting accepted from Q1 2024.

The three traditional domains of new product development (DEV), service delivery (SVC), and supplier management (ACQ) continue to be there.

There were two other domains which were added earlier - security and safety.

And, after the latest model content updates, there are three more domains - data management, people management, and virtual work.

So, with the latest additions, CMMI V3.0 now encompasses best practices across eight domains.

In summary, it can be safely said that CMMI has gradually, but truly, evolved into a full-fledged maturity framework.

In its current form, Version 3.0 of CMMI would serve as an effective tool that can be flexibly leveraged by organizations to drive their enterprise-wide performance improvement and business excellence programs.

Why Freelance Auditors and Consultants Act in an Immature and Silly Manner?

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Sat, 17 Apr 2021 06:07:00 +0530

You get an immature and written in a "not so good taste" email from the auditor or the appraiser.

He is seemingly upset because someone happened to challenge his jumbo-sized ego.

How dare anyone question him?

His ego gets hurt when someone questions him.

Since he thinks he is the only auditor around who has intellect and smartness.

And if that auditor or appraiser or consultant is a freelancer it compounds the effect in the totally wrong direction since there is no one above the freelancer to whom matters can be escalated to.

When you are working as an auditor or consultant with an organization, you need to adhere to certain policies and norms as well as reporting requirements.

So, if you have concerns with an auditor or appraiser or consultant, there is always someone above you can reach out to and get things corrected in respect of the behaviour and / or expertise of the auditor or appraiser or consultant.

However, the freelancer has no organizational polices to adhere to or no reporting requirements and hence tends to act in a very imposing and dictating manner.

And that's the primary reason, in several instances and quite often, freelance auditors and consultants may tend to and do act in an immature and silly manner.

So, what does the freelancer do in a discussion progressing around technical aspects offered by the different stakeholders?

Instead of focusing on responding with reason he responds with a complete lack of maturity.

He says you have no right to offer suggestions to change anything.

He says he has spent couple of hours so it cannot have any issue.

He says let me do my job but forgets that the other person asked questions because that other person is also supposed do his job.

He says not to cross the boundaries which shows complete lack of application of mind while writing and shows lack of any understanding of the situation.

The key thing here that comes up strongly is the auditor is not open-minded.

He is immature and writes and acts accordingly.

He is having a bloated ego which he is trying to massage by acting in an immature and childish manner.

He is also vulnerable.

Probably because he also knows deep within that the kind of work he is doing is not that value-adding.

And how do you show you are doing something of value?

You would write immature emails.

You would throw child-like tantrums.

You would like your ego to be pampered.

You would feel powerful by dropping names.

You would call and then discontinue the discussion quite abruptly.

You would tell that I am the auditor so better listen to me!

You would use the words like "I get irritated “which really displays lack of maturity on your part.

Since in a professional set-up you need to address disparate points of view amicably and not react in a childish manner.

In addition to that,

You and your consultant are not in sync and you don't even want to accept that.
You make several mistakes and offer apologies but are not really interested in making the changes required and throw the ball in the other's court by citing reaons which will not find any place in a professional set-up.
You, in several instances, say something earlier, something else now and something totally else later.
You have a closed mind and are not at all open to any questioning and suggestions from others, even your own clients!
You consultant refers to you condescendingly akin to a demi-god and has a reason since he gets his morsels from you.

The smart thing to do in such cases is to massage the big-sized yet so very vulnerable ego of the auditor.

Auditors like to be pampered.

Auditors like to be made to feel great.

Auditors like to see them being seen as adding value.

So, you should do all that.

Do not think too much beyond that.

You know for sure that when you are talking to such an auditor or appraiser you are, in fact, talking to a scum.

Just smile at the immaturity and vulnerability that you can clearly see through.

And carry on like a professional.

And yes, never ever mind.

CMMI Model and CMMI Appraisal in CMMI V2.0 - Some Interesting Thoughts

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Wed, 17 Mar 2021 10:29:00 +0530

CMMI model and CMMI appraisal have undergone several changes in CMMI V2.0, the latest version of the CMMI product suite.

How effective these changes are and how much thought has gone into these changes is anyone's guess.

The key point, however, is that the CMMI V2.0 is being projected as a bettered version of the CMMI suite, which again is open to debate.

CMMI V2.0 or, for that matter, any other model or framework are essentially benchmarking tools and are as good as the business value they create for an organization.

CMMI V2.0 has laid strong emphasis on business objectives and business performance, and rightly so.

So, changes and improvements that can further improve and deepen the alignment of CMMI V2.0 with business priorities would make it even better.

This post dwells upon two such aspects that can help in doing that.

CMMI Model Online Portal

The first aspect is related to the CMMI model online portal.

One of the key things in CMMI V2.0 is that the CMMI model is available as an online portal which is probably getting updated very frequently.

This is being cited as a strength.

Unfortunately, that view is not logically sound.

Any model or framework serves as a reference and can be used to benchmark its usage in a specific situation against the accepted base which is the model or the framework itself.

Models can change and do change but the changes should get introduced in a thoughtful manner and only at periodic intervals separated by a reasonable time gap.

The new version of a model should come out only as per the above principle unless there is some problem or "bug" in a particular version of that model, making an immediate "rectification" release necessary.

Frequent changes lead to a situation of trying to hit a moving duck, which is never a good idea as far as benchmarking is concerned.

Interestingly, one of the types of CMMI appraisal is now called as "benchmarking" appraisal.

So, in a way, the above is apparently a crucial structural challenge with CMMI V2.0 appraisal.

An organization starts its CMMI V2.0 implementation with CMMI model around a certain time duration.

When it is time for appraisal, let us say after 2 years, the extant copy of CMMI model might be different.

Incidentally, the CMMI model portal has the provision to download a pdf copy so it is possible to store a copy of CMMI model, as it was, at a given point in time.

The question that is but natural to be asked is:

"Which copy of CMMI model should be used for appraisal - the one from two years back or the one which is there now?

In case the changes introduced are significant, then ensuring all of them are adequately incorporated will be a logistics and coordination challenge for the organization.

But in case the changes are not significant, then this is not an issue per se.

That, then, brings up another point.

If the changes are not significant, why to change frequently?

Would it not be better to accumulate the change requests and improvements from actual experiences shared by the users and other sources and bring a new version?

And do that as a strategic event and not as a routine procedure.

The earlier arrangement, where a model version used to get released at a certain time interval was a better one for the model users and implementers.

The online portal would still be useful for the model developers and model maintainers as they can use it as a work in progress copy of the next version of the model.

Change requests and improvements can get constantly incorporated by the model developers and model maintainers.

And just like code-freeze in case of software development, there could be a content-freeze in the model development cycle, where the next version is baselined and formally released.

CMMI Appraisal Sampling

The second aspect is related to CMMI appraisal sampling.

The sampling now is done using a method that is called as a randomly generated sample (RGS).

In this case, any project can ger selected.

In CMMI V2.0 there is heavy emphasis on business objectives and business performance.

Given that, sampling should also reflect the same line of thinking.

What should happen ideally is that those projects which are critical to business should be a part of the appraisal.

The factors that typically govern “critical to business” are:

Importance of the customer of the project - this is influenced by both current earned revenue and future projected revenue from that customer
Size of the project - large projects are more complex and challenging and their success has a proportionately higher impact on the organization's success
Project in a new vertical or a new domain - such projects can help create huge, sustainable revenue streams in the future
Strategic value of the project - this would be driven by the view of the executive management in terms of the long-term survivability of the organization

In case the above factors are not being considered in sampling, then the final sample would not be aligned with business priorities.

But in case the above factors are already being considered in sampling, then this is not an issue per se.

And the final sample would still be the same.

That, then, brings up another point.

If the final sample would still be the same in both cases, why to have this new method?

Would it not be better to let the sample be aligned with business priorities and in fact, bring in, or further improve the mechanism to ensure projects that get selected are critical to business?

Why a Clear Understanding of Convergence is Key for Enterprise Survival?

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Tue, 16 Feb 2021 13:42:00 +0530

Enterprises comes into existences to address certain basic needs of the society.

However, if an enterprise fails to match the changes in the society, step by step, it will not survive.

What is the key competency that ensures an enterprise will survive?

The answer is convergence.

Beneath the different ideas and trends that become popular in the society at different points in time, there is something more fundamental to the way society functions.

There are certain basic needs of the society that have been like that since ages and will remain so forever.

What are these basic needs?

These basic needs are related to physiological and psychological needs of human beings.

After all society is nothing but human being put together.

The physiological and psychological needs operate at the most fundamental level.

The way to fulfil them have changed over time and will continue to evolve but these needs will never go away.

It is a fact that the ideas and trends that have been used to address the basic physiological and psychological needs have evolved and will continue to do so.

If that be the case, how can an enterprise survive this change?

That is where the principle of convergence kicks in.

What is the meaning of the term convergence?

Convergence means focusing on the fundamental essence of something.

The fundamental essence is nothing but the physiological and psychological needs of human beings.

Since they never change, if an enterprise can link the exact physiological or psychological need behind an idea or a trend, it will prove to be an asset for its survival.

An enterprise which has a clear understanding of convergence of ideas and trends will be willing to not only change if needed to keep up with the change forced upon it but also bring changes to the table.

The above will ensure enterprise survival.

For tomorrow.

And forever.

Busting the Hype around TQM and the Continuum of Enterprise Excellence (EEX)

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Sat, 2 Jan 2021 09:57:00 +0530

TQM is a concept that originated in the 1950s in Japan.

However, it has its roots in the American way of looking at things since the founding father of TQM, Deming, was an American.

In the beginning, total quality management or TQM was meant to take care of certain aspects in an enterprise.

Unfortunately, over last several decades, TQM fans have tried to project it as something more than it was meant to be.

That is one of the key reasons behind the problem with TQM’s positioning.

For the fans, the key principles of TQM are like biblical truths.

These principles are, however, not original, or innovative.

They have their basis in the concepts and theories related to general management.

Like there is nothing original or innovative about following a process-based approach, using data for decision-making, etc.

Also, the use of the terms total and quality in TQM is quite misleading.

Total in TQM means all parts of the enterprise and the focus is on how the individual parts support quality of the products and services.

That is a problem since for an enterprise to succeed the various parts need to focus on many other aspects much beyond the quality of the products and services.

Quality in TQM pertains to how well something functions and how every process in every part of the enterprise should work at its optimal best.

That is another problem since it extends the scope of the term quality to mean everything under the sun beyond its core meaning, where quality means quality of design or quality of conformance to the design.

The core need of any enterprise is first to survive and then to grow, organically or otherwise.

The way to achieve the above is quite simple - remain competitive and stay profitable.

For example, Nokia or Kodak were probably doing perfect as far as TQM principles go.

What was missing was the lack of right strategy due to serious misreading of the shifts in the competitive landscape and market dynamics.

At this point, TQM fans will jump and say, "doing that is also a part of TQM".

Well, not really.

That way everything that goes right is due to TQM and everything that does not go right is due to lack of TQM!

That is quite ludicrous.

Achieving enterprise success is hard.

And sustaining the success achieved is even harder.

The key thing for enterprise success is to focus on enterprise excellence (EEX).

Achieving and sustaining EEX is inextricably linked to and profoundly dependent on two broad aspects:

Enterprise Strategy - Setting and calibrating the direction and strategy the enterprise will follow in the near and distant future which includes markets the enterprise will operate in and product/services it will sell
Enterprise Operations - Adjusting and optimizing the effectiveness and efficiency in the operations of the enterprise at the overall level as well as in its various parts which includes the quality of products/services it will create

It is certainly true that application of TQM is beneficial to ensure quality of products/services.

However, there are many other aspects that can impact enterprise success.

For example, the way the enterprise does cash flow management is very important to ensure its profitability and solvency.

Ask any CEO or CFO and they will tell the same.

But that has nothing to do with TQM.

As a matter of fact, the overall use of TQM is limited to specific aspects of the continuum of EEX ecosystem.

It can be said that TQM is more of an engineering and technical thing that uses lot of general management practices to strengthen itself.

It should, however, not try to become overarching like EEX.

Many enterprises focus on blindly putting TQM in place while missing the larger EEX context.

Focusing on TQM for TQM sake may be a good idea for TQM advisors, TQM consultants, TQM trainers, TQM program in-charges, etc. but not for EEX and certainly not for the enterprise.

Like TQM talks about customer first and primacy of process.

There is a lot that is wrong with that.

Sometimes customers may not be reasonable and fair and need to be dealt with accordingly.

From EEX standpoint, the enterprise may even refuse to continue its association with such customers.

Using standardized processes is fine as far as the routine operational activities and transactional tasks are concerned.

However, for innovations and strategic initiatives there cannot be standardized processes.

From EEX standpoint, for such things the enterprise may employ certain philosophies and principles and not be hung up on using a defined process because there would be none.

Unfortunately, the TQM fans think that TQM is the be all and end all of everything.

That is not a correct view.

Like the other methods and tools, TQM has its place in the continuum of EEX ecosystem and can be effectively leveraged when used in an appropriate manner in the right context.

Quality 5.0 Should Take Quality Beyond the Quality in Quality 4.0

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Wed, 2 Dec 2020 15:40:00 +0530

Quality 5.0?

Now what is this Quality 5.0?

And how should Quality 5.0 take Quality beyond the Quality in Quality 4.0?

An earlier post titled What is Quality 4.0? What Does the 4.0 After Quality in Quality 4.0 Signify? dwelt upon the salient aspects of Quality 4.0.

Quality, like any other discipline, should work towards the betterment of the world.

Quality 5.0 should attempt to take Quality a notch higher in the above journey.

Quality 5.0 is still in a formative stage and yet to take its final shape.

Conceptually, however, Quality 5.0 should bring forth certain novel aspects quite clearly and very forcefully.

Beyond systems that behave intelligently, the need of the world is to have systems in place that will act in the right manner, no matter what.

Hence, Quality 5.0 should focus on doing right things than just doing the things right.

For example, a robot can be created with all the AI/ML algorithms to work like a house servant.

The robot is expected to take care of certain needs of the members of the family in whose house it gets deployed.

However, the robot would need more than the AI/ML algorithms to develop empathy when working as a house servant.

Not only that, but such robots should also be made available to those who need it like a physically handicapped person and not only those who can afford it.

Quality 5.0 should go beyond quality of product to its availability to those who have a real need for it.

That way Quality 5.0 will need to imbibe principles of economic equality and not be limited by the principles of economic cost.

Quality 4.0 is supposed to focus on making machines acquire higher level of IQ.

Taking things beyond, Quality 5.0 should focus on making machines acquire higher level of EQ.

It is also important to note that Quality 5.0 will require intervention from the legal authorities and other designated agencies to ensure things are made available based on who needs them the most.

And not who can pay the most!

That is going to be a sea-change in terms of how the world is run.

The objective will be the collective betterment of all living beings and not just human beings.

The ultimate objective will be the betterment of the world around us.

Better for human beings.

And better for all other living beings too.

In a nutshell, Quality 5.0 should help bring sharp focus on three critical aspects:

Systems develop empathy
Needs drive availability
Concern for all living beings

Quality 4.0 will certainly make things better.

Quality 5.0 should help take things much beyond that and make them even better.

What is Quality 4.0? What Does the 4.0 After Quality in Quality 4.0 Signify?

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Fri, 6 Nov 2020 13:29:00 +0530

Quality 4.0.

Industry 4.0.

XYZ 4.0.

Put 4.0 after any term and what you finally get is a heady cocktail.

Like all other domains, Quality also seems to be undergoing this transformation.

What is Quality 4.0?

What does the 4.0 after Quality really signify?

4.0 as a concept, in a simple sense, means the use of systems that learn on their own using artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) at its foundation.

AI and ML are the hot buzzwords these days.

Talk to any and every Tom, Dick and Harry in the corporate world and after some time into the conversation you will hear AI and ML.

Talk to any school or college student and after some time into the conversation you will hear AI and ML.

What is AI?

What is ML?

Let us first understand these two in simple terms and in a layman’s language.

AI or Artificial Intelligence

The purpose of AI is to initially replicate and eventually replace the human intelligence being used for decision making while running a process.
For example, a train can be made to start and stop based on the same criteria a human driver will typically use before making such a decision.
AI is meant to go beyond the realm of routine decision making to "intelligently" figure out the right decision even if something in the process or environment changes and that too suddenly.
Suppose the train in the example above is ready to start since all doors are closed, green signal is on and all those standing on the platform are at a safe distance from the train. Also suppose, at that instant and suddenly one of the persons standing on the platform jumps on the tracks right in front of the engine. So how will you make sure the train doesn't get started?
The way the above will be ensured is where AI can supposedly play a role. The supposedly here is a big SUPPOSEDLY because there are possibly infinitely many possible scenarios like this one.

ML or Machine Learning

The purpose of ML is to make a system behave "intelligently" without relying upon human intelligence which may be getting used otherwise for decision making while running a process.
For example, historical data on all train starts can be used to identify patterns, trends, decision trees and heuristics in conjunction with relevant real-time data and information to aid a train system to decide whether it is right and safe to start the train at a given point in time.
ML sits at the back end of AI and is the thing that makes the system behave "intelligently" and figure out the right decision even if something in the process or environment changes and that too suddenly.
Suppose the train in the example above is ready to start. Also suppose, at that instant and suddenly one of the persons standing on the platform jumps on the tracks right in front of the engine. ML will use historical data to indicate that the train can get started. It will, however, use real-time data to cause an interruption so that the final decision is right and safe. But what will that take?
The way the above will be ensured is where ML can play a role and direct the AI module built into a system to make it behave "intelligently".

Note:

It is fine to say that a system becomes intelligent with AI/ML
However, a system does not "become intelligent", rather it starts to "behave "intelligently"
So, it is better to say that ML induces AI in a system which makes it behave "intelligently".

With that backdrop, let us come back to Quality 4.0.

Quality 4.0

In fact, after having understood AI/ML above, there is nothing left to explain what Quality 4.0 is.

Take Quality.

Inject AI/ML.

What you get is Quality 4.0.

So why so much hype?

Why so much of brouhaha?

There is nothing new here.

In fact, there is nothing new in AI/ML too.

The terms AI/ML and their foundational concepts have been around for decades.

With the advent of computers, automation or digital enablement of systems and processes in all walks of life and business became possible.

And it has been going on since several decades.

The methodologies and technologies to digitally enable or automate a process have evolved and AI/ML is an advanced stage in that journey.

The same applies to the field of Quality.

Processes used or influenced by Quality can be digitally enabled like any other process.

There is no big deal with that.

In some sense, when the automation or digital enablement or digital transformation journey evolves to a very advanced stage and it starts leveraging AI/ML concepts, what you get to is the 4.0.

If what you do is called Quality, then the above would result in Quality 4.0.

That's right.

At the most fundamental level, that’s all there is to Quality 4.0.

Team Capacity Planning in the Context of Service Delivery and Service Level Management

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Fri, 16 Oct 2020 15:18:00 +0530

The services context brings forth some unique and interesting characteristics.

Some of the them are mentioned below:

Services may be required to be delivered against an agreed scope in the agreed service window and that too only on demand
Some members of the service team will be actively utilized by being engaged in working on open tickets while some of the team members may always remain on stand-by, waiting for the next set of tickets

Quantity and quality of services delivered is primarily dependent on the team size and competency as well as the volume of tickets, their distribution and nature of work.

In the services context, there are two essential asks:

First, ensure service is somehow delivered in line with the agreed scope and the business is somehow kept running and doesn't come to a halt or experience slow down. Service delivery is the key focus area for taking care of this.
And second, ensure service is not only somehow delivered but delivered in line with agreed expectations and the business is not only somehow kept running but made to run effectively and efficiently. Service level management is the key focus area for taking care of this.

Team capacity planning deals with estimating the following:

How many team members in all are required for delivering a service?
How many shifts are required and how many team members in each shift?
How many team members are required on weekdays and on weekends?
How many team members are required temporarily to take care of seasonality? When?

Against the above backdrop, where does team capacity planning fit in?

Simply speaking, team capacity planning is finding the required team size at that time.

Required team size is a function of ticket volume, team size and service performance.

The required team size is in some sense is also the optimal team size.

It is important to maintain optimal team size such that the cost is as low as possible and service performance is as high as possible.

Optimal team size can be viewed as the minimum team size which will ensure service performance will meet the service level agreement (SLA).

The core idea is that 1 member less than the optimal team size will adversely impact service performance such that it will not be able to meet the SLA.

Ticket volume, team size and service performance data should be collected and analysed at some selected periodicity like weekly basis or monthly basis.

Ticket volume is simply how many tickets are received.

Team size is simply how many team members are deployed for providing the service.

Service performance is the more intricate one and requires deeper understanding of the following performance parameters:

Effort taken to resolve tickets (average as well as its distribution)
Calendar time taken to respond to tickets (average as well as its distribution)
Calendar time taken to resolve tickets (average as well as its distribution)
Comparison of calendar time taken to respond to ticket against the SLA
Comparison of calendar time taken to resolve ticket against the SLA (which may be defined priority-wise or some other basis like gold, silver, etc.)
Computation of SLA compliance for time to respond
Computation of SLA compliance for time to resolve

Given the above, the high-level team capacity planning approach for finding the required team size or optimal team size involves the following steps:

Determine the volume of tickets (average as well as its distribution) that is received
Compute the adjusted volume of tickets received by the team by considering the variation in the technical nature and complexity of the tickets received
Determine the actual team size (average as well as its distribution) deployed in the team to handle the adjusted volume of tickets received
Compute the adjusted team size by considering the variation in competency of experienced team members versus freshers versus others
Determine the actual service performance of the deployed team in handing the adjusted volume of tickets received
Reconcile the adjusted volume, adjusted team size and actual service performance to see whether adjusted team size is less than required or more
Arrive at the capacity in terms of required team size based on above steps

If the required team size is more than the actual and adjusted team size, then there is a buffer and in case the customer of the service notices that, it can lead to team downsizing
If the required team size is less than the actual and adjusted team size, then there is a deficit and it should be brought intelligently to the attention of the customer of the service for team augmentation

Reconciliation is the more important and involved step in the approach above and should be done using the following rules of thumb:

Total effort available with the team based on adjusted team size and considering leaves, etc. of team members should be more than the total effort required for the team based on adjusted ticket volume and effort taken to resolve one ticket
Effort taken to resolve one ticket should be less than effort derived from calendar time taken to resolve one ticket (calendar time multiplied by number of working hours in that calendar duration gives the effort derived from calendar time)
On an average basis, the volume of tickets received in a certain time duration should be less than volume of tickets resolved in the same duration

For studying the ticket volume and service performance one can start with simple statistical tools like trend of average and standard deviation.

As is required, and as is possible based on competency available, one can explore advanced methods like queuing theory for the above purpose.

How Agile has Turned into a Fulcrum for Selling Organizational and Personal Transformation?

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Fri, 11 Sep 2020 14:15:00 +0530

Agile was simply supposed to focus upon and take care of the challenges with the waterfall model for software development.

How much it has really succeeded in that, in a true sense, is still an open debate and is essentially based on which side of the agile camp you are a part of.

However, it needs to be carefully noted and understood that the Waterfall concept is a very fundamental one which talks about solving any business problem including software development through a sequence of logical steps.

These steps typically include:

Correctly and completely understanding the problem (R for Requirements)
Selecting approach for the proposed solution (D for Design)
Implementing the solution as per selected approach (C for Coding)
Validating that the implemented solution does indeed address the problem (T for Testing).

The above workflow in software parlance is nothing but the software development life cycle (SDLC).

The steps as encapsulated in the term RDCT are nothing but the various phases of the SDLC.

The above principles have always been there.

Right from the very beginning

Software or no software.

In fact, agile is not original or new but is essentially the Waterfall concept re-arranged differently.

Conceptually speaking, in agile, one would execute several, short-duration waterfalls, one after the other.

Reducing release cycle time, or time-boxing, or introducing rituals and practices like backlog, retrospective, daily stand-up, in agile doesn’t anyway change the core of the Waterfall concept.

Agile was meant to be just another way for developing software.

Just another methodology.

And it should have stayed that way.

Over time, it has purposefully been transformed by interested parties into an organizational and personal transformation tool.

Who are these interested parties?

These are those folks who earn their pay-check as agile trainers, consultants, auditors, etc.

They have created the myth and more than that the funny notion that agile transformation is the only need these days for both organizations as well as individuals.

The idea behind agile transformation and even agile methodology is not really an original one.

Methodologies like scrum and extreme programming did bring certain new rituals and practices.

However, following these new rituals and practices wouldn’t make you agile as also not following them wouldn’t make you not agile.

For understanding and uncovering the reality behind the myth, one needs to understand the broader landscape of philosophies and theories related to general and strategic management at the organization level and personal development and growth at the individual level.

All these philosophies and theories have always professed that “change is the only constant”.

Change management is important for anyone.

Be it an organization or an individual.

For personal development and growth and change management at the individual-level, one need not look much beyond the ideas narrated and popularized by people like Napoleon Hill, Dale Carnegie, Norman Vincent Peale, et al.

The personal development philosophies and theories are very well defined and widely available since last several decades.

Formally speaking, their origin can be traced back to the 1910 classic book “The Science of Getting Rich” by Wallace Wattles.

This book propounded that if you make certain changes in your habits and thought processes you will eventually mould yourself into a person worthy of great wealth.

For general and strategic management and change management at the organization-level, one need not look much beyond the ideas such as organizational change management (OCM) and business process management (BPM).

The concepts and practices related to OCM and BPM are very well defined and widely available since last several decades.

In addition, several highly successful CEOs have written books on their own personal experience with organizational transformations.

Here are some examples:

“My years with General Motors” by Alfred P. Sloan - 1963
“Talking Straight” by Lee Iacocca - 1988
“Pour Your Heart into It: How Starbucks Built a Company One Cup at a Time” by Howard Schultz - 1997
“Business @ the Speed of Thought: Succeeding in the Digital Economy” by Bill Gates - 1999
“Jack: Straight from the Gut” by “Jack Welch, John A. Byrne, Mike Barnicle - 2001
“Who Says Elephants Can't Dance? Inside IBM's Historic Turnaround” by Louis V. Gerstner - 2002

Those who are proponents of agile at organization-level use the term “agile transformation”.

How is that any different from the philosophies and theories related to general and strategic management and change management at the organizational level?

Those who are proponents of agile at individual-level use the term “personal agility”.

How is that any different from the philosophies and theories related to personal development and growth at the individual level?

It is simply and mostly a copy and paste job.

There is really nothing new.

It should be kept in the mind that coining a new term is not equivalent to coining a new concept.

Using agile for anything and everything is a common practice followed by those who earn their pay-check as agile trainers, consultants, auditors.

They have no choice indeed.

They need to pay their bills.

And for that they need to able to sell their stuff and wares!

For any sales you need a fulcrum.

And agile has turned into and become that fulcrum.

Here are some examples of terms, slogans, catch-words and one-liners which are used by those who earn their livelihood from agile by leveraging agile as the fulcrum to make the sale:

Personal agility – what about personal development and growth?
Agile transformation – ever heard of OCM and BPM?
Remote agility – is working from home or working remotely anything new?
Distributed agile – how else would you work if not in a distributed model in a globally integrated economy?
Be agile and stay ahead – was “who moved my cheese” not important earlier?
The agile way for dummies - what is it about the agile way that was already not there?
Being agile made easy – why would you want to focus on made easy and not being agile whatever that means?

Nonetheless, the fact of the matter is, agile term is quite popular in certain organizations especially those involved in IT services delivery and software product development.

When one comes to think of it, for both organizations and individuals the focus should always remain on the core issues and concerns.

The core issues and concerns at the individual level are related to personal development and growth and change management.

And the core issues and concerns at the organization level are related to general and strategic management and change management.

Given the above backdrop, it can be argued that a rose is a rose is a rose is a rose.

And calling it with any other name would not have any material effect.

That way, it is fine to say that we will use the term agile transformation.

There is no harm in that.

The problem arises when those who earn their pay-check as agile trainers, consultants, auditors try to build the impression that agile is new, unique, different.

It is not.

Not at all.

Using the term agile or any other term XYZ is alright.

The key thing is this.

Does agile or XYZ help organizations and individuals change for the better?

If yes, then that is exactly what should be.

Names are transient and come and go.

Fundamental concepts and principles remain forever.

Today it is agile transformation.

Tomorrow it will be XYZ transformation.

Today there are those people who earn their pay-check as agile trainers, consultants, auditors.

And tomorrow these same people will earn their pay-check as XYZ trainers, consultants, auditors.

Agile serves as the fulcrum for such people for selling organizational and personal transformation offerings.

However, in the real sense, agile is not the real fulcrum for organizations and individuals.

The real fulcrum is the fact that there are core and fundamental concerns and concepts related to personal development and growth, general and strategic management and change management which will always be there, and which will remain relevant forever.

Sustained Organizational Success - Looking Beyond Quality and Process

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Mon, 10 Aug 2020 12:31:00 +0530

The principles of quality management, as also total quality management, and process improvement, as also process excellence, are truly important for any organization.

The above principles strongly and directly impact the product and service delivery operations of an organization but are still cogs in the wheel as far as sustained organizational success is concerned.

The term "sustained organizational success" is a beautiful concept that can only be understood well when dissected inside out, stretched apart and pinned down throughout the edges.

The first and foremost criterion for success is the organization's ability to remain a "going concern" from financial accounting point of view.

In the most fundamental sense, an organization is a financial system which earns money through certain means and burns money while earning.

Though there are several financial parameters which are important to track and control, the primary secret of staying afloat financially and not become insolvent is to have positive free cash flow.

Profit to an organization is like water to human body.

Human beings can survive without water for certain time but must consume adequate water on an average to stay hydrated and alive.

Similarly, organizations can survive without profit for certain time but must gather adequate profit on an average to stay profitable and afloat.

Human beings need water to stay alive but don't stay alive just for water.

Similarly, organizations need profit to stay afloat but don't stay afloat just for profit.

Where do the principles of quality management and process improvement fit in the big picture as far as the wheel of sustained organizational success is concerned?

They are simply like cogs in the wheel, important but still cogs at the end of it!

Sometimes, this notion is there with some quality and process folks that quality is the answer to all that is ailing organizations.

That is simply not right.

Organizations can run into rough weather on account of issues and challenges in respect of factors beyond just the quality of product and service delivered.

These issues and challenges are generally beyond, much beyond, the principles of quality management and process improvement.

Here are some of the major factors that determine sustained organizational success.

Economic environment (both domestic and global)
Government regulations (both local and international)
Technology innovations (including disruptions and black swan events)
Leadership and strategy (competency and character of CXOs)
Organizational structure (work assignment based on merit and not loyalty)
Financial performance (net income and free cash flow)
Operational performance (quality of product and service delivered)

The above very clearly shows the place where quality management and process improvement play their part in the big picture.

And here is the key thing.

Simply designing, developing, delivering and deploying good quality products and services is not good enough to attain sustained organizational success.

For any and every organization the core problem is the one and the same.

How to attain sustained organizational success?

Whatever is the final solution, one thing is quite clear.

One needs to certainly look at the principles of quality management and process improvement to seek a solution.

At the same time, one needs to look beyond, much beyond, quality management and process improvement to get to the right solution to the core problem.

Why Simple Concepts Win Over Complex Models and Frameworks?

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Sat, 11 Jul 2020 10:26:00 +0530

Models and frameworks like TQM, ISO, EFQM, CMMI, Six Sigma are like the same wine in different bottles.

They may try to create the impression of being unique in both their value proposition and orientation but are essentially one and the same.

What they are good at is making simple concepts appear and sound complex.

It need not be that way.

There is a cottage industry of consultants, auditors, trainers, etc. who have a vested interest in promoting and propagating these complex models and frameworks.

Terms and jargons like TQM, ISO, EFQM, CMMI, Six Sigma seem to suggest the person uttering them is some expert.

The reality is far away from the above.

No one can openly and honestly accept that though.

We all need to be hypocrites to maintain the fake decorum.

In many of the conferences on these complex models and frameworks this kind of stupid behaviour is on open display.

There are those venerable folks who are experts in verbal diaorrhea.

They keep on saying many things, unrelated and mostly silly in nature.

These folks are more vulnerable than venerable since they are under pressure due to their hidden need to maintain their standing in such forums.

They somehow end up joining all and every meeting.

And say things like we need to improve humanity, we need to work for the welfare of the society and the country, we need to have this for prosperity or that for prosperity.

You can never be in agreement with their thoughts in a genuine sense but must wear the facade of being respectful and attentive.

And unfortunately, such folks say that same thing again and again and again.

When you clear the clutter and remove the flab wrapped around the Models and frameworks like TQM, ISO, EFQM, CMMI, Six Sigma what emerges is something very simple yet beautiful and powerful.

The simple concepts win over complex models and frameworks.

Any day.

What are these simple concepts and why is it important to understand them accurately?

The answer is this - these are the guiding and the driving forces for any organization that wants to succeed and sustain that success, not just tomorrow or day after but for ever.

The simple and powerful concepts are the heart of how to make an organization successful.

For understanding these, one needs to go back to the basics, the very fundamental elements of business success.

All models and frameworks end up unnecessarily complicating the fundamental elements.

They put too much of dirt and grease to the simple concepts.

The fundamental truth is that an organization needs to fully take care of the interests and needs of its stakeholders.

Nothing more to that and nothing less to that.

Period.

The high-sounding terms and models cannot obfuscate this simple truth.

The simple concepts are as encapsulated below.

As a company you just need to focus on the following simple concepts:

Keep your customers satisfied and if possible, delighted

Not because you can charge them more money but because you can charge them for more time
Because they can act as powerful references for you to get more customers

Keep your employees happy and if possible, engaged

Because they will give their 100% without imposing too many controls on them
Because they will stay longer with you

Keep your investor's financial interests safe and if possible, make them really rich

Because they will continue to stay invested and maybe invest even more
Because other investors will also get interested to place their bets on you

Keep the government agencies content with your level of compliance and corporate ethics and if possible, become a perfect corporate citizen

Because the authorities will be mindful of your strong reputation when dealing with you
Because this will attract certain select group of highly successful investors who only invest in ethical companies and once they invest the market capitalization goes up steeply

The above simple concepts are more than enough.

There is no need of the complex models and frameworks like TQM, ISO, EFQM, CMMI, Six Sigma in the real sense.

They can still be used though.

They don't provide any news fundamental concepts but can provide some useful ideas.

They are still important in some sense as they provide work to the cottage industry of consultants, auditors, trainers, etc.

How Much Value Do Model-based Appraisers and Consultants Add?

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Fri, 10 Jul 2020 22:55:00 +0530

The question "how much value do model-based appraisers and consultants really add?" is an interesting one.

In fact, it is quite a fundamental question.

But the more fundamental question is this:

"Do they actually add much value?"

And perhaps the most fundamental questions of all would be:

"Do they actually add any value?"

Most of them do little or no value addition.

Appraiser and Consultant - No Value, No Need

The consultants and appraisers are, at the core, mostly one-trick ponies who regurgitate the same set of nonsense whichever organization they go to.

The work like a pair of clowns who ask dumb questions and expect you to think they are smart.

They re-phrase and paraphrase your questions and ask them back.

That's very irritating, to say the least.

They have some rigid notions about the concepts and terms and refuse to see the underlying logic that governs those concepts and terms.

They have no concrete and specific solutions to offer.

So you can expect them to only say this much:

"We ask questions".

Well, what else would someone do when he or she doesn't know the basic stuff?

They know something is crystal clear.

But they would go on and on and repeatedly raise the same, silly and invalid questions.

And to prove their point, they repeat a falsehood again and again.

In every discussion, they hover around the same set of points like:

You must understand the pain points

this is a completely nonsensical point
you would start an initiative only when you have a business need, real or perceived
no one would allocate budget for an activity if there is no business case for it

You must articulate the business problem clearly

this is another utterly nonsensical and comical point
articulation of a business problem is not a linear thing and is done based on the context and the level of the person it is being communicated to
Also business problems may not always be straightforward, number-based statements but may involve complex, subjective issues with multiple dimensions

You must have the data for this and for that

one big question is why should you collect the data without any thought to the overall burden of collecting that data?
ignoring the ROI of data collection is a clear reflection of the ignorance of the consultant and appraiser who suggest get the data for this and for that
data should be seen in the context of process and should not be used to blindly infer and conclude anything about the process

You only would need to define the right approach for doing this

then what are you doing and why are you needed?
the consultant and appraiser need to be a part of the solution and not offer arcane and generic and non-implementable suggestions
everyone knows the usual stuff and if you can't suggest the specifics then you are good for nothing as a consultant and appraiser

It is interesting to note here that many, if not all, pairs of consultant and appraiser are actually good for nothing.

It is, therefore, very important for an organization to thoroughly evaluate the competency of the consultant and appraiser they are hiring.

You are paying them to be a part of the solution and not to just give you some kind of gyan.

You have to set the context and clear the situation by calling a spade as a spade.

You are paying them.

So you better ask them to listen to you.

You have to manage and drive them.

What if they refuse to get the signal?

There is a very simple answer to that.

Change your consultant and appraiser next time around.

They should not become like a millstone around you neck.

They better add value.

Or you kick them out.

So if there is no value from a consultant and appraiser then there is absolutely no need of such a consultant and appraiser.

CMMI V2.0 - Some Key Concepts and Terms - Part 3

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Tue, 9 Jun 2020 10:40:00 +0530

The following bulleted list provides the links to the earlier post(s) on this blog which talk about certain key concepts and terms in V2.0 as compared to V1.3 that are important from an implementer's point of view.

CMMI V2.0 - Some Key Concepts and Terms -https://business-process-improvement-blog.blogspot.com/2020/04/cmmi-v20-some-key-concepts-and-terms.html
CMMI V2.0 - Some Key Concepts and Terms - Part 2 - https://business-process-improvement-blog.blogspot.com/2020/05/cmmi-v20-some-key-concepts-and-terms.html

Here are some more additional key concepts and terms.

Establish approval matrix for key decisions related to process management including process definition, implementation, compliance and improvement

Such an approval matrix will clearly provide the way for performing process management in the organization with high degree of effectiveness
It is recommended to revisit and review the approvals peridocially and optimize and fine-tune them for efective and speedier decision-making

Establish approval matrix for key decisions related to project delivery including project management, execution and resource management (people, software and hardware)

Such an approval matrix will clearly provide the way for performing project delivery to the customers with high degree of effectiveness
It is recommended to revisit and review the approvals peridocially and optimize and fine-tune them for efective and speedier decision-making

Establish approval matrix for key decisions related to company/site operations including departmental processes like of HR, Admin, IT, Legal, Sales, etc.

Such an approval matrix will clearly provide the way for managing the operations with high degree of effectiveness (incidentally, if a company is PCMM level 3 or hugher they will already have this in place
It is recommended to revisit and review the approvals peridocially and optimize and fine-tune them for efective and speedier decision-making

The above provides some additional key concepts and terms in V2.0 as compared to V1.3 that are important from an implementer's point of view.

For any implementer with working knowledge of CMMI V1.3, it would be quite useful to correctly understand and incorporate these and other such key concepts and terms.

CMMI V2.0 - Some Key Concepts and Terms - Part 2

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Sun, 3 May 2020 15:51:00 +0530

CMMI V2.0 - Some Key Concepts and Terms - https://business-process-improvement-blog.blogspot.com/2020/04/cmmi-v20-some-key-concepts-and-terms.html

Here are some additional key concepts and terms.

Execute quality assurance using a well-defined approach and plan developed based on historical quality data

Quality assurance should be executed in a systematic manner using a structured and standardized quality assurance approach and plan
The quality assurance plan should not only consider future and upcoming process needs but also incorporate results from the analysis of the past data on quality and non-compliance issues

Extend focus of quality assurance beyond verifying compliance to enabling process improvement too

Quality assurance should continue to be the watchdog on process compliance and continue the focus on compliance to defined processes and procedures.
In addition, quality assurance should become an enabler of improvement in the quality of the performed processes and resulting work products by focusing more explicitly on identifying and triggering opportunities for process improvement.

Involve subject matter experts (SMEs) also in addition to peer reviewers for identifying work product issues

Review by SMEs, who possess the appropriate technical knowledge, and not just the peer reviewers enhances the effectiveness of the technical reviews.
Use of the term SME in addition to the term peer reviewer allows for better handling of the egos, especially of those technical experts who are senior by experience also and not just by expertise.

The above provides some additional key concepts and terms in V2.0 as compared to V1.3 that are important from an implementer's point of view.

For any implementer with working knowledge of CMMI V1.3, it would be quite useful to correctly understand and incorporate these and other such key concepts and terms.

CMMI V2.0 - Some Key Concepts and Terms

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Mon, 13 Apr 2020 14:25:00 +0530

An earlier post titled CMMI V2.0 - Some Major Changes and Improvements Over CMMI V1.3 talked about the major changes introduced into the CMMI version 2.0.

Overall the changes are quite useful and improve upon the structure of the framework as well as provide better clarity on certain key principles and concepts.

There are several key concepts and terms in V2.0 as compared to V1.3 that are important from an implementer's point of view.

Here are some of them:

Sustain the focus on continual performance improvement through continual process improvement

Process improvement is to be employed as a tool to eventually bring in improvements in the performance of the business operations.
Return on investment of process improvement initiatives should be always on the top of the mind and hence should be measured and closely monitored so as to attain the desired business outcome.

Leverage opportunities in addition to managing risk in the risk management area (this is seemingly a direct lift-off from ISO 9001:2015)

Risks are those events and factors that act as head-winds and can derail or decelerate the project from meeting its objectives.
On the other hand, opportunities are those events and factors that act as tail-winds and can accelerate and keep the project on track so that it can exceed its objectives.

Perform causal analysis right from the start and not only at level 5 as was the case in version 1.3

Causal analysis need not wait for systems and processes to become highly mature.
It can and should be done even in an organization which has just started its process improvement journey.

Conduct causal analysis on successes and good happenstances too and not only the failures and problems

Causal analysis is generally viewed to be linked with problems and their mitigation.
However, causal analysis can be equally applied to derive learning from successes and good practices.

Derive effort estimates from explicit size estimates

At the outset, size needs to be explicitly estimated. In this context, size is viewed as a measure of the quantity of the work to be performed and is regarded as a fundamental attribute of that work.
Subsequent to that, effort is derived from size estimates and additional considerations like work complexity, team competency, etc.

The above provides just some of the several key concepts and terms in V2.0 as compared to V1.3 that are important from an implementer's point of view.

For any implementer with working knowledge of CMMI V1.3, it would be quite useful to correctly understand and incorporate these and other such key concepts and terms.

Extension to and Augmentation of CMMI Version 2.0

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Tue, 3 Mar 2020 18:55:00 +0530

CMMI V2.0 is expected to get extended much beyond the three domains it has conventionally been applied till date - development, services and supplier management (acquisition).

The plan seemingly is to extend CMMI V2.0 by augmenting it with newer domains like workforce management (people), security and safety.

Workforce Management

It is, however, interesting to note that "people" area was already there as part of a separate model called as P-CMM (written with a "dash after "P").

P-CMM had its last release more than a decade earlier in July 2009.

The version was quite incidentally 2.0!

P-CMM never saw much traction and hence never had another release.

In a way, having a separate model for people practices was never a logical thing to do in the first place.

Managing people practices in isolation has no meaning and must be seen as one of the several elements that form part of effective management of work in an organization.

Following people practices will find a place in CMMI V2.0 under the capability area "Managing the Workforce (MWF)":

Compensation and Rewards
Staffing and Workforce Management
Career and Competency Development
Empowered Work Groups
Organizational Training

Organizational Training was already there in the first release of CMMI V2.0, and has been a part of CMMI framework for quite a long time.

P-CMM has continued on life-support for many years and CMMI V2.0 will help resuscitate it by subsuming it in a manner that makes sense.

That is why there are just five people practices that will there in CMMI V2.0.

It is actually just four if one were to take out the Organizational Training also.

It is easy to see the right-sizing of P-CMM in CMMI V2.0 from 22 practices to just 4!

The HR folks who used to make a lot of unnecessary hullabaloo, misplaced hype and a big mountain out of the P-CMM mole-hill have also been right-sized along with their pet model.

For more details about P-CMM, read the following post:

Security (Management)

Another extension to CMMI V2.0, is the Security domain which has conventionally been associated with ISO 27001, the ISO standard for information security.

The above should be extended further by organizations to the Data Privacy domain though it is not explicitly asked for.

This is crucial given the importance of Data Privacy, which has extended the information security domain to special protection of personal information through regulations such as GDPR.

For more details about Data Privacy, read the following posts:

Following security practices will find a place in CMMI V2.0 under the capability area "Managing Security (MSEC)".

Managing and Planning Security
Developing Secure Solutions
Managing Security Threats and Vulnerabilities
Selecting and Managing Secure Suppliers
Planning and Supporting Security in Work

For more details about Information Security, read the following posts:

Safety (Management and Engineering)

Another extension to CMMI V2.0, is the Safety domain which has conventionally been associated with specific safety standards.

In addition, there is a framework known as CMMI + SAFE that was developed to provide a safety add-on the to CMMI-DEV model.

The last version of +SAFE, version 1.2, was released more than a decade back, in March 2007.

Following safety practices will find a place in CMMI V2.0 under the capability area "Managing Safety (MSAF)".

Communication and Coordination
Managing and Planning Safety
Ensuring Safety

For more details about Safety, read the following posts:

CMMI +SAFE - Safety Extension to CMMI

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Mon, 2 Mar 2020 18:52:00 +0530

CMMI +SAFE was developed with the purpose of providing an option to organizations that wanted to extend their CMMI implementation to include safety considerations.

The last version of +SAFE, version 1.2, was released way back in March 2007.

+SAFE, version 1.2 was provided as an add-on for safety over CMMI for Development, version 1.2 and has not been kept current with CMMI V2.0, the latest version of the CMMI model.

It was developed by the Australian Department of Defence and not the US DoD which had funded the development of CMMI models till version 1.3.

The technical report published on +SAFE described how to use this framework as either an independent thread or as an add-on to CMMI implementation in the organization.

Since developing and maintaining safety-critical products require specialized processes, skills, and experiences, +SAFE was intended for guiding the implementation of such practices in an organization.

It was also intended for subsequently appraising an organization's capabilities in managing the development and maintenance of safety-critical products.

+SAFE supplements CMMI-DEV with two additional process areas:

Safety Management
Safety Engineering

Key details of the specific goals and specific practices in the above two process areas available in +SAFE are as given below.

Safety Management

This process area pertains to identification and planning for addressing safety requirements and considerations and corresponds to Project Management process areas in CMMI-DEV.

SG 1 Develop Safety Plans
SP 1.1 Determine Regulatory Requirements, Legal Requirements, and Standards
SP 1.2 Establish Safety Criteria
SP 1.3 Establish a Safety Organization Structure for the Project
SP 1.4 Establish a Safety Plan

SG 2 Monitor Safety Incidents
SP 2.1 Monitor and Resolve Safety Incidents

SG 3 Manage Safety-Related Suppliers
SP 3.1 Establish Supplier Agreements That Include Safety Requirements
SP 3.2 Satisfy Supplier Agreements That Include Safety Requirements

Safety Engineering

This process area pertains to execution and monitoring of the plan developed in the "Safety Management" and corresponds to Engineering process areas in CMMI-DEV.

SG 1 Identify Hazards, Accidents, and Sources of Hazards
SP 1.1 Identify Possible Accidents and Sources of Hazards
SP 1.2 Identify Possible Hazards

SG 2 Analyze Hazards and Perform Risk Assessments
SP 2.1 Analyze Hazards and Assess Risk

SG 3 Define and Maintain Safety Requirements
SP 3.1 Determine Safety Requirements
SP 3.2 Determine a Safety Target for Each Safety Requirement
SP 3.3 Allocate Safety Requirements to Components

SG 4 Design for Safety
SP 4.1 Apply Safety Principles
SP 4.2 Collect Safety Assurance Evidence
SP 4.3 Perform Safety Impact Analysis on Changes

SG 5 Support Safety Acceptance
SP 5.1 Establish a Hazard Log
SP 5.2 Develop a Safety Case Argument
SP 5.3 Validate Product Safety for the Intended Operating Role
SP 5.4 Perform Independent Evaluations

+SAFE was designed to cut down the dependence of CMMI appraisals on the need for safety domain expertise with the members of the appraisal team.

This extension was developed for standalone use but can be used in combination model with the primary CMMI implementation track.

There are intentional overlaps with CMMI model content and some safety standards though it is neither meant to be seen as an integral part of the CMMI model nor rely upon any specific safety standards.

Since +SAFE is an extension of the CMMI framework, it adopts the same assumptions, model structure, conventions, and terminology as the CMMI model and is also affected by the general process-area and capability-level interactions inherent in the CMMI model.

Why Conferences on Business Process and Improvement May Not be Worth Spending Your Time on?

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Sun, 2 Feb 2020 08:52:00 +0530

Most of the conferences on the subject of business process and improvement sound like one and the same.

They try to rehash the same old wine in new bottles but miserably fail at the same.

You have the key note speakers who speak the same stuff in a more flowery language.

They are paid to speak well on anything and everything and most of them do a pretty good job at that.

They are more like paid actors than the believers in business process and improvement philosophies.

Simple, old things are made to sound like new gems of wisdom.

Some of the speakers cover the mechanics of the context for that particular conference.

Suppose the conference is on "How to make your business agile in an ever changing world using XYZ framework?".

So some of the speakers will touch upon the nuts and bolts to do with the XYZ framework.

Some of them may even narrate case studies related to their experience in adopting and using the XYX framework.

And then the funny things start happening.

Almost all of them, invariably, talk of the same set of challenges at the core of their talks and presentations.

The same things that we know since decades and centuries.

The indiscriminate and unconsidered use of certain terms and phrases by most of the speakers has become a part of the SOP for talks at such conferences as it makes the speakers sound knowledgeable and very wise.

Here are some such terms and phrases:

Transformation - this is big word which has been around since ages. Radical changes or transformations have been at the root of the how the world around us has evolved since the time of the invention of the wheel.
Disruption - doing something out-of-box is not anything new. In any period in the history of human civilization there have many cases of disruption, which one may think of as very commonplace and trivial today.
Innovation - doing something in a significantly better or refined way is something that has been going on since times immemorial. These are essentially improvements of a higher order and the world is full of umpteen examples of innovations from the day one a human being has been there on this planet.
Disruptive innovation - this is nothing but verbal jugglery and the modern-day management gurus are experts at this. There is not much to understand here if you know what disruption means and what innovations means.
Change management - a big phrase indeed. Applied to the context of bringing in any enterprise-wide change in the organization, it is nothing but cultural transformation.
Self awareness - again this has been around there since the first human being that lived on the planet. Human beings have the ability to become aware of where they need to improve and can gradually learn and become better at that.
Collaboration - another high-sounding term for teamwork. No man or woman is an island and needs to work with others to get things done. Who the hell doesn't know that?
Value addition - this has been there and we know that quite well, the term "value for money" tells clearly what this exactly means. When you do something as an organization you expect to make money from that and people pay for it when they see it adding some sort of value.
The pace of change in the world is accelerating - we have been hearing this thing in every second article and every second interview and there is nothing new here in any sense. The pace of change will increase as a natural result of the changes before that since there are more things and hence more possibilities for things to change.
The new normal now is volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity - this is the most funny of the statements you will hear since there was no time when this was not happening. Even for those who lived in the stone age, survival was hard and the world was full of volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity.
You need to own and drive your own career development and growth - when was this not true? Those who have gone to the very top of their careers have usually being propelled by an intense internal desire and passion to reach the top.

The good part is that at most of the conferences, there is some level of treatment of the context related to the XYZ framework, though it may involve use of some gobbledygook which may have limited relevance for most of those present at the conference.

Not only the above, and to make it even more funny, in the end every talk eventually ends up with the same set of silly conclusions.

All of them bring up the standard list of laundry items and common asks required to make the XYZ framework work.

These items are common across the board, no matter which that XYZ framework is and in fact even if it happens to be any other damn thing you want to get done in an organization.

Here are those common asks:

Top leadership commitment

This is quite interesting insight from the "key notes".
Is there literally anything that will be allowed to happen in an organization without this
For anything to happen in an organization you will need sponsorship, direction, approvals, funds for staffing, competency development and resources.
That has been always been true.

Organizational culture

Another trivial insight related to reporting structure, roles and responsibilities, commitment, accountability, ownership, empowerment, motivation, engagement and blah, blah, blah.
And is this an insight at all, who doesn't really know that this is important?
Culture change is always hard and change management is essentially intertwined with cultural transformation.

People receptivity and resistance

Another obvious insight that gets thrown at the attendees at the conferences.
Is there anyone in any conference who doesn't know about is?
An organization is a set of people connected through some structure and rules.
This has been always been the case that change in the organization means change in the people working for the organization.
In fact, the point above on organizational culture is highly related to this point and the reason for that is people influence the organizational culture as much as the organizational culture influences the people working in that organization

Everything starts with the "I"

This is another classic point in example for why conferences don't add much real value.
Changes always starts with the individual, who doesn't know that?
The whole idea of self-awareness and self-development is not at all new.
Since ages, thoughts like finding the meaning of life, purpose of life, self-actualization, etc. have very much been there.

Sadly, in many conferences, many times the invited talks by some of the so called "experts" in that XYZ framework dish out exactly the above points.

The language used may be different and more flowery though.

It is all staged or acted out to create the right impact.

There is nothing original about it.

There is nothing really thought- provoking in what you hear from the invited key note speakers.

What you get to see is some colorful picture or table made by the speaker in one of his own books, typically a book you have never heard of.

They re-assemble the old ideas in a newer format and claim to be original thought leaders.

Think about the above.

And also think why conferences on business process and improvement may not be worth spending your time on if you want to learn something new and original.

However, these events are undoubtedly an excellent forum from professional network building point of view.

If you go with the above thought in my your mind, you will not be disappointed.

For better network building, it is also a good idea to keep on asking couple of questions when you attend a conference so that you get noticed.

Better still, become part of a panel discussion, or take up a speaker slot, if it comes by.

And the best, the icing on the cake, is to become a key note speaker for delivering an invited talk.

And why is that the best?

First, you get the chance to dish out and peddle your stuff.

You need to speak about the same age-old and universal principles but in your own language,

And you would need to learn to use the flowery method of delivering a talk so that you also sound like an exert.

After all, those who have paid to attend the conference deserve some bang from the bucks they have spent on the conference fees.

Also the side benefit, you will need to start writing a book.

This would essentially mean you should be able to re-assemble the old ideas in a newer format and claim to be an original thought leader like others of the ilk.

Say that emphatically that you are working on a book when you give your talk.

You don't have to finish it though.

Don't worry, no one is going to check with you about the book after wards.

And yes, the book should include some colorful picture or table.

The other good thing is you will be paid for the talk, not for the book though.

So are conferences on business process and improvement worth spending your time on if you want to learn something new and original?

Think about the that when the next conference on business process and improvement comes up.

That will help.

Going is not a bad idea, but be clear what is it that you want to get out of it.

ROI of Agile Transformation

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Fri, 3 Jan 2020 10:59:00 +0530

Agile transformation has become a catch word since last couple of years.

Like so many things that have come and gone, this is like the latest fashion in the town.

Is agile transformation about driving the adoption of a newer method such as Scrum, XP, SAFe, etc. by an organization?

Or is it something which is above and beyond and involves changes in the mindset required to make an organization truly agile?

The dictionary meaning of the term agile is quite interesting.

Agile means "to be able to move quickly and easily".

"Quickly" means the time required to do something is, relatively speaking, on the lower side.

"Easily" means the effort required to do something is, relatively speaking, on the lower side.

So Agile means quick and easy.

This is a simple but very good definition of the term agile.

Even when agile as a method was not there, agile as an English word always existed.

When you say something needs to be "quick and easy" it is a good thing to have.

Over time, obviously, people created agile methods with their associated rituals like scrum, etc.

Agile transformation needs to look at above and beyond the method-driven approach.

Given the above, we now agree that any organization needs to be quick and easy.

And consequently agile.

This needs a foundation level shift in the way the organization is structured and run.

The top man needs to adopt an agile-based thinking.

The top man needs to drive "quick and easy" aspect into the organizational strategy and operations.

Agile transformation is not a technical subject.

The simplistic and popular views prevalent on agile are not right in this context:

Agile is better than waterfall (one can leverage any method including waterfall in a truly agile environment)
Agile is fragile (the failure points in Agile like design refactoring which can render the system-level architecture less than optimal can be better handled using the right method)
Agile is for delivery function only (agile as a method can be useful for any function but agile as a mindset is most certainly useful for any function)
Agile is the cure for all ills (there is no silver bullet, agile certainly is not one and there will never be one even in the distant future)

Agile transformation as mindset change is definitely crucial for companies and organizations in the present times where change has truly become the constant.

So is agile a good thing to do?

What is the ROI of agile transformation?

ROI has two components - return and investment.

What is the return from agile mindset?

There are several benefits an organization can derive from agile mindset.

Here are some of the important ones:

The organization will have elaborate plans but will revisit and align the plans to keep them synchronized at all times with the changes in the environment.
The organization will look for ways to empower its workforce at all levels to take important decisions without too many layers of approvals.
The organization will have such policies in place that facilitate the various teams and their members to constantly improve their activities and operations to make them more "quick and easy".
The organization will have the right structure in place based on meritocracy and competency without consideration to loyalty and longevity.

And what are the investments required for agile transformation?

There are several expenses an organization has to incur for instilling agile mindset.

Here are some of the important ones:

Setting up a dedicated core team to lead the agile transformation
Training of top management, core team and others on the agile way of thinking
Review and revision to the existing policies and procedures to align them with the concept of "quick and easy"
Up-gradation of internal tools to improve the agile factor

The expenses and investments are really no different from what one would incur for running any organization-level change management initiative.

Any agile transformation is nothing but an organization-level change management initiative.

So are the returns from agile transformation commensurate with the investments made?

Is the ROI promising enough?

Yes and no.

Yes, if there is real mindset and cultural change at a deep level.

No, if the change happens but stays at the method-level and is at the surface only.

Many organization-level change management initiatives do not deliver to their promise as they fail to bring in true cultural change.

Culture is hard to change.

And in fact, culture is the only thing that needs to be changed, in any organization-level change management initiative.

ROI calculation for agile transformation is done in a manner similar to what is used for any organization-level change management initiative.

As someone said culture has strategy for breakfast.

The ROI is good if the culture changes.

Culture changes happen if they happen first and for keeps at the top management level.

Top management in many companies is expert at giving lip-service.

They would show as if they genuinely care but scratch the surface and there is only dirt and dust underneath.

They need to let things go, which is very hard if not impossible.

ROI for any organization-level change management initiative depends upon them.

Similarly, ROI for agile transformation also depends upon them.

There is a simple magical trick to get the ROI from agile transformation.

The magical trick involves just one thing.

The top management needs to change first.

Unless these folks change, no change happens for real.

And unless these folks change, there is no ROI of agile transformation.

Quality Hold or Non-Quality Hold?

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Tue, 3 Dec 2019 18:18:00 +0530

At times, a manufacturer is forced to put a product on quality hold owing to some issues getting identified or getting reported on the product from the field.

When the above happens in just a few weeks of the product getting launched, it speaks volumes about the lack of necessary product quality measures before the product is allowed to ship.

This has direct and immediate business impact on the sales figures for the period the product stays on "quality hold".

The term "quality hold" is an interesting one.

It means a product is put on hold due to quality.

Whereas, the product is actually put on hold due to lack of quality or due to non-quality.

It would be better to use the term "non-quality hold" rather than "quality hold".

From a business point of view, quality holds come at a cost.

In addition, there is an impact on the market reputation of the manufacturer.

This has a lot to do with the pressure on manufacturers to design, build and ship new products as well as frequent and continuous product improvements and innovations.

The business pressure leads to short-cuts being taken or crucial aspects getting ignored.

That may result in faster delivery, but at times, not a good one.

Organizations need to carefully assess and balance out the time to market pressure against the need to have good quality of the product that eventually gets shipped.

Quality holds are never a desirable situation for any manufacturer.

In several instances, it is possible that the issues getting identified or getting reported on the product from the field may not lead to any visible product failure in the short run.

However, in case any issue comes to the notice of the manufacturer it has an obligation to act upon it with high degree of urgency.

Hence quality holds.

It would be preferable to never have a quality hold or rather non-quality hold happen.

Business should, at no time, be forced to hold itself from continuing to ship and sell products due to quality hold.

The reason is very simple.

Every quality hold is nothing but essentially a business hold!

Process, Process Everyhwere But Not A Practice To Be Seen

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Wed, 13 Nov 2019 21:41:00 +0530

The above reflects the true state in many organizations.

They have many processes, at times more than what is perhaps needed.

However, the compliance to these processes may not be adequate.

Which means they have process, process everywhere but not a practice to be seen.

In such organizations, whenever somethings falls through the cracks, the first and natural tendency is to put a process around it.

So over time, the volume of processes adds up and builds up to a very high degree.

There are processes that get defined and documented for anything and everything.

The above is a good approach to apply the systems approach in an organization.

There are two key rules that should be followed in such situations:

Standard process is put down for those activities that are done again and again and generally very frequently

Standard process is put down for those activities that involve multiple hands and multiple stakeholders.

The problem arises when these processes are not followed religiously.

The compliance to the defined processes is for namesake only and hence these processes do not deliver value in an effective manner.

Lack of compliance to processes in many organizations is a result of cultural issues as well as operational pressures.

Compliance issues may not have immediate impact but do have an impact in the long run for sure.

Such organizations have process, process everywhere but not a practice to be seen!

Lala Culture in Pseudo-Professional Companies

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Wed, 2 Oct 2019 17:55:00 +0530

There are professional companies.

And then there are the pseudo-professional ones.

The pseudos do all possible things to create the facade of professionalism.

However, peel the first layer off and you get to see the dirty reality immediately.

The top dog in such companies has a fetish for external recognition.

And that is really sick.

Even if you are the biggest rat in a small rat-hole, you are still a rat.

This is exactly the case with the Lala-type man who is the top dog or the top rat in a small shop-type pseudo-professional Lala company!

This man is invited to an important meeting where he is also the chair.

On the day of the meeting, an hour or two before the scheduled start time, this man calls you and tells you that he some other supposedly important engagement.

Which also means this particular meeting is not important!

And asks you to go ahead without him.

He says this meeting will mostly be about the routine stuff.

So its okay to go ahead.

It is actually not okay and only a Lala-type man can make such a statement.

For any company, focusing on the routine stuff is absolutely important to ensure the operations go on smoothly.

Of course, focus needs to be on strategic stuff too.

However in small shops where the Lala is the boss of the house, there is nothing really that can be called as strategic stuff.

The Lala-type man creates a false impression about himself and the small shop he is taking care of more like a watch-man than the top leader.

When told that the so-called routine meeting is an important one and he should attend, this man reluctantly agrees and provides a date and time slot when the meeting can be re-scheduled to.

When the day of the re-scheduled meeting arrives he does something completely non-sense, something only a Lala-type man can do in a pseudo-professional company.

This man is, interestingly, the one who is the chair of the so-called routine meeting.

You are the organizer of the so-called routine meeting and you have asked someone in your team to send out the meeting request to those who should attend the meeting including the chair (that same Lala-type man).

This Lala-type man does something amusing.

He wants to re-schedule the meeting again by pushing it further by half-an-hour.

That's really crap.

The bigger crap is that he doesn't call and inform you directly.

He calls one of his stooges from the old boys club he has created in the company.

This stooge becomes a messenger of the top dog.

The stooge tells you that the Lala man wants to move the meeting ahead by half an hour.

You are supposed to comply.

This was told to you for your information only.

You are nothing, just a complete zilch.

Do you feel humiliated?

Not at all.

Why?

Just one reason.

You have seen the same kind of non-sense happen umpteen times already.

There is no surprise.

There is no shock.

After all, this same man has parachuted an incompetent nincompoop over your head with a funny, dysfunctional title.

So what else can you expect other than sheer non-sense?

That nincompoop has only only competency - he is a "yes sir" stooge.

This Lala-type man is used to such an abnormal style of functioning so you cannot and should not expect anything fair and transparent in such an organization.

The meeting gets shifted and eventually happens also.

What also happens at the same time is, that whatever little respect you had left for this man simply vanishes into nothingness.

You have no choice but to comply with the Lala's wishes, whims and fancies.

You do have a choice regarding how much respect you really have for the Lala in private.

In such companies it will be a zero-respect in private situation, but you would create the facade of just the opposite.

The reason is that you need to play smart with the respect factor for the Lala in public.

And then, the big question.

Lala culture in pseudo-professional companies is a bitter truth.

The faster you adjust to that truth, the better for you.

Don't carry any ego as you will be humiliated again and again.

Be ready for any and all kinds of non-sense.

There should not be any surprise.

There should be any shock.

If you do the above, you will be at peace with yourself.

Do, however, enjoy the experience as you pass through the amusing times you are surely going to have when you work with a pseudo-professional Lala company.

ITIL 4 - The 4 Four Dimensions Model and Service Value System

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Sat, 14 Sep 2019 21:40:00 +0530

The ITIL 4 framework, the latest version of the ITIL framework, was released in Feb 2019.

The key concept in this model is the concept of services that are delivered by a service system.

So what does a service system contain?

A service system essentially contains the following elements:

Service relationships (the supply chain through which service is delivered)
Service offerings which constitutes of:

Goods
Access to resources
Service actions that provide the core, enabling and/or enhancing services,

Products (refers to the hardware and software used to deliver the service)
Resources (refers to other elements like people, knowledge repository, etc.

The ITIL 4 framework, broadly speaking, consists of the following key components:

The Four Dimensions Model
Service Value System (SVS)

Here is a schematic representation of the ITIL 4 framework in a nutshell:

The ITIL 4 framework consists of the following key components:

The Four Dimensions Model
Service Value System (SVS)

THE FOUR DIMENSIONS MODEL

The four dimensions include:

Organizations and people
Information and Technology
Partners and suppliers
Value streams and processes

The above four dimensions represent perspectives which are relevant to the whole SVS, including the Service Value Chain (SVC) and the ITIL Practices.

However, the PESTLE factors, as mentioned below, that are beyond the control of the SVS constrain and influence the four dimensions:

Political factors
Economical factors
Social factors
Technological factors
Legal factors
Environmental factors

The interplay of the four dimensions impacts the creation of products and services for the provisioning of the service offerings for creating value for the service consumers.

ITIL SERVICE VALUE SYSTEM (SVS)

The ITIL Service Value System (SVS) coverts the inputs in the form of Opportunity/demand into outputs in the form of Value.

The core components of the ITIL SVS include:

ITIL Guiding Principles
ITIL Service Value Chain (SVC)
Governance
Continual Improvement
ITIL Practices

The Seven ITIL Guiding Principles

Focus on value
Start where you are
Collaborate and promote visibility
Think and work holistically
Keep it simple and practical
Optimize and automate

ITIL Service Value Chain (SVC)

The service value system (SVC) is the central element of the SVS and is essentially the operating model which outlines the key Activities required to facilitate value creation through service provisioning.

The six SVC Activities are:

Engage
Plan
Obtain and Build
Design and Transition
Deliver and Support
Improve

For converting inputs to outputs the SVC Activities use different combinations of ITIL practices.

Governance

This provides the system for directing and controlling the organization and is realized through the following activities:

Evaluate - Assess the business needs, strategic priorities and current portfolio
Direct - Decide the strategic direction, future investments, organizational polices
Monitor - Appraise the performance of organizational outcomes and business benefits

Continual Improvement

Opportunities for continual improvement needs to be explored at all levels of the organization in all functional areas.

The continual improvements can range from strategic to tactical to operational to the ones which are transaction-based in nature.

The continual improvement model involves use of the following steps:

What is the Vision? - Align with company mission, business goals and objectives
Where are we now? - Determine current performance baseline (KPIs and metrics)
Where do we want to be? - Define measurable targets that need to be achieved
How do we get there? - Define the improvement plan
Take action - Execute the improvement plan
Did we get there? - Evaluate improved performance baseline (KPIs and metrics)
How do we keep the momentum going? - Put in place measures for ongoing sustenance

The improvement ideas should be logged and tracked to closure using a structured system like a continual improvement register or log.

ITIL Practices

The practices essentially constitute a set of resources designed for performing work.

There are 34 ITIL Practices which are arranged in three broad categories:

General Management Practices (14)

Architecture management
Continual improvement
Information security management
Knowledge management
Measurement and reporting
Portfolio management
Organizational change management
Project management
Relationship management
Risk management
Financial management
Strategy management
Supplier management
Workforce and talent management

Service Management Practices (17)

Availability management
Business analysis
Capacity and performance management
Change control
Incident management
IT asset management
Monitoring and event management
Problem management
Release management
Service catalogue management
Service configuration management
Service continuity management
Service design
Service desk
Service level management
Service request management
Service validation and testing

Technical Management Practices (3)

Deployment management
Infrastructure and platform management
Software development and management

When the Head of Operations in an Imbecile as well as a Dim-witted Nincompoop

noreply@blogger.com (connect2hcb) — Sun, 1 Sep 2019 11:26:00 +0530

The head of operations is a crucial role in any organization.

The person in this role needs to be not only smart and intelligent but also fair and highly professional.

However, in several organizations, the head of operations is effectively a joker.

He is there for one reason.

His loyalty to the top man.

When this person is an imbecile as well as dim-witted nincompoop it is very damaging to the professional fabric of the organization.

Several unfortunate things happen in such a company.

This person creates his favorites in the system.

The set of favorites are beyond the usual rules of business operations.
The favorites are into R&D for the future, technology innovation, IP development, competency building, brand building and every such thing where they are not exposed to the pulls and pressures of corporate life.
These special folks are basically living a retired life just like the head of operations himself.

This person acts with a pronounced bias.

He needs to keep his favorites in good humor.
He also needs to keep those who he is loyal to happy and needs to prove his loyalty again and again.
He doesn't own up to the mess he ends up creating every time he does something due to lack of clarity and poor communication.

This person needs to be a "yes sir" barking dog

He needs to bark when told to bark and shut up when told to do so.
He has no mind of his own and needs to take orders.
He needs to oblige the different sirs in the organization who are letting him carry on with the nonsense and mess that he has created.

This person projects an image of exclusivity and seniority

He gets a bigger room similar to other imbeciles in the organization.
He goes for lunch with other jerks like him.
He is there for long time so has become a senior due to loyalty more than merit and leaves no opportunity to show a sick sense of exclusivity and seniority.

Such imbeciles and dim-witted nincompoops are usually hard to tackle.

They, however, do provide a comical, but not at all necessary, relief from the professional hassles.

In the long run, they end up making the organization sick.

Very sick.

Very very sick.