[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Comments on the nature of governance
I think that the governance section needs to be more architectural in nature. I suggest the folowing outline: 1. A short intro on what governance is: What is governance, what are the issues, who are the stakeholders. Why is it important? What is the relationship to management How multi-ownership domains affects those pieces and maybe puts natural limits on authority 2. What are the key pieces that need to be put into place: Structure of explicit rules/constitution, the idea of there being organs of control. What are the levers of those organs (policies, roles, powers, authorities and responsibilities) Measurement infrastructure analytics, policy violations, policy conflicts Enforcement infrastructure: policy enforcement points, meta-policies The inputs to the organs of control: decisions about Standards and other regulatory influences, conflicts between participants. What kind of cross-organizational entities are important in the context of a multi-domain SOA-based system. What kind of entities exist within an organization. 3. More elaboration on the relationship to management as one of enforcement (and hence implementation of governance) This is where material on policies and contracts as descriptions of governance intentions could link things together nicely. 4. The specific features of the relationship between regulatory authorities and any governance structure. Something that draws out the links between internal authority within the realm and external authority. (e.g., I have to ask you to follow these processes because of my obligations under SOX). Also, we need to base the model on a diagram. This was my diagram:
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]