Jenny
Having looked at this more closely I think it is something that we need to take step by step as we are still on a big learning curve. As a first step a simple reference in the Policy Product Matrix is the quick and easy way of highlighting the OMG work and we have already set a precedent for that by quoting the OMG’s Business Process Model as a technique to consider using. We need to be careful about making firm endorsements and recommendations until we see evidence of their successful usage but we can at this stage make a reference to them so people can consider using the techniques. And just to clarify the Matrix is not an inventory of what policies are used today. It is a checklist of all the things that need to be considered when putting together a transformation programme. So we expect managers to use the Matrix, identify what they need to do and use any references to tools and techniques in their implementation plans.
I’ve said before we have a longer term intention to issue detailed guidance on implementation including developing the Roadmap etc but for now our priority is to assist with current implementations and learn the lessons from them before going into detailed print.
With all that in mind I suggest we add a reference to SBVR in the Matrix as per the attached. We cannot add references to VDML and CMMN yet as they are still work in progress and the specs are not publically available. We can add them later to the appropriate cells when OMG publishes the specs.
If you are content with this approach I’ll put this proposed change on the agenda for approval at the next TC meeting.
From: Jenny Huang [mailto:jenny@ifossfoundation.org]
Sent: 03 October 2012 01:26
To: John Borras
Cc: 'TGF TC List'
Subject: Re: [tgf] Complementary standards for multi-stakeholders service delivery and citizen engagement
hi John,
I forgot about the Policy Product Matrix element in the TGF, the intent for me to bring up those items were indeed not to add additional standards to the TGF primer itself but to provide tools to help realize the vision. i.e. Transformation is going to be a long running process with many stakeholders involved, the more tools to help produce standardized artifacts along the way the better it is to repeat the processes and to retain/share knowledge as we progress.
A quick click thru at the policy product wiki, it appears the primary focus is to inventory what policies are used today. It is a necessary step but not sure how exactly the analysis tools will fit in there, thou.
re you other question about whether there is any similar work exist, I suspect there is none. The work is done in the OMG Business Model Integration task force, so the nature of the group is to harmonize of what exist in the industry and fill n the gaps of what needs to be developed. The BMI folks are more looking for TGF as a use case to support broader adoption of OMG standards, I think it is an opportunity to consider additional resources that can help the realization of TGF, especially OMG has strong US gov. presence.
perhaps we can help to focus the discussion of this thread by figuring out how do we populate this use case page https://wiki.oasis-open.org/tgf/Use%20Cases i.e. how one would use the current TGF artifacts and how one would go about the analysis process to develop the business case for transformation and to develop the roadmap for transformation with multi-stakeholders involvement etc.
Jenny
On 10/1/2012 6:18 AM, John Borras wrote:
Jenny
I must confess I haven’t done a deep dive into each of these standards yet but at first glance they seem more like a set of tools and techniques that can assist in the deployment of a TGF programme. To that end it would seem more of a case of referencing them in the Policy Product Matrix and maybe the TGF Primer rather than adding to or creating new TGF Patterns. But before we go down that route we should be certain that there are no similar or competing standards that we should give due consideration to. Do you have any knowledge or views on that please?
Views on this from other TC colleagues would be appreciated please.
Dear all,
On the last TC call, I mentioned that there are a few standards from the Object Management Group might be useful to facilitate the analysis and simulation of the complex problem space that the TGF is addressing.
I’m providing a short intro of those items here, will be happy to arrange a few conference calls/webinars with domain experts from the OMG to explore the topics further with the TC.
SBVR: Semantic of Business Vocabularies and Business Rules
- It is intended to capture the semantics of business concepts and relationships with support for natural-language-like declarative _expression_ of business rules of a complex entity, such as a business. It includes the ability to express the concepts and rules in multiple vocabularies (i.e., multiple languages). This is an existing spec. a high level descriptions can be found at this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics_of_Business_Vocabulary_and_Business_Rules
- Relevance to TGF: We need to examine whether the current TGF Pattern Language spec. can be enhanced with SBVR. This will allow instance of requirements/concepts to be translated and managed at regional level at the same time keeping the coherence at the state/government level using modeling and relationship techniques.
VDML: Value Delivery Modeling Language
- This is a work in progress in the OMG (potential adoption in early 2013). The heart of this work is to support Business Design and Innovation Management driven by the creation and exchange of value. It fills the gap between business models (e.g., Osterwalder) and business process management.
- Relevance to TGF: This systematic modeling approach is essential for virtualized service delivery and franchising business model with citizen engagement as envisioned by the TGF
- This blog post on “Outside-in Business Architecture” provides some insights to the work http://fredacummins.blogspot.com/2012/01/outside-in-business-architecture-with.html
CMMN: Case Management Model and Notation
- This is a work in progress in the OMG (potential adoption in early 2013). The specification defines a language for modeling of elements of a type of case (e.g., tasks, stages, events, constraints,…) to support adaptive planning, decision-making, collaboration and coordination on individual cases.
- Relevance to TGF: From a whole government perspective, services to citizens and other stakeholders often require ad-hoc coordination and collaboration that crosses organizational boundaries and engages shared services. For every transformational project that is going to carry out in a “virtual organization” fashion, similar governance and organization process/structures are required as one would expect from a single enterprise environment.
- This type of work environment is already seen for projects like “Healthy cities” yet lack of a structure for effective community engagement. Here is another blog post that provides a high level view: http://fredacummins.blogspot.com/2011/07/knowledge-worker-cockpit.html
Please note all of the above specifications are geared for business/strategy thinkers to clearly model the desired business/benefits first so that appropriate technology and who they should be sourced from can be assessed in a much more holistic manner in order to meet the business/citizen benefits that are envisioned.
I’m interested to get your feedback on my assessment of their relevance to the TGF effort.
Regards,
Jenny
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: tgf-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org For additional commands, e-mail: tgf-help@lists.oasis-open.org