Challenge  My organisation’s IT function had recently been restructured into a set of smaller individual businesses  within IT (value streams) and an associated set of group that provide support and governance over these  value streams.

The value streams run independently like their own businesses so they can deliver value to their specific  customers groups within the organisation that they serve as fast as possible. However they also need to  align to the common IT strategy of the organisation, maintain visibility of all the work occurring within IT  and work together across value streams to deliver a complete service that meets the customer needs.

The existing way that IT funding requests and solutions were reviewed, assessed and governed by a single  team and single IT executive would not work in this new matrix structure. The current method of detailed  review of documents and series of meetings to discuss them would be too time-consuming to ensure  alignment and enable visibility.

Selection  It was important to be able to determine what would be feasible (“what Works”) very rapidly without a  large investment of time and cost as the process would be used weekly by a large number of people,  including all of the IT executives whose time is extremely valuable.

In the future we will automate the final governance process, but don’t want to develop software to do this  until we know the process will achieve the desired outcome.

This is why I selected the learning launch approach, outlined by Matthias Walther in the Learning Launch Tool  video in the Experimentation Module, to be able to test my hypothesis by doing an experiment that was  fast and cheap.

Image source -> Matthias Walther - https://www.coursera.org/learn/design-thinking- innovation/lecture/F04r6/learning-launch-tool

Application  My hypothesis was that managers and executives could better achieve the alignment and  governance outcome they were searching for by reviewing an overview dashboard presentation that  would act as a “tripwire” to highlight issues or areas of concern that they could then deep dive into  the detailed documents.

The key assumptions I need to test included:

  Would it provide sufficient visibility across value streams, highlight strategy alignment (Value  Creation)

  Would it enable just enough governance (Dependability)

  Would the dashboard by easily created and understood (execution)

  Would it be simple enough to be created by any of the IT project delivery staff (scalability).

I then designed a set of tests by creating a template and mocked up a small number of examples  from existing documents/projects. These I used to test the approach with a representative subset of  the people involved in the process (subject matters experts, managers, executives etc). I had  architects and project managers experiment with creating the presentation summaries. I then fed  these into the next set of tests and had managers and executives review summaries to test that the  summaries them provided with the visibility and alignment that they needed.

Once the interviews I did with the participants of these experiments had provided feedback  (confirming data), that this approach would work and was delivering the value they expected I then  continued development (created how-to instructions, alignment scoring guides etc, google site to  store them). This approach has now been implemented and is used as our official core architecture  governance process that is working very effectively and being used to make all key decisions & guide  all major investments.

Insight  In performing the learning launch for the new governance approach, I realised just how easy it is to  get blinded by your own confirmation bias and the importance of direct testing with the end  customers of what you are creating.

Despite my thinking that the order for presenting information I’d landed on was just what was  required, one of the executives pointed out that what mattered most to her and her peers when  making decisions was strategic alignment. She highlighted that the summary presentation needed to  focus on that first and foremost and asked that we adapt the format and ordering of the slide – and  insight I would never have gotten until it was too late without doing fast and quick experimentation  up front.

I’d gotten so caught up in the linear, logical flow of the information necessary to help the subject  matters experts create the summary, I’d underestimated the need from the executives to have the  strategic alignment question answered up front.

Given what I’ve learnt from her feedback, I’ve started to be very conscious of my confirmation bias  in all my work.

Approach  Next time I design a process like this (and for other design work in general), I’m going to use a  visualisation activity up front in the design process to help highlight all the key outcomes and use it  through the design thinking process, especially to keep them front and centre when designing and  conducting my experiments.

In the future I’ll actively seek out very different thinking stakeholders for their opinions and include  experiments that can help me to uncover “disconfirming data”, not just “confirming data” so that I  can counteract this inbuilt bias and pivot and adapt.


Challenge My organisation ’s IT function had recently been restructured into a set of smaller individual businesses within IT ( value streams ) and an associated set of group that provide support and governance over these value streams . The value streams run independently like their own businesses so they can deliver value to their specific customers groups within the organisation that they serve as fast as possible . However they also need to align to the common IT strategy of the organisation , maintain visibility of all the work occurring within IT and work together across value streams to deliver a complete service that meets the customer needs . The existing way that IT funding requests and solutions were reviewed , assessed and governed by a single team and single IT executive would not work in this new matrix structure . The current method of detailed review of documents and series of meetings to discuss them would be too time - consuming to ensure alignment and enable visibility . Selection It was important to be able to determine what would be feasible ( “ what Works ” ) very rapidly without a large investment of time and cost as the process would be used weekly by a large number of people , including all of the IT executives whose time is extremely valuable . In the future we will automate the final governance process , but do n’t want to develop software to do this until we know the process will achieve the desired outcome . This is why I selected the learning launch approach , outlined by Matthias Walther in the Learning Launch Tool video in the Experimentation Module , to be able to test my hypothesis by doing an experiment that was fast and cheap . Image source - > Matthias Walther - https://www.coursera.org/learn/design-thinking- innovation / lecture / F04r6 / learning - launch - tool Application My hypothesis was that managers and executives could better achieve the alignment and governance outcome they were searching for by reviewing an overview dashboard presentation that would act as a “ tripwire ” to highlight issues or areas of concern that they could then deep dive into the detailed documents . The key assumptions I need to test included :  Would it provide sufficient visibility across value streams , highlight strategy alignment ( Value Creation )  Would it enable just enough governance ( Dependability )  Would the dashboard by easily created and understood ( execution )  Would it be simple enough to be created by any of the IT project delivery staff ( scalability ) . I then designed a set of tests by creating a template and mocked up a small number of examples from existing documents / projects . These I used to test the approach with a representative subset of the people involved in the process ( subject matters experts , managers , executives etc ) . I had architects and project managers experiment with creating the presentation summaries . I then fed these into the next set of tests and had managers and executives review summaries to test that the summaries them provided with the visibility and alignment that they needed . Once the interviews I did with the participants of these experiments had provided feedback ( confirming data ) , that this approach would work and was delivering the value they expected I then continued development ( created how - to instructions , alignment scoring guides etc , google site to store them ) . This approach has now been implemented and is used as our official core architecture governance process that is working very effectively and being used to make all key decisions & guide all major investments . Insight In performing the learning launch for the new governance approach , I realised just how easy it is to get blinded by your own confirmation bias and the importance of direct testing with the end customers of what you are creating . Despite my thinking that the order for presenting information I ’d landed on was just what was required , one of the executives pointed out that what mattered most to her and her peers when making decisions was strategic alignment . She highlighted that the summary presentation needed to focus on that first and foremost and asked that we adapt the format and ordering of the slide – and insight I would never have gotten until it was too late without doing fast and quick experimentation up front . I ’d gotten so caught up in the linear , logical flow of the information necessary to help the subject matters experts create the summary , I ’d underestimated the need from the executives to have the strategic alignment question answered up front . Given what I ’ve learnt from her feedback , I ’ve started to be very conscious of my confirmation bias in all my work . Approach Next time I design a process like this ( and for other design work in general ) , I ’m going to use a visualisation activity up front in the design process to help highlight all the key outcomes and use it through the design thinking process , especially to keep them front and centre when designing and conducting my experiments . In the future I ’ll actively seek out very different thinking stakeholders for their opinions and include experiments that can help me to uncover “ disconfirming data ” , not just “ confirming data ” so that I can counteract this inbuilt bias and pivot and adapt .