330 Wirtschaft
The variety and interdependencies of enterprise systems that digitize large organizations’ processes have grown significantly, resulting in complex enterprise systems landscapes. Avoiding such complexity requires addressing the IT-business engagement gap between (inadvertent) producers of complexity in the business and those in IT who have to manage it. We identify mechanisms for tackling three components of this gap: 1) bridging the awareness gap through information sharing, 2) narrowing the incentive gap through shared goals, and 3) closing the authority gap by evening out power differentials through empowerment.
Established companies are facing two transformations involving digital technologies: becoming digitized and becoming digital. The platforms enabling these transformations are fundamentally different in their purpose, target state, success metrics — and especially, in the key responsibilities of senior leaders. Because of these differences, companies will need to apply new rules new roles, processes, metrics, and norms — to the new digital platform. To develop new rules leaders should (1) separate the teams working on the digital platform, (2) allow digital platform leaders to experiment with new rules, and (3) identify new leaders and coach them to succeed with new rules. Given the time it takes to establish new rules, companies need to start breaking old rules now.
Digitale Transformation: Können Sie den Begriff noch hören, ohne mit den Augen zu rollen? Auch wenn der Begriff in aller Munde ist, besteht immer noch große Verwirrung darüber, was eigentlich so neu daran sein soll. Immerhin setzen Unternehmen ja (digitale) Informationstechnologien (IT) seit Jahrzehnten ein, um Geschäftsprozesse zu verbessern.
The modern industrial corporation encompasses a myriad of different software applications, each of which must work in concert to deliver functionality to end-users. However, the increasingly complex and dynamic nature of competition in today’s product-markets dictates that this software portfolio be continually evolved and adapted, in order to meet new business challenges. This ability – to rapidly update, improve, remove, replace, and reimagine the software applications that underpin a firm’s competitive position – is at the heart of what has been called IT agility. Unfortunately, little work has examined the antecedents of IT agility, with respect to the choices a firm makes when designing its “Software Portfolio Architecture.”
We address this gap in the literature by exploring the relationship between software portfolio architecture and IT agility at the level of the individual applications in the architecture. In particular, we draw from modular systems theory to develop a series of hypotheses about how different types of coupling impact the ability to update, remove or replace the software applications in a firm’s portfolio. We test our hypotheses using longitudinal data from a large financial services firm, comprising over 1,000 applications and over 3,000 dependencies between them. Our methods allow us to disentangle the effects of different types and levels of coupling.
Our analysis reveals that applications with higher levels of coupling cost more to update, are harder to remove, and are harder to replace, than those with lower coupling. The measures of coupling that best explain differences in IT agility include all indirect dependencies between software applications (i.e., they include coupling and dependency relationships that are not easily visible to the system architect). Our results reveal the critical importance of software portfolio design decisions, in developing a portfolio of applications that can evolve and adapt over time.
THE PROBLEM: Companies create problems for customers and employees when product innovation goes unmanaged. Eventually, excessive operational complexity hurts the bottom line.
THREE SOLUTIONS: Focus on product integration, not product proliferation. Make sure your product developers work closely with customerfacing and operational employees. And settle on a high-level purpose that can guide decision making.
By integrating its previously separate insurance, banking and investment products around customer life events (e.g., buying a car, getting married or buying a house), USAA is able to deliver a superior customer experience. To achieve the integration, USAA had to re-architect its business by redesigning structures, roles, incentives, processes and IT systems. The USAA case provides four principles for architecting a business to provide superior customer experience, which will become increasingly important in the digital economy.