Transcript Linsell-Fraser_ppt

James Linsell-Fraser, Senior Architect & Client Technical Advisor
September 2011
Improving Reliability and Making Things
Cheaper to Run
Tuesday 20th September
© 2011 IBM Corporation
Why am I here?
 Background
 Challenge
 Approach / Plan
 Opportunities
2
© 2011 IBM Corporation
Background
 My Background
– Complex systems integration programmes in financial services and public sector
– Trusted advisor - driving value out of IBM products and services
– Not here talk specifically about IBM and what it is and does – will answer what I can!
 IBMs technical community
– I am a representative of IBMs technical leadership capability in UK and Ireland
– Day job versus eminence – exploiting IBMs technical council, shared values
– Innovation drives value in front of the client: technology and service orientated
– We represent a significant influence in the market and clients expect the best
– A services world, consuming IT services (SOA, Cloud) – helping define the standards
3
© 2011 IBM Corporation
Challenge
 “Complex Systems Integration” – a process that adopts service based patterns
– For me, the hardest part of what we do in IT delivery
– Integration of disparate technologies, current & legacy
– Integrating technology with business – service orientated architecture
– But, because it is hard, we don’t always get it right! (but we need to learn)
 What can we learn from other industries about improving our effectiveness?
– Team of 6 started an initiative to compare and contract the IT and Automotive Industries
– The challenge is – where do you start and what do you compare?
– Problem is, we are not intellects / experts in Automotive manufacturing….
– …..but there must be some synergies in method and process?
4
© 2011 IBM Corporation
Approach – Auto manufacture example
Operational
Architecture
Integration
Architecture
Functional
Architecture
Technology
Architecture
5
•Needs to be:
Sounds
justto like
IT…
• reliable
and perform
customer
expectations
• dependable
Manufacturer
and supplier
• realistic total cost of ownership/support
ecosystem
• economic to
run and decommission
• Based
design principles
and best practice
e.g.onElectrical,
entertainment,
• Define the relationships between the components
mechanical,
user interface, etc sub
• Complex interactions required, modelled and understood
• Multiple systems
layers of complexity
to integrate
to integrate
e.g. on
SatNav,
Bluetooth,
Aircon are
• Based
design principles
and best practice
components
from• Legacy
3rd party
vendors. Engine might
• Custom design components
be
shared
• Shared
asset amongst
components models and
• 3rd party vendor
components
partners.
Body
panels bespoke
e.g.
chassis,
• Tried
andShared
tested principles
and bestdrive
practicetrain
• Basedand
on assets,
products
and design group
patterns
engine
between
• Could be shared amongst different business units
members.
Heritage
and brand.
• Best
of breed materials
and components,
affordable
© 2011 IBM Corporation
Problem Statement
How can we make complex IT integration
projects more reliable and cheaper to run?
“Complex SI in the 2010s is more about component integration than “blank sheet”
engineering”
6
© 2011 IBM Corporation
Compare & Contrast the two industries
AUTO
IT
The lifecycle of automotive delivery
is well established to control
change and maximise profit.
IT is a relatively new industry which
has grown dramatically both in
business impact and in technology.
It is a highly competitive, global
industry with a complex supplier
ecosystem.
There are established global
brands for which product quality is
a fundamental requirement.
7
IT is a competitive and global
industry with an increasingly complex
supplier ecosystem.
There are established global brands for
which service quality is a
fundamental requirement.
© 2011 IBM Corporation
What we want to achieve
STUDY GOALS
 Compare the lifecycle of Auto production and maintenance
 Understand how Delivery Excellence affects our business and is contained
 Identify engineering influences that can be translated into IT process improvement
RESULTS FROM THE STUDY
 Recommendations on how the IT Services business could change its delivery models
 A model of the transformation effort and investment required
 A model of the IT return on the potential Delivery Excellence improvement
8
© 2011 IBM Corporation
Using hypothesis to focus on the problem – “Service Patterns”
“Due to an accurate
estimating method and
automated build processes
the motor industry is able to
invest more on the design
phase and design for run”
“The motor industry is more
adept at managing change
than the IT industry”
“The motor manufacturing process
has mastered core engineering
principles that are common
throughout the industry and used
to drive down cost and improve
reliability”
“The motor industry has
overcome the equivalent of the
Business-IT-IT gap in
efficiently managing the
transition from requirements to
build to run”
“The motor industry has adopted and matured testing
processes using accurate input data to improve
quality and optimise manufacturing. The IT industry
has not yet reached a similar level of maturity”
9
© 2011 IBM Corporation
The plan is to undertake research using a variety of sources to
evidence the hypotheses and identify if there are relevant
improvements that we could adopt into IT design and delivery
capabilities
Consult academia
to identify relevant
studies/sources
Work with
innovative bodies
such as the NoAE
Compare and
contrast processes,
metrics and
outcomes
10
Refer to published
industry research
e.g. Gartner
Reference case
studies from both
IT and Auto
projects
Leverage
relationships with
auto manufacturers
e.g. JLR
© 2011 IBM Corporation
NoAE: Network of Automotive Excellence
Opportunities for IBM and Manchester Business School
What could the Academic community / business school do for us?
 Help identify research, assets or experiences that we could study
 Introduce us to bodies, communities, knowledge or leaders in this this area
What we could do to thank you for that
 Share our analysis and results with you, perhaps an opportunity to collaborate?
 Understand how our work could contribute to your work
 Build relationships with IBM so that you could leverage R&D, capability and industry
leadership
(our) Timescales




11
End of Q411 – identify the sources of input and collaboration
End of Q112 – outline business case, review early recommendations
End of Q212 – finalise work, publish
Remember – we are doing this voluntarily in time we make around our day jobs !
© 2011 IBM Corporation
Questions?
12
© 2011 IBM Corporation