Changes

October  

October  

During October, I attempted to introduce the team to a User Story / Scrum / Sprint process (see CCDIC Sprints.pptx).  However, as the first month came to a finish, it was clear that, for the time being, the Team did not have the time to contribute to this issue solution process.  I was getting insights to the PPMG Team's workload issues.

During October, I attempted to introduce the team to a User Story / Scrum / Sprint process (CCDIC Sprints.pptx).  However, as the first month came to a finish, it was clear that, for the time being, the Team did not have the time to contribute to this issue solution process.  I was getting insights to the PPMG Team's workload issues.

Hoping that the workload would diminish, I continued the process alone eventually completing 17 Sprints successfully and generating 30+ Business Analyst artifacts: .

Hoping that the workload would diminish, I continued the process alone eventually completing 17 Sprints successfully and generating 30+ Business Analyst artifacts: .

The true value of the Sprint effort was that the User Stories captured many issues (63) including pain points and suggestions for improvements from staff as well as contributions from Audits and Evaluations.  

The true value of the Sprint effort was that the User Stories captured many issues (63) including pain points and suggestions for improvements from staff as well as contributions from Audits and Evaluations.  

During the course of the initiative, I went through all of the issues: investigating and developing solutions as well as carefully tracking their development types (User eXperience, Integration, Data Management, Data Gathering and/or Reporting) so that I could assess the maturity level of the system (see Findings.ppt, User Stories Report.ppt)

During the course of the initiative, I went through all of the issues: investigating and developing solutions as well as carefully tracking their development types (User eXperience, Integration, Data Management, Data Gathering and/or Reporting) so that I could assess the maturity level of the system (Findings.ppt, User Stories Report.ppt)

During the month I completed Systems, Software and Data inventories in order to determine what was in place.  This set of facilities was all we had to work with (see BAinventories.accdb).   

During the month I completed Systems, Software and Data inventories in order to determine what was in place.  This set of facilities was all we had to work with (BAinventories.accdb).   

I also completed a Reports data model study building on existing inventory work generated by one the Team’s experiments to Lean concepts and methods. This work allowed me to move quickly along the lines of suggestion included in the work towards an integrated, local data repository.

I also completed a Reports data model study building on existing inventory work generated by one the Team’s experiments to Lean concepts and methods. This work allowed me to move quickly along the lines of suggestion included in the work towards an integrated, local data repository. (Report Modeling2.ppt)

I created a presentation extoling the virtues of “decoupling” the data gathering function from the reporting function.  The idea needed to be combined with other solutions in order to meet the local need.  But, it seemed like a move in the right direction with respect to improving the culture.

I created a presentation extoling the virtues of “decoupling” the data gathering function from the reporting function.  The idea needed to be combined with other solutions in order to meet the local need.  But, it seemed like a move in the right direction with respect to improving the culture.

November

November

I began to explore more obscure data gathering opportunities based on the facilities available in the inventories.  One method was based on ODBC connections established within workbooks. These “connections” appear as “live” sheets in the workbook on the connecting PC.  Inputs are received centrally without emailing worksheets. My testing did not include large scale tests, but, the method works well and in an intuitive manner.  I produced a presentation demonstrating its value to data collection efforts.

I began to explore more obscure data gathering opportunities based on the facilities available in the inventories.  One method was based on ODBC connections established within workbooks. These “connections” appear as “live” sheets in the workbook on the connecting PC.  Inputs are received centrally without emailing worksheets. My testing did not include large scale tests, but, the method works well and in an intuitive manner.  I produced a presentation demonstrating its value to data collection efforts. (Setup Workbook Connections.pptx)

I reviewed the validation performed in the data gathering spreadsheets sent to PPMG staff.  The current solution only performed 20% of the tests that would minimize data cleaning before the data can be imported into a database.  Something better was required.  I began to investigate Visual Basic solutions.

I reviewed the validation performed in the data gathering spreadsheets sent to PPMG staff.  The current solution only performed 20% of the tests that would minimize data cleaning before the data can be imported into a database.  Something better was required.  I began to investigate Visual Basic solutions. (PMRwithForm5.xlsm)

On Nov 11, submitted a draft of the plan going forward.  The plan contained possible configurations and data collection methods based on the current facilities.  By way of contrast I developed the “Big” solution.  This contained all of the facilities I thought would be required to support a PHAC side RBM effort.  By analysing the gap, I was able to deduce what changes would have to be put in place over the next few years, who the likely providers of facilities would be and what form the facilities would take.  I began basing all of my improvement plans on this information in lieu of information from PHAC which was said to be “coming”.

On Nov 11, submitted a draft of the plan going forward.  The plan contained possible configurations and data collection methods based on the current facilities.  By way of contrast I developed the “Big” solution.  This contained all of the facilities I thought would be required to support a PHAC side RBM effort.  By analysing the gap, I was able to deduce what changes would have to be put in place over the next few years, who the likely providers of facilities would be and what form the facilities would take.  I began basing all of my improvement plans on this information in lieu of information from PHAC which was said to be “coming”. (New BA Plan.pptx)

It was becoming apparent that integration and harmonization was going to be important over the next year as silos prepared for their exposure to the new “open”, “sharing” world in which no one is a neighbour, rather, we all share the same “room”.

It was becoming apparent that integration and harmonization was going to be important over the next year as silos prepared for their exposure to the new “open”, “sharing” world in which no one is a neighbour, rather, we all share the same “room”.

I had identified a local requirement to manage planning, financial and operational data in PPMG.  Now, how could the planning system be made to appear more like the financial system for which the Team had an intuitive understanding based on its hierarchical, cascading model?

I had identified a local requirement to manage planning, financial and operational data in PPMG.  Now, how could the planning system be made to appear more like the financial system for which the Team had an intuitive understanding based on its hierarchical, cascading model?

To that end, I carefully attempted to inject information into a discussion intended to resolve the nomenclature issues between the CCDIC PMR planning reporting system and the Branch level BOP reporting system.  But, I found a lively organic discussion was already in place driven by a desire to include local planning information in the BOP data gathering spreadsheet.  I stepped back realizing that as long as we treated the data objects appropriately, it did not matter what we call each.  The team resolved the issue and moved on.  However, discussions of the two data models together can be very difficult because the equivocation uses the project management objects names in a manner that is inherently confusing.  One has to carefully indicate whether one is speaking with one’s BOP or PRM hat on or risk not being understood.  This is a soft barrier to further development.  

To that end, I carefully attempted to inject information into a discussion intended to resolve the nomenclature issues between the CCDIC PMR planning reporting system and the Branch level BOP reporting system.  But, I found a lively organic discussion was already in place driven by a desire to include local planning information in the BOP data gathering spreadsheet.  I stepped back realizing that as long as we treated the data objects appropriately, it did not matter what we call each.  The team resolved the issue and moved on.  However, discussions of the two data models together can be very difficult because the equivocation uses the project management objects names in a manner that is inherently confusing.  One has to carefully indicate whether one is speaking with one’s BOP or PRM hat on or risk not being understood.  This is a soft barrier to further development. (PMTerms.pptx)

December

December

I extended my data modeling scope to include reports that use data provided by PPMG, any PPMG data submitted to planning or financial reporting authorities and any other data created by PPMG.

I extended my data modeling scope to include reports that use data provided by PPMG, any PPMG data submitted to planning or financial reporting authorities and any other data created by PPMG. (Section Planning Input Requirements.pptx, CCDIC Section Milestone Planning.xlsx)

By this time, my intention was clear: integrate BOP and PRM planning in order to achieve time savings.  If sufficient data were collected in PPMGs planning phase, it could have most, if not all, of the data on hand required by the BOP data gathering process.  I felt that this time-saving incentive would also lead to a resolution of nomenclature issues as well.  Further, it is sensible to provide data gatherers with requirements.  I recommend that PPMG require that BOP activity names be selected soon enough to ensure none of the section and division planning processes are “negatively influenced”.

By this time, my intention was clear: integrate BOP and PRM planning in order to achieve time savings.  If sufficient data were collected in PPMGs planning phase, it could have most, if not all, of the data on hand required by the BOP data gathering process.  I felt that this time-saving incentive would also lead to a resolution of nomenclature issues as well.  Further, it is sensible to provide data gatherers with requirements.  I recommend that PPMG require that BOP activity names be selected soon enough to ensure none of the section and division planning processes are “negatively influenced”. (

In addition, if PPMG preserved its inputs to the financial process in such a data collection, that un-aggregated data would be available to those investigating data shown in variance reports from a financial system incapable of providing the original un-aggregated inputs back to the area of concern when asking them to answer variance questions based on their inputs.  Truly a “keep your receipts” kind of a situation.  I called this data collection the CCDIC Planning System.  Perhaps not all of the data contributes to nor is created by the planning process but, its availability enables solutions to many of the issues in our User Stories.

In addition, if PPMG preserved its inputs to the financial process in such a data collection, that un-aggregated data would be available to those investigating data shown in variance reports from a financial system incapable of providing the original un-aggregated inputs back to the area of concern when asking them to answer variance questions based on their inputs.  Truly a “keep your receipts” kind of a situation.  I called this data collection the CCDIC Planning System (now Repository2.accdb).  Perhaps not all of the data contributes to nor is created by the planning process but, its availability enables solutions to many of the issues in our User Stories.

I investigated the current Balanced Score Card planning initiative based on the Lean training in 2019.  I found the artifacts created by the team were quite useful as inputs to my work on inventories and data models.  But, PPMG performs much of its planning in an Ad Hoc manner driven by the Branch request for planning data for it’s BOP reporting. The opportunity to practice new methods, share new concepts and learn about the strengths of the organization on which they hope to leverage their new plans never materializes.   

I investigated the current Balanced Score Card planning initiative based on the Lean training in 2019.  I found the artifacts created by the team were quite useful as inputs to my work on inventories and data models.  But, PPMG performs much of its planning in an Ad Hoc manner driven by the Branch request for planning data for it’s BOP reporting. The opportunity to practice new methods, share new concepts and learn about the strengths of the organization on which they hope to leverage their new plans never materializes.