It’s really nice that this can be fractal too. You can have 1) Vision/Mission/Role/Goal (VMRG) not at the enterprise level – where it’s 3 levels out from a company.
2) You can have a VMRG of a center of excellence (e.g. Document Management) or organization group (HR, Finance etc..) within that company.
Linking 1 (enterprise scope) and 2 (sub-company scope) together would give a nice audit trail.
Sorry, meant to say above “not JUST at the enterprise level’
Although, thinking about it some more: Wouldn’t item 2 (sub-company scope) also be a service in which enterprise canvas/service content model would make? As you say, everything is or represents a service – so yes.
With the idea of ‘just enough detail’, maybe a VMRG for item 2 would be a enough of this strategy ‘stuff’. For example, if the item in scope is a particular vendor’s Document Management Software – then (would you agree or not?):
Vision – effectively management documents for the firm..
Values – metadata, indexing, storage, retrieval, distribution, security, versioning, and search
Role – Manage Documents
Mission – Manage documents of all new clients in vendors ABC Document Management software. KPI – % documents of new clients managed..
Those Vision/Values do exist WITHOUT the stated mission because there are other applications that management documents (shared network drives, sharepoint etc..)…
Clearly, the vision in context is not enterprise in scope – it’s more inside-in/out, IT focused, which of course your frameworks cover but is not biased to.
Side note, would really like to see how to translate a typical IT scope (aka one that BDAT would probably cover somewhat well) to your framework and then see how it links to the overall enterprise scope.
Would you agree with that understanding and example?
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *