Blog Archives

Services and disservices – 2: Education example

Services serve the needs of someone. Disservices purport to serve the needs of someone, but don’t – sometimes through incompetence or failure in operation, sometimes through incompetence in service-design, and sometimes even by intent. And therein lie a huge range of problems

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Business, Complexity / Structure, Enterprise architecture, Futures, Power and responsibility, Society

Services and disservices – 1: Introduction

Services serve: they serve the needs of someone, or, in a broader ecosystem, the needs of something. Services serve – that’s why they’re called ‘services’. Yet what do we call something that purports to serve some need, but doesn’t? I’d suggest

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Business, Complexity / Structure, Enterprise architecture, Futures, Power and responsibility, Society

Catching ideas in flight

Where to start with this one? Where the heck do I start? How do I get it to stay still long enough that I can start? Threads. Words. Sort-of. Except that as soon as I start to write, it’s gone anyway.

Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Complexity / Structure, Knowledge

Simplifying SCORE, again

How can we simplify the SCORE framework – Strengths, Challenges, Options, Responses, Effectiveness – to make it more accessible as a practical, more strategy-oriented replacement for SWOT? As summarised in the post ‘More on simplifying SCORE‘, the way to use SCORE is sort-of

Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Complexity / Structure, Enterprise architecture, Futures, Knowledge

More on simplifying SCORE

How do we use SCORE, as a practical, more strategy-oriented replacement for SWOT? These are some additional notes as a follow-up and extension to the previous post ‘Simplifying SCORE‘. They perhaps apply in particular to the new simplified layout for

Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Complexity / Structure, Enterprise architecture, Futures, Knowledge

Simplifying SCORE

What tool or graphic would you use to guide a quick exploration of strategy or tactics? Many people would use SWOT, of course – the classic 2×2 grid of Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats: The catch is that it’s very limited

Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Complexity / Structure, Enterprise architecture, Futures, Knowledge

An acronym for (enterprise) effectiveness

What’s a quick way to keep reminding ourselves about effectiveness in the enterprise, and that tagline of “things work better when they work together, on-purpose”? My suggestion for this is the somewhat-contrived acronym LEARN: eLegant – clarity, simplicity, consistency, ‘feel’, self-adapting

Tagged with: , , , ,
Posted in Business, Complexity / Structure, Enterprise architecture

A tagline for enterprise-effectiveness

What’s a simple tagline that we can use to help guide conversations about enhancing of enterprise-effectiveness? My own preference is this: things work better when they work together, on purpose. Okay, I’ll admit that that doesn’t quite give us the full

Tagged with: , , , , ,
Posted in Business, Complexity / Structure, Enterprise architecture

Effectiveness for enterprise-effectiveness

Keep it simple. Simple, yet not simplistic. Acknowledge the complexity, yet don’t ever push that complexity in people’s faces. (Not until they’re ready for it and choose to face it, anyway.) Help people find their own effectiveness about creating effectiveness.

Tagged with: , , , , , ,
Posted in Business, Complexity / Structure, Enterprise architecture

Enterprise effectiveness

Enterprise-architecture is dead. As a term, anyway. Although it had been dying for quite a while, we do have some certainty now about when it died; we know how it died, and even why it died. And whilst some of us

Tagged with: , , , ,
Posted in Business, Complexity / Structure, Enterprise architecture
Books by Tom Graves
Ebooks by Tom Graves
Categories
Archives