To: jdb@MIT.EDU (James D. Bruce)
Cc: itlt@MIT.EDU, mbarker@MIT.EDU
Subject: Re: What Do I Want to Say on August 15? 
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 1995 23:52:05 EDT
From: Mike Barker <mbarker@MIT.EDU>

-My biggest concern, however, is the absence of explicit 
-reference to accountability, responsibility, and attention 
-to the delivery of business value.  We can build the best 
-teams in the world but if they don't deliver business value 
-to our customers then we are in big trouble!

-Thanks again for putting this together.................jim

Thank you.  I think you and Greg have brought out a point that we need
to make sure gets made in the August 15 talks.  Specifically, one of
the main goals for the I/T transition is to make sure IS provides the
best possible environment for teams to deliver business value.  We
should probably stress that part of the team formation is going to be
coming up with ways of defining, measuring, and keeping track of how
each team (and each individual) contributes to increasing business
value.

Let me expand on that a little.

I think the real answers to questions about responsibility and
accountability are just like the answer to how to get there from
here--we're going to have to work on it together.

As with priorities, we need to make sure we understand each other,
give people a chance to succeed or make mistakes, and arrange regular
internal reviews of how well we are doing.

I do think the same principles that say push power and authority down
and out as far as possible (delegate and distribute, if you prefer those
terms) lead to the conclusion that responsibility has to go right along
with the rest of the package.  Maybe the way to present it is that when
you take charge of some part of a task, you gain some level of authority
and power over that area.  You also take responsibility for it.

Offhand, I'd suggest that we go back to goals, tasks, and negotiations. 
The ITLT (and others) can lay out goals--strategic targets.  A team
takes one (or more) of those goals and sets out the tasks they will use
to get there.  In most cases, there will be some negotiations about how
much resources (money, people, space, time, etc.) it will take to
achieve those tasks, and then there will be some continuing check-up and
monitoring as things proceed.

I'm concerned that we not get lost in trying to handle all the possible
contingencies in some grand theoretical approach.  Perhaps someone else
can do that, but I think we're going to have to work together on
building teams and keep right on tinkering with the teams, processes,
and other parts of the new I/T framework as time passes.  There isn't
going to be a simple golden rule to use in handing out responsibility,
setting up and tracking accountability, and making sure business value
increases.

Instead, everyone has to take charge of their own responsibility.  If
teams are operating well, with visible goals clearly related to business
value, accountability won't be a problem--keeping the teams from coming
down too hard on those who "aren't pulling their weight" will be!

I think it comes back to building methods for people to "take charge"
(grabbing authority)--and making sure that everyone knows you also are
assuming responsibility at the same time.

Here's a thought--suppose that when a new team starts up in some way, or
whenever someone becomes a team leader, through "bubbling up" from the
team or "appointment" from some other group, the first required action
is to write a "contract" and get approval from at least the new and the
"originating" team.

The main points of the contract might be:

    a.  these are the goals of the team
    b.  these are the steps the team will take
    c.  these are the resources the "originating" team will provide
    d.  these are the results the team will commit to
    e.  these are the rewards and penalties that apply

This would make the team (and team leader) take responsibility for
defining what they are going to do and how they are going to be
measured.  They also should have a reasonably good measure of how their
proposal "stacks up" in terms of delivering business value, since that
is going to be part of the consideration on agreeing to provide
resources.

The ITLT (or other originating team) would act as a check on whether or
not the goals and resource planning of the team actually provided good
business values.

If we required that all contracts have serious "lifetimes" (maximum--1
year?) and really evaluate whether or not to renew the contracts when
they come up for it--we would put a limit on some of the "bureaucracy
building" that plagues most organizations.

mike