After many years analyzing customers’ change control processes we’ve learned that no two processes are ever the same. However, I’ve noticed that when a company sets out to improve their change control processes, they tend to make them more complex than necessary. Particularly when attempting agile processes for the first time.
I’d like to take credit for this, but can’t as I just heard it and I’m not even sure where I heard it, but it resonated with me…!
The gist of the article/conversation was that with more and more change automation being available to us, the desire for Agile change processes and the overall desire for speed of development, the comment was that going forward we should not be asking who is going to approve the change, but rather what is going to approve the change.
Last week an Infographic landed on my desk illustrating recent RedHat sponsored UBM research around the future of business IT applications. What caught my eye was the way the Gartner Bi-Modal IT concept was used to describe the different kinds of IT applications in play, rather than focussing on the way the different application types were managed – perhaps the area we normally speak into.
During a recent webinar, we asked attendees to what degree their SAP IT organization were feeling pressure from the business to ‘speed up’. The results were telling.
Improving the outcomes of SAP change management processes has become increasingly important as SAP customers deal with higher change volumes and shift to more agile delivery methods. Developing that process can be challenging, especially if it’s the first time — at RSC, we’ve found that the most common areas of improvement measured by customers are…
The benefits of agile software development are well documented. A nice summary is provided by the global consulting firm PwC. However, established processes and innovation/agile processes are at odds – especially in the SAP change management world which is very much accustomed to a waterfall SDLC methodology.