Skip to main content

Über dieses Buch

The LESS 2010 conference was the first scientific conference dedicated to advancing the “lean enterprise software and systems” body of knowledge. It fostered interactions by joining the lean product development community with the agile community coupled with innovative ideas nurtured by the beyond budgeting school of thinking. The conference was organized in collaboration with the Lean Software and Systems Consortium (LSSC). The conference is established as a conference series. The idea of the conference was to offer a unique platform for advancing the state of the art in research and practice by bringing the leading researchers and practitioners to the same table. Indeed, LESS 2010 attracted a unique mix of participants including academics, researchers, leading consultants and industry practitioners. The aim of the conference was to use this diverse community to advance research and practical knowledge concerning lean thinking within the field of software business and development. LESS 2010 had more than 60% of its speakers come from the industry and the remaining from academia. LESS is poised to grow as we advance into future iterations of the conference and become the conference for lean thinking in systems and software development. Its growth and credibility will be advanced by the communities and knowledge exchange platform it provides. LESS offers several avenues for knowledge exchange to create a highly collaborative environment. Each year, we aim to bring novelty to a program that fosters collaboration, letting new ideas thrive during and after the conference.



Scaling Agile to Lean

Scaling Agile to Lean – Track Summary

There are many books, journals and articles explaining agile and to a much lesser extent lean software development methods. Technical competences such as software architecture, automated testing and quality assurance are key focal areas of these materials on agile and lean methods. While some are prescriptive, there is often a substantial difference between the textbook ‘vanilla’ version of the method and the method actually enacted in practice. Prescribed practices are inevitably interpreted in diverse ways or tailored to suit the specific needs of teams. The constantly evolving technological environment that software development projects are enacted in also highlights the need to tailor prescribed agile practices to work in emerging deployment models, such as cloud computing and mobile computing. Quite a few empirical studies focus on how agile methods were adopted, tailored and used in realworld contexts (e.g., Rasmusson, 2003, Fitzgerald et al., 2006). However, there is a distinct absence of lean software development cases, and cases of agile deployment tend to be weak in terms of theoretical foundation, fail to build on previous lessons, and often lack consistency and coherence (Abrahamsson et al., 2009, Conboy, 2009). In the absence of sound, systematic research, there are few lessons learned across studies, and thus the existing body of knowledge is somewhat fragmented and inconclusive. A systematic and insightful understanding of agile adoption, tailoring and execution is yet to be achieved, and research on lean software development is yet to begin.

Kieran Conboy, Vasco Duarte

Agile Transformation Study at Nokia – One Year After

Many organizations have started to deploy agile methods but only few extensive surveys exist on the impacts of these methods. In this study, we wanted to see if there is any change in the practitioners’ opinions after one year of appliance, and if any real trends can be found from the data. The data were collected using two questionnaires. The population of the first study contains more than 100 respondents from three different continents (Europe, North America, and Asia) and seven different countries and the second study 500 respondents from the same organization. The results reveal that most respondents are satisfied agile way of working and would like to stay in agile mode. They also think using agile methods is important for the future. In two consecutive studies we can see that the opinions of the people who have actual experience on agile methods have stayed the same and that the general opinion towards agility has remained extremely positive. We also show that the opinions are reflecting the actual experience on agile methods.

Maarit Laanti

The Role of the User Story Agile Practice in Innovation

The concept of an innovation space where different knowledge and perspectives can interact leading to innovation is central to lean thinking. The SECI framework of organizational knowledge creation identifies five enabling conditions which impinge on this space, namely intent, autonomy, fluctuation, redundancy and variety. User Stories, introduced in XP and now commonly used in Scrum, are a key practice in requirements capture. In common with lean thinking, they are user value centric, encourage rich dialogue between project stakeholders and avoiding premature specification of solutions. This conceptual paper examines user stories through the dual lenses of an innovation space and the five SECI enablers. The authors conclude that expressing user needs as user stories can support the development of innovative solutions, but that care must be taken in the design of the user stories and their application. This paper concludes with a set of recommendations to support innovation through user stories.

Colm O’hEocha, Kieran Conboy

Lean/Agile Software Development Methodologies in Regulated Environments – State of the Art

Choosing the appropriate software development methodology is something which continues to occupy the minds of many IT professionals. The introduction of “Agile” development methodologies such as XP and SCRUM held the promise of improved software quality and reduced delivery times. Combined with a Lean philosophy, there would seem to be potential for much benefit. While evidence does exist to support many of the Lean/Agile claims, we look here at how such methodologies are being adopted in the rigorous environment of safety-critical embedded software development due to its high regulation. Drawing on the results of a systematic literature review we find that evidence is sparse for Lean/Agile adoption in these domains. However, where it has been trialled, “out-of-the-box” Agile practices do not seem to fully suit these environments but rather tailored Agile versions combined with more plan-based practices seem to be making inroads.

Oisín Cawley, Xiaofeng Wang, Ita Richardson

Lean and Agile Project Management: For Large Programs and Projects

This talk discusses how agile methods can be used for managing high-risk, time-sensitive R&D-oriented new product development (NPD) projects with demanding customers and fast-changing market conditions. It establishes the context, provides a definition, and describes the value-system for lean and agile project management. It provides a brief survey of popular lean and agile project management approaches and illustrates the mechanisms for scaling the lean and agile project management model up to large-scale, distributed projects. It also illustrates a few key agile project management case studies as well as basic, burnup/burndown, cost estimating, business value, earned value management, and advanced metrics for agile methods including real options. Finally, this talk addresses the critical differences between agile and traditional non-agile project management paradigms, as well as the debate surrounding the pros and cons of agile certification.

David F. Rico

When Agile Is Not Enough

Agile provides a good framework for improving software development, but it is not enough to get true improvement in the way the whole organization functions or to get significant business benefits. Very seldom an organization’s biggest problems are in software development. More often they are in interfaces of different functions or not understanding well enough what business the organization is in and what do customers really want. For these purposes, it is argued, that lean thinking gives better tools to understand and address the underlying problems. It is shown that lean and agile complement each other in many areas, but there are also challenges in combining the two approaches. Lean addresses the role of management, which agile mostly omits. It is argued that combining lean thinking with Scrum means actually going to the roots of Scrum; Scrum has been influenced by lean thinking, so there is no inherent conflict.

Kati Vilkki

Refactoring the Organization

Every organization has a design. As an organization grows, that design evolves. A decision to embrace agile and lean methods can expose weaknesses in the design. The concept of refactoring as applied to software design helps to improve the overall structure of the product or system. Principles of refactoring can also be applied to organization design. As with software design, the design of our organization can benefit from deliberate improvement efforts, but those efforts must have a purpose, and must serve the broad community of stakeholders that affect, or are affected by, the organization. Refactoring to agile and lean organizations demands that we have a shared vision of what the refactoring needs to achieve, and that we optimize the organization around the people doing the work.

Ken Power

A Journey to Systemic Improvement

Various Agile methods focus on delivering “value” or “valuable working software” or “delivering quality code” but what if we are just doing the wrong thing righter? A more recent development has been the popularity of “Lean” thinking for IT. However there is far more to a successful intervention than mapping value streams and finding then removing “waste”. I also see a series of anti patterns forming:

Traditional IT leaves “knowledge of the work” to a mixture of Business Analysts, Product Owners, proxy customers and managers views.

Those within IT often point to meeting the needs of the “business” as if they are the ones who produce revenue for the organisation. The customer becomes forgotten.

The approach of IT implementation is “push” - here is the new IT system, now how do we get people to use it?

I believe decisions about the use of IT should be taken from a position of knowing the “what and why” of current performance as a system. In the Systems Thinking approach IT is “pulled”, the people doing the work understand the “what and why” and “pull” IT into parts of the work, knowing what to expect. The first part of this talk is an overview of Systems Thinking theory, and more specifically how it can be applied to IT and what benefits this will bring. Part two of this talk revolves around a series of experience reports using the Systems Thinking Method in both IT and non-IT areas within BBC worldwide.

David Joyce

Complexity vs. Lean, the Big Showdown

Agile software development is (in part) based on the idea that software teams are complex adaptive systems (CAS), and many experts (like Jeff Sutherland, Jim Highsmith, Sanjiv Augustine, Joseph Pelrine) have borrowed terms from complexity theory (“self-organization”, “emergence”) to explain how software teams work. During a panel session at the Scan-Agile 2009 conference in Helsinki I asked panel members Mary Poppendieck (lean development) and Dave Snowden (complexity theory) what the difference is between complexity thinking and lean thinking. Is there a difference? How do Complexity and Lean “see” each other? Unfortunately, due to some confusion, the question never got answered and the conference moved on. Afterwards Mary Poppendieck told me honestly that she didn’t really know how to answer that question. And maybe the other panel members had the same problem. . Now I suggest that I try to answer that question myself. My upcoming book about complexity science and management of software teams has made me think a lot about topics like these. I think I have some interesting ideas that would lead to good discussions. Some examples:


Lean software development promotes removing waste as one of its principles. However, complexity science seems to show that waste can have various functions. In complex systems things that look like waste can actually be a source for stability and innovation;


Lean software development preaches optimize the whole as a principle, and then translates this to optimization of the value chain. However, I believe that complexity science shows us a value chain is an example of linear thinking, which usually leads to sub-optimization of the whole organization because it is a non-linear complex system;

My suggestion is therefore to organize a talk and discussion where I present the concepts of complexity theory, and how this relates to Lean thinking.

Jurgen Appelo

Lean Product Development and Innovation

Lean Product Development and Innovation – Track Summary

The words lean, product development, and innovation have unique implications for software organizations. Most lean software implementations have focused on the individual work practices rather than attempt to take a system approach. This is consistent with the evolution on lean thinking. Similarly even though innovation is the lifeblood of software organizations, few are successful at sustaining their innovation efforts. We believe that lean product development serves as a bridge to connect lean enterprise thinking and innovation in a mutually reinforcing manner. The program we have put together focuses on blending research and practice to provide the conference attendee with immediately usable tools, tips and techniques, and at the same time create the foundation for creating a lean system of innovation.

Jayakanth Srinivasan, Karl Scotland

A Tentative Framework for Lean Software Enterprise Research and Development

The current trends in most software development organizations are in striving for high performance while meeting the emergent and even rapidly changing customer needs. Traditional product development models are often ineffective in such respects. Now Lean and Agile software models address many of those particular concerns. However, empirical evidence of their actual performance effects is still scarce and probably many hidden inefficiencies exist in practical software projects. For example the Kanban process model is one of the latest proposals with apparent potential to improve the efficiency of the projects. This paper explores how software development activities and process improvement can be evaluated in such cases. A research model is constructed for the purpose of this investigation. New research hypotheses can be derived and tested empirically with case study projects. By applying the supported hypotheses in practice, the model is intended to be a systematic performance development vehicle for software projects and a provisional framework for the Lean software enterprise transformation research and development.

Petri Kettunen

What Is Flowing in Lean Software Development?

The main concern of the software industry is to deliver more products in shorter time-cycles to customers with an acceptable economic justification. In virtue of these concerns, the software industry and researchers in the field of software engineering have engaged in the process of adopting lean principles. In this paper, we are seeking the knowledge that could help us better understand the nature of flows in software development. We define a generalized concept of the value creation points and an axiomatic system that capture the specifics of software development. Further, a generalized definition of the flow makes it possible to identify super-classes of waste sources. Finally, we define a concept of decision flow, suggesting what a value creation point could be in the software development context. The decision flow is an inseparable part of the software development activities and it carries capabilities of adding or diminishing the value of products.

Vladimir Mandić, Markku Oivo, Pilar Rodríguez, Pasi Kuvaja, Harri Kaikkonen, Burak Turhan

Leadership in Kanban Software Development Projects: A Quasi-controlled Experiment

Useless actions and work in software development projects do not increase the value for the customer. While getting rid of such waste may sound simple, even recognizing the waste is considered a challenging issue. Once recognized with its causes, projects are more aware of the signs of waste: the pitfalls are avoidable by knowing their reasons. On the other hand, self-organization and empowering the teams emerge in a modern Kanban-driven software development project. This makes it relevant to ask whether sacrificing project resources for leadership adds any value. Hence, this paper conducts a quasi-controlled experiment with two leadership settings in order to find out differences between waste, its causes and effects. The results from the empirical analysis show that waste is present in each project but the amount and significance of waste can be reduced with the right leadership even in self-organized teams of Kanban projects.

Marko Ikonen

Distributing a Lean Organization: Maintaining Communication While Staying Agile

Distributed software development teams are common-place today. One good reason for distribution is the need to combine special skills or competencies from different locations. However, integrating skills flexibly is both a technical and a communication challenge. Lean and agile projects depend on direct communication. In this contribution, we investigate how agile teams can be distributed by adding a “remote partner” - and still maintain agile advantages. We analyze communication using the goal-question-metric paradigm (GQM) and apply it to a programming project, part of which was distributed. We discuss our insights on the minimal set of additions (technical and organizational) that are required to turn distributed while staying agile.

Sebastian Meyer, Eric Knauss, Kurt Schneider

Experience Report: Product Creation through Lean Approaches

This paper describes how lean approaches should be interpreted for the creation of software-based systems and includes an experience report on how that understanding of lean is applied in a project at a Siemens business unit. The case study addresses issues relating to the portfolio and product management, architecture, product lifecycle management processes and people and organization related issues.

Henning Rudolf, Frances Paulisch

Huitale – A Story of a Finnish Lean Startup

We in Huitale have implemented a lean product development process. As a result Huitale has a workflow that is predictable within acceptable variance. We can change the direction of the business at any given time but stay grounded in what we have learned. We can adjust the product roadmap visibility according to our business needs. In addition we have achieved exceptional quality. In past three years we have had two production bugs. The implementation of lean development process requires discipline and experience.

Marko Taipale

Kanban and Technical Excellence or: Why Daily Releases Are a Great Objective to Meet is Europes biggest online automotive market. At Product Development is coordinated and orchestrated with Kanban. One major, enabling objective of mobile. international is to release daily. This paper is about the companys way from their successful Kanban implementation to a smoothly running and effective value chain on the technical level. We will discuss how the different levels of technical skills impact Kanban and its results in a positive or negative way and why daily releases supports progress in the right direction on each level.

Markus Andrezak, Bernd Schiffer

Clean Delivery: An Experience Report of Collaborative Lean Software Delivery

Stuck in the purgatory of an immature ”Agile” IT department and old world project management office, facing up to eighteen month lead times on analysis and sign off, off shoring contractors and people new to Agile. These are the experiences of how we created a bubble of effectiveness through applying systems thinking and radical changes in delivery process. The result was a clear success with practically zero defects and a model of future development within the company.

Christian Blunden

Beyond Budgeting

Beyond Budgeting – Track Summary

Beyond Budgeting is about rethinking how we manage organizations in a postindustrial world where innovative management models represent the only sustainable competitive advantage. It is also about releasing people from the burdens of stifling bureaucracy and suffocating control systems, trusting them with information and giving them time to think, reflect, share, learn and improve. It is about transferring responsibility and power from the centre to the front line units; putting employees first, customer second and the hierarchy third. Above all it is about learning how to change from many leaders who have built and managed ‘beyond budgeting’ organizations.

Peter G. Bunce

Beyond Budgeting: A Performance Management Model for Software Development Teams

The Beyond Budgeting performance management model enables companies to keep pace with changing environments, to quickly create and adapt strategy and to empower people throughout the organisation to make effective choices. We argue that this performance management model may be ideal for agile software development. Although drawn from different disciplines, both are designed for a customer-orientated, fast-changing operating environment and the Beyond Budgeting model suggests a useful overall framework for research in the performance management of agile software development teams. This paper uses the model as a lens to examine the performance management of agile software development teams within a large multinational. The findings show that some traditional performance management processes (most notably the budgeting process), which were designed to aid in the performance management of software development teams may impede the performance of agile teams due to their suitability adherence to the requirements of the systems development lifecycle model.

Garry Lohan, Kieran Conboy, Michael Lang

New Approach for Managing Lean-Agile Development: Overturning the Project Paradigm

Project management has lived long through a growing criticism of not delivering to expectations. When agile development and lean management approaches are now emerging to product development, this paper assesses their impact to current practices of project management. It is indicated that the very basis of the project management has shaken, and new management approaches need to be developed to accommodate the agile development in contemporary product organizations. A proposal is made for the outline of such an approach. In conclusion the changes in business management needed to enable this new approach is discussed.

Juha Rikkilä

Beyond Budgeting in Statoil

It is both scary and amazing to observe how little management practices have developed over the last fifty years, a period where we have seen groundbreaking innovation in most other parts of business and technology. My sons who now are finalizing their business studies could easily have used many of my own textbooks from thirty years ago, especially those covering budgeting, planning and performance management. Most business schools still teach, and most companies still practice a "command-and control" approach born in a time when the pace and predictability of business environments were radically different, and when the expression "knowledge organisation" did not exist.

Statoil is Scandinavia’s largest company. One of it’s values reads "Challenge accepted truth, and enter unfamiliar territory". Bjarte Bogsnes will share Statoil’s long journey, which by no means is over, towards a new coherent management model which "takes reality seriously" both from a business and people perspective. He will advocate the need for joining forces with HR on this journey, because management processes must be fully aligned with leadership principles and practices. The two communicating opposing messages is a recipe for confused and disillusioned employees. Bogsnes will also argue that organisations will not succeed with their lean and agile efforts on development projects unless lean and agile also becomes the way the organisation, and not just it’s projects, is run.

Bjarte Bogsnes

Case Study: The SpareBank 1 Gruppen’s Road to a New Corporate Governance Based on the Principles of beyond Budgeting

SpareBank 1 Gruppen is a Norwegian holding company that, through its subsidiaries, provides and distributes products in the field of life and P&C insurance, fund management, securities brokering and factoring. The company joined the BBRT in 2008.

Sigurd Aune, CFO SpareBank 1

Gruppen will describe their Going Dynamic (Beyond Budgeting) project. This will include why they needed to change, what they are changing, their progress so far and the challenges that lie ahead.

Sigurd Aune

How the beyond Budgeting Management Model Enables Lean Thinking and the Agile Organization

Lean thinking has been around for decades, yet relatively few organizations have adopted and benefited from its ideas to the fullest extent. Even fewer organizations have gone on to become both lean and agile. As the evidence for such radical improvements is so compelling you have to wonder why. Most organizations implement lean thinking as a series of tools and have no concept of agility. Effective lean thinking and agility require organizations to push decision-making and responsibility down to the self-managed teams, yet the way most organizations are designed and managed inhibits changing from hierarchies and command-and-control to these self-managed teams.

This presentation briefly outlines why we need to change from the traditional command-and-control management model to the Beyond Budgeting learn-and-adapt management model. It examines the basic requirements of lean thinking and agility why this learn-and-adapt model is necessary to enable lean thinking and agility to realise their full potential. It explores the visions and principles of the Beyond Budgeting management model, with examples from companies that have adopted many of these principles. Finally it explores some of the practical steps for successful implementation and change management. Peter Bunce is a Director of the Beyond Budgeting Round Table (BBRT), an international shared learning network dedicated to helping organizations move beyond command-and-control. His background is in manufacturing engineering.

Peter G. Bunce

Handelsbanken – Our Way

Founded in 1871, Handelsbanken is one of the leading banks in the Nordic region, with over 700 branches in 22 countries. It regards Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Norway and Great Britain as its domestic markets. The Handelsbanken management model is acknowledged by the BBRT as almost certainly the best ‘Beyond Budgeting’ exemplar in existence. This presentation will describe the principles and values of running a multinational bank through good and bad times. Handelsbanken has for decades been successful in applying a decentralized management model. The strong core values and beliefs are the Handelsbanken way to better banking.

Pekka Vasankari

Dynamic Management in a Global Telecomms Business

Telenor Group is one of the largest mobile operators in the world with more than 40.000 employees situated in 13 different countries across Europe and Asia. The history of Telenor’s communication practices can be tracked back all the way to the mid 19th century. The communication services provided was more or less governmentally controlled at that time since. The Telegraph Act that was passed in 1899 gave the Norwegian state authorization to take over the private telephone companies. The Norwegian Telegraph Administration as it was called back then changed its name to Norwegian Telecommunications (Televerket) in 1969 and the productions of communication services, now also included television broadcasting, continued without any competition until 1988 when the Norwegian Telecom’s monopoly on the sale of telephone sets ends. In the years past we had seen the birth of new markets of satellite phones and soon the mobile technology was standing in the doorway ready to be introduced to the public. In 1995 Norwegian Telecom changed the name to Telenor and in 2001 Telenor went from being fully owned by the Norwegian state to being publicly listed. After about 150 years of evolution within the telecommunication business we see Telenor as it stands today; a company with interests in many of today’s countries around the world and a still continue to be a growing driving force in modern communications.

In addition to its own telephony and broadcast services, the Telenor Group has substantial activities in subsidiaries and joint venture operations. While some are seen as a pure financial investment, others are important in order to support and develop the core business of Telenor. The Telenor Group is dynamic and flexible in its business approach, always exploring new markets and new technologies to make long-term investments. This is part of the reason why Telenor has been able to grow from a national telephone service company in Norway to become the world’s 7th largest mobile service provider in less than two decades.

The initiative to begin the journey towards implementing Beyond Budgeting in Telenor was decided by the top management in the Telenor Group, including all the CFO’s of the Telenor Group, already in 2007. However, there is still some distance to travel until we have completed the implementation. The first year of the project it consisted of three pilots; DiGi in Malaysia, dTac in Thailand and Telenor Broadcast in Norway.

Going Dynamic

was the name chosen for this ongoing project in Telenor. We found that the existing way of governing was not adequate as the growth in certain markets was higher than anticipated. The budget assumptions and goals we had in relations to these markets were therefore insufficient. Delivering "on budget" was not sufficient in the competitive market, but when everything was based on the budget (follow-ups, bonus agreements etc) there were limited incentive for the employees to go beyond the budget.

Telenor developed a Going Dynamic management model framework where the focus is strong when it comes to the relationship between establishing strategy and ambition, operationalizing the strategy and dynamic forecasting, reviews & action planning/execution. With this we are hoping to establish a stronger link between the strategy and operations making us able to respond to rapid changes and being able to initiate necessary actions accordingly. At the same time, the developed model maintains the same "level of control" as before (although without budgets). This is a more forward looking management model than previously. The Going Dynamic model increase probability of getting more forward looking financial and operating information as well as removing the yearly budget process. In addition, well defined responsibilities and documented management processes will strengthen and clarify the roles of individuals. Eventually, this kind of cultivation will encourage everyone to perform as business owners and not just following the budget.

Kenneth Hauge

Lean Implementation - Lead by Example

Successful Lean Transformation achieved through leading by example. It has been noted that the number one secret to success for a successful and sustainably lean transformation is management commitment and support the initiative. This presentation is targeted towards identifying those key elements that management must possess and exhibit in order to support the initiative and drive the right culture change. Heidi’s presentation is based on a real case in a European manufacturing company.

Heidi Pschibilla

Continue Your beyond Budgeting Journey with Help from Agile, Lean and Scrum

Statoil is introducing the so-called “Scrum” method in business support project throughout the company with the goal of achieving better, cheaper and more sustainable results in a shorter time. Scrum is based on the principles of ‘lean’ and ‘agile’ and is closely related to Beyond Budgeting.

Helge Eikeland, Statoil

will explain the principles of Scrum and how they are beneficially using it in their Beyond Budgeting implementation.

Helge Eikeland


Panel: Why Agile, Why Lean?

The Agile movement started a transition in the software industry. Some say that Agile brings more professionalism to the industry by focusing on the core activities and calling for a redesign of our software development processes in a fundamentally different way. However, it is clear that as Agile gets adopted, not everything is a bed of roses. Many companies are faced with issues that the available Agile methods do not sufficiently address. Lean is another paradigm that is gathering momentum and, according to many, can be the “next step” for the agile methods to step out of the software development environment and step into the larger business context of our industry. Some of the questions we intend to frame in this panel are: Why have companies embraced Agile? Why have companies embraced Lean? What do each of these paradigms agree on and what are the divergences? Why are those divergences important? What does the Lean paradigm change for a software company that has embraced Agile in the past?

David Anderson, Kati Vilkki, Alan Shalloway, David Joyce, David F. Rico, Ken Power


Fit Manufacturing

With the current global downturn, companies must develop innovative approaches to ensure that economic sustainability is achieved. This paper proposes a Fit Manufacturing Model (FMM) to help manufacturing companies to become economically sustainable and to operate effectively in a global competitive market. The FMM combines the principles of existing manufacturing paradigms with new and innovative management concepts to create a sustainable approach to manufacturing.

Duc Truong Pham, Andrew J. Thomas, P. T. N. Pham

Enabling Dynamic Capabilities through Agile IT and beyond Budgeting Practices

This paper discusses the confluence of agile, lean and beyond budgeting approaches in the context of Enterprise IT solutions and presents a framework, which helps to achieve synergies from these approaches and avoid sub-optimizations. The paper suggests that lean and agile approaches cannot be used in a vacuum but need to be developed and considered in the context of other critical processes required to sustain and deliver enterprise IT solutions. While agile and lean methodologies certainly provide benefits they can deliver significantly more value when applied in collaboration with an overall dynamic capabilities (Teece et al, 2007) approach. The paper briefly introduces the ITCapability Maturity Framework (IT-CMF), (Curley, 2004, 2006) and considers a closed loop mechanism to enable a dynamic capability in the context of rapidly changing environments. The paper also presents a five-layer maturity model for managing the Enterprise IT budget which aligns to the principles of beyond budgeting (Hope and Fraser, 2003; Bosgnes, 2009) being considered in this conference.

Martin Curley


Weitere Informationen

Premium Partner