Comments on: “Governance Man” has fallen into my trap! :-)

By: SharePoint Conference goes large in the UK | 21apps

SharePoint Conference goes large in the UK | 21apps — Sun, 22 Jan 2012 01:02:57 +0000

[...] you looking to see Governance Man (Joel Oleson) for real, share a pint with Andrew Connell, meet the infamous Bob “Praise [...]

By: CleverWorkarounds » Who wants to spend 3 days with me and the gang?

CleverWorkarounds » Who wants to spend 3 days with me and the gang? — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 18:53:23 +0000

[...] me (aka Dr Wicked) round it off – pushing the boundaries of pop-culture metaphors for cheap laughs and the odd bit [...]

By: CleverWorkarounds » Meet Agile Boy :-)

CleverWorkarounds » Meet Agile Boy :-) — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 22:33:49 +0000

[...] Agile Boy Tags: Offbeat @ 8:33 am | Not so long ago I wrote about the adventures of Governance Man and Dr Wicked. I also mentioned that there was another partner in crime. Agile Boy. Here is he is in-between [...]

By: Chris Tomich

Chris Tomich — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 15:31:01 +0000

I fully agree with your last comment Andrew – “Just having a plan will not ensure success, having the right people delivering the solution will.”.

I would go one step further though and actually say that ‘just having a plan will not ensure success, mutual (or shared) understanding of requirements and deliverables by the client and the integrator will’.

By: admin

admin — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 14:20:00 +0000

Hi Craig

I agree with everything you said in your comment (and your post on this topic). The bit about “mitigating conflict” is the most interesting one for me, because this is the hardest bit to acheive and interestingly the area where things fall apart *first*. I spend a lot of time in this area these days and not just within SharePoint (or IT for that matter).

You might find this book chapter an interesting read. I think it cuts to the heart of why “governance” is a tough job to acheive and even tougher to maintain.

Andrew, your reply completely nails it – brilliant stuff!

By: Craig Roth

Craig Roth — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:50:58 +0000

What I mean by “mitigating conflict” is “pre-deciding who wins in arguments”. I see this as one of the main aspects of the governance (along with “resolve ambiguity and manage short- and long-range goals”). It explains why this is a political endeavor involving executives since only they can lend authority to statements like “The XXX team gets to determine the intranet design and navigation, not YYY or ZZZ”.

That also means, as you said, that governance is not aimed at techies. There are enough other guides for them. This needs to be understood by the people that sign it who should include business execs high enough to mitigate conflicts with the stroke of a pen.

This is at the base of my argument that a SharePoint Statement of Governance should not be written by someone in a techie role (a techie person trying to stretch their horizons and move into non-techie jobs would be fine). More on that at http://knowledgeforward.wordpress.com/2009/03/27/spgov-itpro/

By: SharePoint Daily for March 30, 2009 - SharePoint Daily - Bamboo Nation

SharePoint Daily for March 30, 2009 - SharePoint Daily - Bamboo Nation — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:14:26 +0000

[...] “Governance Man” Has Fallen Into my Trap! (Clever Workarounds)This post was supposed to be called “SharePoint Governance is not a deliverable” – hence the pizza above, but my secret evil plan has worked faster than expected! Read on… When I met with Dux Sy for breakfast the other day in a diner that looked remarkably like the set from Happy Days, our conversation covered various areas of topics around US vs Australian culture, SharePoint governance, project management, food, wicked problems, sense-making and my two kilograms of Vietnamese coffee beans that came from a weasel’s digestive tract . Smart guy, is our Mr. Sy indeed; good business acumen – well suited to being a SharePoint sensei. [...]

By: Andrew Woodward

Andrew Woodward — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 10:31:55 +0000

Jeremy, your comparsion between agile and waterfall is very apt here.

Waterfall – everything is planned up front, you need to know everything to start with and plan for every scenario. Much like writing a very long governance document up front, trying to cover every angle up front.
Agile – inspect and adapt, but have good processes in place to have confidence (you could read assurance). The need for governance to steer and provide the guidance would be covered by the 2-5 page plan Paul (and Joel) mentions, the document that provides the direction. The assurance and processes are developed within the business by the people who use them, they would inspect and adapt the processes to meet their specifics requirements.

However, adopting an “agile” approach to this also does not ensure success. It puts more emphasis on the people and less on the document. Just having a plan will not ensure success, having the right people delivering the solution will.

By: Jeremy Thake

Jeremy Thake — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 09:16:59 +0000

I’m with Governance Man…I mean Joel…be great to see a plan/approach to a steady SharePoint business solution
Isn’t this what the Sample Governance Plan is meant to do? I guess what you’re trying to say is that it isn’t one size fits all…but surely it can be tailored or bits pulled out? Or do you think it’s a completely different approach? Like comparing Agile approach to Waterfall approach at implementation?
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc262943.aspx

Its amazing how much of a buzzword it is:
http://www.diigo.com/user/jthake/sharepoint+governance

By: Joel Oleson

Joel Oleson — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 06:26:17 +0000

Well played.

Where can I get a copy of your 2-5 page plan? Love some examples for a portal or hosting plan. Little r me.

Joel