It led projects rarely benefit anyone other than It users

Barriers in Communication and Responsibilities IT making business decisions has a far greater threat to the business than IT states in standards for example OMG maturity models.


http://www.cfo.com/whitepapers/index.cfm/displaywhitepaper/14610720

I'm going to be direct in this blog, as it disturbs me when I see standards published by Technical people that break the foundational requirements for any business.

Let me share a service specification example with you that defies the legal definition of an employee to an employer relationship.

A contractor or temporary worker isn't an employee.  The role the person plays or the way technology forces a person to claim an employer can ruin a person's reputation.

For example; I had most of my full time roles start as a consultant.  In many situations the social media isn't friendly or can be taken into a completely in-appropriate context.  Especially when iterative changes are introduced. Without any communication or consideration for the current users.  In one case, on LinkedIn the original placement of any education wasn't designed for a person to select a university.  I entered sponsored management training that was presented as a way for my employer to supplement my lack of formal education. 

1:1 Training in Baldridge Total Quality Management, within a few weeks I had acquired the theory and began to apply what takes others years in advanced degree programs.
 
The consultant has a doctorate in human behavioral practices and did his management studies at the Kaizen Institue.  He's brilliant! He personally coached me through a very difficult situation releasing the team of people rather quickly, despite the MBA's my peers had.  They were struggling with the advanced statistical theories.  I was proud then and practice often for the gift I was honored with by people with very prestigious credentials including the President of the company who rewarded me for my years of loyalty and exceptional service.

Let me give you a very in-proper statement and example to use in semantic relationships or explain how the very nature of an information or electronic record can become the threat for internal vulnerabilities by design.


I am unable to find a single example of a person who had two employers, to warrant the example used by Corba in section 6 of the service specification.  In fact, most companies consider this a conflict of interest and some forbid a person to serve two masters.  Recently laws have been passed that indicate a person cannot falsely represent themselves. 

What people have done in this case; reduced a companies technology investments indirectly.

ie; in my mind a technology isn't going to allow a person to be one person then allow them to be another during a process or set of activities performed or intended to be performed by a person.

Debunking the gap between IT and Business-When we (business people) talk about Business Process it isn't up to IT to define and publish a conflicting and in appropriate set of materials on the business subject.

Business Process Management is about people, therefore IT and technologies are either going to support the process or we can use very simple approaches to achieve our goals without technology.

Problem Statement
The standards published by IT on the business process maturity and capability maturity model in OMG have not been rationalized by business people.

1. If true, these people should be given  management assessment on the role and authority they have over a company.  
2. These are incorrect assumptions around maturity for business subjects that obviously aren't clear to technical people.  
3.  The applications referenced have forced people to adopt a brand or represent biased perspectives.  

I've been a manager and proven the effective ways to execute both technology and operational design for strategy and growth.  My lack of formal education should be used in this example to help this audience understand that even an uneducated person like me has enough common sense to not take this approach.

The problem we face includes in appropriate standards causing business defects by design.  This would be equal to my going into a technology domain and telling technical people that we have standards that we just published that have more weight on the way Technology Investments operate.

No, the business requirements came before the technology ever was considered.  The fact that you elected to execute the technology without the business was the first problem.

In closing my very strong position intended for my personal blog and likely to never publish.

IT is an absolutely incorrect assumption to make that IT defines and uses references to a specific technology supplier in their standards.  NO ONE IN BUSINESS SHOULD rely on these maturity models in their business.  These are dated practices and an incentive to increase volume at the risk of quality.

Defects of certain types have a far greater risk than stated.  5 defects on an invoice has tax, regulatory and in one geography 1 million dollar penalties per incident.  Duty fee invoices will be incorrect and therefore reported incorrectly.