Assists ministries with investment cases, looks for alignment with digital principles and standards. Hypothesis: Likely to intersect with org design, team formation. Goal: alignment (e.g. clients get consistent advice), clear governance/ boundaries, healthy collaboration Risk: could too many “advisory services” teams doing similar work create confusion for clients? DIO Digital Demo: Feb 22, 2024 Status: Tess has a discovery Discovery chat with Andrea Hill (Director of Digital Advisory Services) and Mackenzie Kitchen (Senior Digital Analyst) on May 14th Technically the DIO folk are Analysts, not Advisors Success metric = digital projects successfully funded They see all the funding cases and what folks are up to, aim to spot red flags with a supportive, light touch and connect folks to DO services (incl. ours) Typically folks have their minds made up when they reach the DIO (e.g. no org design advice) Working on: Digital Investment Assurance Framework to increase oversight and support post-funding Will be conducting Project Health Checks chaired by a DIO Analyst: progress, delivery, successes, value delivered money spent roadmap review anything project team wants to talk about rubric tiers: https://intranet.gov.bc.ca/assets/download/B3BDBB3395AC48C1A952D8D6D085DC70
Governance/contacts: this creates a new point of contact: the responsible ED, program side. Very rarely may be an IT person. The framework sets down roles and responsibilities - MCIO, DIO, Ministry CFO (operational, capital, sustainment), program area ADM/project sponsor They have a goal of digitizing their service and making their data more visible, open to partnership and collaboration with us Note: 3 analysts supporting 12 ministries - tight capacity OPPORTUNITY: earlier intervention points with DO clients “how could we (relevant DO services) show up when there is a transformation-twinkle in the eye?” e.g. support before many decisions are locked in, to set up for success REQUEST: as we evolve our service, let DIO folk know so they can direct clients accordingly
| Assists select priority partners toward rapid delivery. Likely to intersect with org design, team formation. Goal: alignment (e.g. clients get consistent advice), clear governance/ boundaries (do we help the same audiences, different ones, some overlap?), healthy collaboration and support for the hard work, sense of team-across-teams? Risk: could too many “advisory services” teams doing similar work create confusion for clients? MAS Digital Demo: Feb 8, 2024 Status (May 7): Tess has had prelim async touchpoints with David King (Product Owner), and a lovely 1:1 with Gurkamal Sidhu (Scrum Master) Seeds have been planted - in the future let’s collectively sense if there are opportunities to do a more formal discovery around ways we could collaborate, support each other, and align overlappy elements of our services MAS team: feel free to use the commenting feature here to drop thoughts, ideas, questions! and pls correct my framing above about your work, there has been lots of change & growth!
| Clients we support: SDPR - 25 digital talent hires AT Gen & JEDI - 2 In progress via X Min MOH - 2 Hired talents via X Ministry CITZ - 34 Hired Talents via X ministry NRM ( 5 Ministries) - 6 - Hired Talents via X ministry SPDR - 4 Hired Talents via X ministry TRAN - 2 Hired Talents via X ministry AEST - 1 Hired Talent via X Ministry PSA - Classification modernization - product development support + hire full team soon? Job Profile approval to use. Other IMIT Branches on Org design/Alignment, role development and transformation Applicants through outreach opportunities, such as BCIT Career fairs, clinics etc. Candidates - Coaching and advice for applications & career development. Clients looking for a TA initiative - 'Rapid Hire Program'
Clients we can’t support: GBAs who want to use the DT job profiles but do not fit into them Clients that have needs but timing of when we run our comps (driven by capacity and CI) don't align Clients that need more help with Job Description work rather than talent acquisitions. Clients that would like to do it themselves but would like to understand best practices and/or access resources (i.e. can you share learning with me so I don't repeat mistakes) Who just need some additional support to expedite, but want to run their own. - We often now provide advice. Clients who don't agree with our Service Agreement policy, i.e. can't commit to process or time commitments. When we don't have resources to support their requests. i.e. Unable to run another competition . Clients who require IT roles, (Or general) that fall outside of DT Roles. With specific requirements for roles, that require a stand alone competition. Who have larger requests.
| Clients we support: IMBs Ministry Procurement Shops Government Business Areas (direct interaction with Product Owners) Teams looking for digital talent for Agile projects GBA prepared to run a competition within the rules of procurement Key Clients: MOTI, CITZ, SDPR Other folks we've supported in the past: HLTH, FIN, EDUC
Clients we can’t support: Inadequate budget Not prepared to commit time to procurement competition Not a fit for our DM platforms Not building open-source web apps Low-value TWU/SWU opportunities (ROI too low - not worth the effort) Not ready to work in Agile (i.e., no full-time PO). Clients not doing custom dev (more for SWU) SWU/TWU both based on Agile Agreements. That means that teams have to be working in Agile for contracts to work.
|
