Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

Service Designer:

Tess Good

Discovery Phase:

February-March 2024

Research Phase:

March-April 2024

The aim of our capacity building, as aligned to our Digital Plan, is not to move from “outsourcing to insourcing” but to strike a better, and more intentional balance across all the ways we can access and build digital capacity. 

That is to say we will always need to hire and procure – but we need to do that differently

Jordan Samis via email to DTC Staff

...

Discovery Session B: Ecosystem & Connected Services

...

Connected Services

RECOMMENDATION

Bigger picture SD opportunity: how might we support optimal wayfinding and service experiences through the Digital Office?

  • Would recommend a DO-level investment here, vs. bottom-up through one Branch / one Designer - at a minimum, resource this as a standalone scope of work, it will involve a lot of calendar wrangling, workshop time, user research, and service analysis with folks whose capacity is tight across busy services

  • e.g. transformation-journey mapping x strategy initiative to capture the typical services and supports folks need, assessing if we’re showing up at the optimal time in their process to have the intended impact, and if there could be efficiencies created across DO silos

    • discovery conversations with DIO generated a hypothesis that our services may be accessed too late - when folks have already committed to a certain way of doing things

DIO Digital Advisory Services (DAS)

Modernization Advisory Services (MAS)

DTC - Talent

DTC - Marketplace

Assists ministries with investment cases, looks for alignment with digital principles and standards.

Hypothesis: Funding is likely to intersect with org design, team formation (DTC).

Goal: alignment (e.g. clients get consistent advice), clear governance/ boundaries, healthy collaboration, efficiencies.

Risk: could too many “advisory services” teams create confusion for clients?

DIO Digital Demo: Feb 22, 2024

Discovery outcomes:

  • 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:

    1. progress, delivery, successes, value delivered

    2. money spent

    3. roadmap review

    4. anything project team wants to talk about

    5. 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

  • OPPORTUNITY: how might DTC leverage DIO insights to predict demand on our services, e.g. number of clients/digital funding cases in play

  • 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

Discovery outcomes:

  • Tess has had prelim touchpoints with David King (Product Owner), and Gurkamal Sidhu (Scrum Master)

  • Seeds have been planted - ran out of time to conduct meaningful discovery, their strategy was also in flux

  • Heather Remacle, Sr. Director, has since published some theory and a framework underpinning their work: Value - Align - Scale - Enable (VASE)

  • David King has recently left the Product Owner role

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.

...