Use Psychology Tools to Advance Enterprise Architecture Efforts

Transcription

1 Research Publication Date: 12 April 2006 ID Number: G Use Psychology Tools to Advance Enterprise Architecture Efforts Robert A. Handler Influencing behavioral change is crucial to enterprise architecture success. Two timetested organizational-psychology tools should augment the enterprise architect's toolkit. Reproduction and distribution of this publication in any form without prior written permission is forbidden. The information contained herein has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable. Gartner disclaims all warranties as to the accuracy, completeness or adequacy of such information. Although Gartner's research may discuss legal issues related to the information technology business, Gartner does not provide legal advice or services and its research should not be construed or used as such. Gartner shall have no liability for errors, omissions or inadequacies in the information contained herein or for interpretations thereof. The opinions expressed herein are subject to change without notice.

2 WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW EA is largely about changing the behavior of people, and failure to address this imperative will shortchange the EA effort. The techniques presented here provide useful methods to analyze people and tailor messages to their unique personalities. For EA team analysis, the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is a well-regarded tool that will provide sufficient information to optimize team dynamics. A good approach for analyzing a larger and broader group of stakeholders is provided by the Decision Styles Inventory, which focuses on the most crucial aspect of a stakeholder's personality how decisions are made. ANALYSIS This document is a synopsis of the analysis offered in "Psychology May Hold Key to Successful Enterprise Architecture." Access to the more-detailed document is available through a premiumservice offering, Gartner's Enterprise Planning and Architecture Strategies. Increasingly, the critical success factors for enterprise architecture (EA) hinge on human behavior and attitudes, rather than technology. As IT infrastructure continues to standardize, EA efforts are focusing more on areas that require nontechnical, interpersonal skills. Internally, EA teams must have abstraction, communication, persuasion, organization change management and leadership skills. Externally, EA teams must identify key stakeholders, recognize their concerns and views, and address them in a manner that fosters positive change. Many tools and techniques associated with organizational psychology can be applied to these goals. Such tools can help identify the required skills and desired behavioral changes to satisfy the objectives of EA, and can help influence key individuals to drive support and foster change. Two tools for understanding individuals strengths and preferences are particularly applicable to EA efforts: The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) The Decision Styles Inventory The MBTI Developed by Katherine Briggs and Isabel Myers, the MBTI uses four basic dichotomies to classify personality types: Extroversion (E) or introversion (I) Sensing (S) or intuition (N) Thinking (T) or feeling (F) Judging (J) or perceiving (P) Classifications based on these four dichotomies are used to define 16 personality types, each with its own characteristics and idiosyncrasies. Two examples of these personality types include: ISTJ (introversion, sensing, thinking, judging) Realistic, task-oriented, concerned with facts, attentive to detail, hard working and having high expectations of others ENFP (extroversion, intuition, feeling, perceiving) Outwardly focused, excited by introduction of new possibilities, concerned for people, energetic, enthusiastic, spontaneous and adaptable Publication Date: 12 April 2006/ID Number: G Page 2 of 6

3 Although scientifically unproven, the MBTI is generally accepted as a viable technique for understanding personalities of individuals. (More information on MBTI, including definitions of all 16 personality types, can be found at It is an excellent diagnostic tool to identify the strengths of any team tasked with producing results especially an EA team and to validate that members are assigned to roles that suit them. Examples of EA team roles and MBTI considerations include: Architects These individuals require abstract thinking abilities. Thus, those assuming architect roles are more likely to be successful if they have the letters N and T in their MBTI profile. According to advocates of Myers-Briggs, only 12 percent to 16 percent of the U.S. population is predisposed to this ability (that is, have "NT" characteristics in their MBTI profile). Communication and change management roles These include facilitator, change management specialist and communication specialist. Those suited for such roles are likely to possess the letters E and F in their MBTI profile. Facilitators for EA will be more successful if they also possess a J in their profile, in addition to E and F. Planning and task management roles EA team roles requiring managerial skills include EA project/task managers and the EA team leader. The former should possess a J in their profiles, since they will tend to manage tasks well. The leader of the EA effort, meanwhile, should be extroverted, flexible and adaptable, and able to process information intuitively and to make decisions based on patterns. Based on these characteristics, an ideal chief architect would possess an "ENTP" MBTI type. According to Myers-Briggs advocates, this type comprises only about 5 percent of the population, which could explain why finding a suitable chief architect can be so difficult. The Decision Styles Inventory This was created by Alan Rowe and Richard Mason, who hypothesized that people make decisions based on their tolerance for ambiguity, and on whether their values are oriented toward tasks and technical concerns or toward people and social concerns (see Figure 1). Publication Date: 12 April 2006/ID Number: G Page 3 of 6

4 Figure 1. Decision Styles High Analytical Conceptual Tolerance for Ambiguity Low Directive Behavioral Task and Technical Concerns People and Social Concerns Value Orientation Source: Rowe and Mason There are four basic decision styles that people tend to gravitate toward: conceptual, behavioral, directive and analytical. The characteristics of each decision style are listed in Table 1. Table 1. Decision Style Characteristics Basic Decision Style Solves Problems Method of Thinking Preferred Presentation Style Directive Rules and policies Focused Terse, bottom-line Analytical Conceptual Analysis and insight Intuition and judgment Behavioral Feeling and instinct Source: The Decision Styles Inventory Logical Creative Emotional Detailed, much information/data Big picture, multiple scenarios, effects on stakeholders Detailed with attention to changemanagement aspects More than 50 percent of senior managers gravitate toward a directive decision style, while most IT staff members gravitate toward an analytical one. Without conscious intervention to manage this dynamic, these two groups are predisposed to conflict or tension. The Decision Styles Inventory is well-suited to stakeholder analysis because of its focus on decision making and the low number of types. Once a list of stakeholders is developed, consider whether each of these individuals or groups is focused more on tasks or people and its tolerance of ambiguity to help identify whether its decision style is conceptual, behavioral, directive or analytical. This will help determine the best way each stakeholder should be approached: Publication Date: 12 April 2006/ID Number: G Page 4 of 6

5 Directive stakeholders are bottom-line- and results-oriented individuals. They should be given the important points as quickly as possible, and supporting details should be withheld unless they are requested. When communicating with a directive stakeholder, be succinct and to the point, highlighting what is needed, how and when it should be accomplished, and the benefits it will bring. Conceptual stakeholders love the big picture. They should be given multiple, highlevel scenarios and be allowed to play these out in their minds. These stakeholders are predisposed to concepts over action. They will generally welcome the offer to contribute their ideas. But if they are asked to review details or perform detailed tasks, their support for EA will likely wane. Analytical stakeholders prefer details and enjoy analysis. These stakeholders will likely be concerned with the purity of the approach used for EA, and with traceability. Failure to have sufficient detail and logic for them is a recipe for disaster. When communicating with analytical stakeholders, be prepared to answer detailed questions, and to provide detailed diagrams and analysis. Behavioral stakeholders dislike ambiguity. They are concerned with how EA will impact people and the organization. When working with behavioral stakeholders, include organization change management resolutions alongside any communication, and provide a venue for free expression (for example, an anonymous suggestion box). Publication Date: 12 April 2006/ID Number: G Page 5 of 6

6 REGIONAL HEADQUARTERS Corporate Headquarters 56 Top Gallant Road Stamford, CT U.S.A European Headquarters Tamesis The Glanty Egham Surrey, TW20 9AW UNITED KINGDOM Asia/Pacific Headquarters Gartner Australasia Pty. Ltd. Level 9, 141 Walker Street North Sydney New South Wales 2060 AUSTRALIA Japan Headquarters Gartner Japan Ltd. Aobadai Hills, 6F 7-7, Aobadai, 4-chome Meguro-ku, Tokyo JAPAN Latin America Headquarters Gartner do Brazil Av. das Nações Unidas, andar World Trade Center São Paulo SP BRAZIL Publication Date: 12 April 2006/ID Number: G Page 6 of 6