Appendix A2.1: Maturity Model for shared services

Transcription

1 Appendix A2.1: Maturity Model for 12/02/ Processes Processes are decentralised and subject to potential risk of nonachievement of service delivery to an acceptable standard Processes are but processes are still operated as-is (i.e. not yet redesigned in the SSA) and subject to quality and productivity issues processes used are attaining best Inconsistent execution and delivery of services Performance driven by specific individual behaviours Customers uncertain of quality and timeliness of service delivery No drive to improve or perform to agreed standards Lowest levels of productivity and expectations Steps in for standardisation of service delivery across entities or departments Customers aware and expect a certain level of consistency in service delivery No formalised process to measure and inform customers of Slightly higher levels of productivity compared to Basic due to efficiencies arsing from standardised processes Processes operated from the are taken on asis so below standard Customers starting to receive certain process related KPIs on adhoc basis; SLAs not fully defined No clear process documentation in Element of being reactive rather than proactive in change No formalised process for driving efficiencies and quality Productivity higher than standardised due to adoption of some shared services concepts 100% process standardisation and consistency of delivery Clearly documented processes accessible online Clearly defined end to end process ownership & SLAs Benchmark achieving external best Six Sigma/ lean principles applied Continuous measurement and improvement Highest levels of productivity and expectations

2 2. Delivery systems Systems are not common and basic in nature with little integration Multiple systems in with lack of integration Lack of commonality and compatibility between systems Low levels of extended functionality and capability No enabling technologies Sideline spreadsheets used Multiple unconnected databases of information Systems are operating concepts not Systems may be common but entities have different ways of operating Configuration and other interfaces between a common system may be different The shared services aspect is not in with separate lines of communication No leverage of systems to facilitate the benefits of shared services and higher customer satisfaction but systems are still operated as-is by the service provider (i.e. not yet redesigned in the SSA) At go-live, common systems are taken on as-is and still need to be optimised Different ways of working still need to be deployed to support the systems Separate databases are in Process teams tend to be separate due to different ways of working around common systems systems are attaining best Integrated, single source of data Elimination of duplicate data entry Self service capability Integrated workflow Certain activities outsourced Automated data/ MI reporting Process teams can be merged to support multiple organisations

3 3. Quality assurance Quality checking is unstructured and subject to potential risk of processing failure Quality checking processes dependent on individuals Variable quality and risk of failures high No clear reporting mechanisms Lack of measures and target setting Quality assurance is a standardised process and Standard policies and procedures in for quality assurance No clear mechanism for reporting operational or setting targets Internally driven mechanism onlyno sharing with customers but quality assurance is still applied as-is by entity (i.e. not yet redesigned in the SSA) Differences in quality assurance still exist when taking on work into a shared service Lack of comparability of between entities in due to different measures in No mechanisms in to drive behavioural change Adhoc reporting and analysis performedinternal and for customer quality assurance is well embedded and achieving best results Mature SLAs KPIs and measures Regular review of operational Service credits and penalties to drive correct behaviours Customer satisfaction measured

4 4. Governance arrangements Governance is unstructured and no clear lines of responsibility and accountability No governance board in Decisions made ad hoc without clear authority Changes that impact on others are not considered Inward looking and reactive in nature Governance is a standardised within a common centralised structure but Governance structure is common but entities still view themselves as separate Authority levels still not clear cut Some decisions still made without consultation Inward looking but Governance is still applied as-is by entity (i.e. not yet redesigned in the SSA) Governance is applied on united outline framework agreement basis Many of the former ways of working for governance are in creating redundancy and duplication Metrics and reporting is applied inconsistently depending on individual organisation preferences Thinking is around individual entity rather than joint approaches to problems governance is well embedded and achieving best results Clear metrics Defined ownership/ responsibility within the organisation and key third parties Strategic element to the service management Clear investment strategy to fund future efficiencies

5 5. Efficiency mechanisms Efficiency decentralised and adhoc in nature Efficiency improvement driven largely by individuals No consistent approach or methodologies used to drive improvement Limited improvements made due to lack of scope for change Minimal technology improvements due to unviable business case Efficiency Common mechanisms make it easier to collaborate with others on efficiency changes Still an individual benefits focus rather than wider perspective taken Initiatives driven by a single organisation Lack of distinct coordination No common efficiency methodologies used but efficiency still operated as-is (i.e. not yet redesigned in the SSA) Processes not fully common so cannot apply consistent costing approach Different ways of applying recharges tend to be easy to apply rather than reflective of resource usage Benchmarking and measurement is sporadically applied No common group of participant sponsored excellence programme in efficiency helping to drive best Fully costed end to end processes Recharging mechanism reflective of resource usage Clear view of the cost drivers Regular benchmarking Ongoing operational excellence programme

6 6. Technology support Access to Technology support is limited and unsophisticated No dedicated team to support technology Operations have to rely fully on external support Operations make do and try to fix themselves with sub-optimal workarounds No strategic technology focus Technology support Common standardised approach to Individual organisations still drive their specific support requirements Divergence in approach and implementation can still occur within the common framework No mechanism to ensure a clear strategic focus but technology support delivery still operated as-is (i.e. not yet redesigned in the SSA) Within a common framework of there are different ways of applying Requests are still generated by each organisation No common platform to agree requests in a concerted fashion Requests for change driven by individual organisational needs helping to drive best Fully integrated mechanisms in Ability to take full advantage of technologies available for all in Technologies aligned to overall strategy Technologies assist drive towards world class CIPFA 2010