Читать книгу Managing Chaos - Lisa Welchman - Страница 18

Rest assured—every organization has digital governance problems. Just because an organization might look good online doesn’t mean that it is getting a good return on its investment or operating in an effective, low-risk environment. I’ve seen plenty of “lipstick-on-pig” digital environments where a nice-looking website design was only thinly veiling an ineffective digital presence supported by no real digital strategy and an uncoordinated digital team—governance gone wild! I’ve also seen some “looks like it was built in 1997” websites where the site was getting real work done for the organization, and the supporting organization was only inches away from governing well. Looks can be deceiving.

How can you tell how well your organization is doing? Instead of looking at your (and your competitor’s) websites, social channels, and mobile apps to judge how well you are governing, you can understand where you are on the digital governance maturity curve (see Table 1.3).

You’ll probably find that your organization is at different levels of maturity for different aspects of the framework (team structure, digital strategy, digital policy, and digital standards). That’s normal. Maybe you work in a heavily regulated industry, and you’re “mature” when it comes to digital policy, but you lack standards. Or maybe you have some policy and standards, but you have no real digital strategy. The point is for you to assign responsibility and accountability to the right set of resources so that the substance of your strategy, policies, and standards is on target, laying the foundation for your digital team to create real online value for the organization.

Once you’ve finished designing your framework, you will find that accountability and authority for strategy, policy, and standards will be distributed throughout your organization’s digital team. But do you know who your digital team is and what they do? Maybe not. So before we examine how to determine accountability for each of the digital governance components, let’s take a look at how digital teams are structured. Just as websites grow organically and without much of a plan, so do digital teams. It’s important to take the time to establish and put into place a well-defined digital team before you begin your governance design efforts.

Understanding Digital Governance Maturity

There is a digital governance maturity curve (see Figure 1.6) that most organizations move through when they launch a digital channel (Web, mobile, or social). The process of maturity begins with the decision to launch a new channel, and it culminates with the organization having fully integrated that channel into the company to the extent that governing dynamics and operational processes are automatic, leaving the organization fully responsive to digital trends.

The dynamics of each phase are fairly distinct. Most organizations that are seeking to improve digital governance are usually in the “chaos” phase, while some are stalled at “basic management” and trying to move to the next level. Also, organizations are typically at different places on this curve, depending on which digital channel is being considered. For example, an organization might be at “basic management” for websites, but at “launch” for its mobile channel, while in “chaos” for social channels. This issue can add complexity when designing a digital governance framework.

FIGURE 1.6 The digital governance maturity curve.

GOVERNANCE AND DIGITAL ANALYTICS

Phil Kemelor, EY

In my work with Fortune 500 companies, government agencies, and national non-profit organizations, the linkage between smart Web governance and intelligent use of analytics data goes hand-in-hand. Governance sets the tone for a culture of analytics through clear definition of strategy and direction as to what metrics and measurement guide accountability in achieving goals related to the strategy.

TABLE 1.3 WHERE IS YOUR ORGANIZATION ON THE DIGITAL GOVERNANCE MATURITY CURVE?

Maturity Stage	Dynamics
Launch	Research and development mode, as the digital functionality or channel is being informally tested or formally piloted.
	Basic policy constraints are considered to ensure that the organization is operating within the bounds of the law and any other regulatory constraints.
	There are few standards imposed at this point because the organization is just going to “try out” new functionality to see if there is value to the organization.
Organic Growth	Aspects of functionality “work.” Others in the organization begin to leverage the work of the piloting team.
	Functional and systemic redundancy begins (design, technology, process).
	Some progressive executives may understand the value of the channel, but deep value and mature business measurement tactics are not being applied.
	Functionality is thought of as a “cost center,” not a core revenue generator.
	Basic policy constraints are still in place, and some may be documented.
	There are usually few standards in place. Considerations around basic corporate standards, such as branding, begin to arise.
Chaos	Executives and senior management are aware of the digital channel, but they have likely wholly delegated the creation of digital strategy to junior resources.
	Different organizational departments have created organizationally incongruent digital strategies. Competition for “ownership” begins to emerge.
	The organization is unable to identify and account for all its digital assets or the people who execute on and fund digital development inside the organization.
	Core marketing communications and IT policy are beginning to be formalized—sometimes separate from the stewardship and influence of the corporate legal team.
	Some standards are documented, but many core digital standards are missing.
BasicManagement	Executives and senior digital experts have begun a dialogue regarding the strategy for digital.
	The organization begins to consider its digital budget.
	Digital quality measurement tactics, systems, and software are emplaced.
	Some design, functionality, and platform normalization has begun, and efforts are made to reduce redundancies where they exist and where it is effective.
	A core digital center of excellence is beginning to emerge, although it may not have all of the desired authority.
	Performance is evaluated by examining tactical analytics like website “page hits” and number of “likes” in social media channels.
	The existence of a set of digital policies and standards is in place.
	Basic cross-organization collaboration teams begin to appear, such as “Web Councils” and standards development teams.
Responsive	“Digital” is fully integrated within the organization and is no longer a functional silo.
	The digital team is clearly identified, organized, and funded.
	Accountability for digital strategy is clearly placed.
	A guiding principle for digital development is established.
	Performance indicators are defined, and mechanisms and programs for quality and success measurements are in place.
	Digital policy stewards and policy authors are identified.
	The process for external and internal policy review is in place.
	Digital standards steward(s) and authors are identified, and standards compliance and measurement mechanisms are implemented.

Summary

• Digital governance is a framework for establishing accountability, roles, and decision-making authority for an organization’s digital presence. It addresses three topics: strategy, policy, and standards.

• Digital strategy articulates the organization’s approach to leveraging the capabilities of the Internet and World Wide Web. It is authored by those who can evaluate the impact of digital on your marketspace and come up with an effective strategy for success.

• Digital policies are guidance statements put into place to manage the organizational risk inherent with operating online. They should be informed by digital, organizational, and legal experts.

• Digital standards are guidance statements for developing the organizational digital presence. They should be informed and defined by subject matter experts.

• A digital governance framework delegates authority for digital decision-making about particular digital products and services from the organizational core to other aspects of the organization. This allows the organization to effectively decentralize production maintenance of its digital presence.