I have categorized a number of existing business software applications according to the below list. Think web publishing as a business context.
My challenge is that the list is not necessarily mutually exclusive or complete exhaustive (MECE.) I am looking for your guidance on how to improve this list. Can you help? Does this list even need to be MECE?
- Asset Management
- Business Rules Management
- Capacity Management
- Configuration management
- Content Capture
- Content Creation
- Content Management
- Customer Management
- Document Management
- Financial Management
- Identity Management
- Incident Management
- Knowledge Management
- People Management
- Problem/Opportunity Management
- Project Management
- Records Management
- Release Management
- Risk and Issue Management
- Security Management
- Service Management
- Workflow Management
The idea here is that each of the above functions or capabilities should be supported by an IT system and business process. I have a description of each and can share it of you think it will help. The descriptions highlight some of the relationships and areas of overlap - particularly between the areas in the CMS/publishing/KM zone.
Hi Craig,
ReplyDeleteMy idea is using a Quality System to categorize the functions. You can consider every function as a process and then categorize and prioritize those processes.
For instance, in Quality Management we often categorize processes into three categories. 1-Management Processes 2- Core Processes 3-Supporting Processes.
Management Processes are kind of processes that are related to top managers' decisions, strategies and policies. Core processes are kind of processes that make added-value for the company. In other words company make money with those processes and clients pay for them directly. For example Project Management Process may be considered as a core process. Finally, Supporting processes are kind of processes that support the core processes but clients may not involve with them like Training process.
Definition of the client/Stakeholders in this kind of approach is the key.
I hope it does work for you.
Sean
http://www.linkedin.com/home?trk=hb_tab_home_top
Sean, Your thinking lines up closely with mine. (Your link doesn't work so I was unable to follow up in more details.)
ReplyDelete