coloradodigitalservice / modern-software-delivery-maturity-index Goto Github PK

Is Product Ownership the key skillset needed, or is it Product Management? A high level executive (e.g. SES) could claim to be the Product Owner, and they'd check most boxes, but doesn't help the team much. I generally argue that PM's are more needed, but that government is more familiar with the notion of POs.

__

I think this is spot on don't want to remove the product ownership role. Rather, I think it is important to incorporate a section around product management. I do think the are different but equally important.

__

We see many agency projects here in Colorado that have a single Product Owner and have been advocating for a Product Manager role that spans the entire portfolio when each Product Owner is focused on a single product or piece of functionality within. Gov seems to really identify with Product Owner but I also don't think it matters too much here. The goal is to have the product voice at the table.

I recommend against using the Low category to say "Lack of X" – that's less Low and more None. Maybe separate Low and None to differentiate b/w places that are completely lacking and places that are just at the start. Otherwise, few people will self-identify as Low, and you'll see lots of people at Medium or higher.

A suggestion from mgifford

They should add accessibility there.

Questions: Is that a top-level category or an element in an existing or new category? What category should it be?

Finance, and impact of public sector finance.
Might match with a section that can include sustained, active exec sponsorship.

@greggles @MatthewJMcAllister

I'm sure you mean this to be separate from "Purchasing v. Procurement", but the topic titles really make it seem like they're roughly identical

Is this model meant to be a self-assessment? Or a third-party assessment? If it's a self-assessment, a lot of this language could be alienating.

Under "User-Centered Approach" for Low Maturity, a bullet reads, "After work is complete, it must be re-done because..."

This feels less like user-centered and more about iterative development and deployment

A question some might ask for the Modular Contracting row under High Maturity is, "why is a multi-vendor environment good"?

Answers from comments in the prior google doc include: de-risk, competitive marketplace. Single vendor reduces competitive position, replace-ability of contractors, ecosystem of contracts, open marketplace of contractors.

Under "Product Ownership", it says "Product Owner may exist", that is strange here. If it does exist, it's in the High category. If it doesn't, it's in the Low category.

To avoid insulting anyone, you could use fluffier adjectives (Initial, Developing, Progressing, Managed, Advanced, etc.) ala these: https://www.google.com/search?q=information+security+maturity+model

For the "High Maturity" column, note that can be tenuous and takes a lot of energy to maintain