Ziggo - Tech Mahindra - Jan-Dirk Rundervoort Mehul Shah March 2014
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Ziggo – Tech Mahindra Jan-Dirk Rundervoort Mehul Shah March 2014
Agenda
● Why did Ziggo need a partner in IT Delivery
● How was Tech Mahindra selected
● Tech Mahindra Strategy
● Governing the relationship
● Partnership 2.0
Motivation
Results
Next steps & Challenges
2
Why did Ziggo need a partner in IT delivery?
Innovation of our content, services and networks plays an important role in
the distinctiveness in the coming years.
ZUMBA
Services from
the cloud, Group and
IP over IP individual
Mobility in ‘self
combination service’
with WiFi and‘real
PARTNER NEEDED
time’ TO
• shorten time to market
• provide access to innovation
• improve on quality/cost
3
How was TechMahindra selected? (1)
Why did a pure Dutch company without Sourcing experience select a pure
Indian “player”.
● First contacts between VP Operations and TechM on scarce expertise
● TechM on the long list of Business Consultancy (also with other
Indian companies)
● Reference visits at customers and in India TechM on the shortlist
Based on their elaborated experience with BSS/OSS package
implementations
● Extensive interactive selection process with three candidates; focus
on long term partner and launching Ziggo mobile services
Two final contracts ready to be signed
4
How was TechMahindra selected? (2)
Why did a pure Dutch company without Sourcing experience select a pure
Indian “player”.
● Scoring:
Services
Launching Mobile
Legal
Strategy
Finance
Governance
Risk
● Cultural match
5
Motivations of Tech Mahindra
• In 2011, CE was too small in revenue
• Target to multiply the revenue to at least 6 times by
Global 2015
Positioning • Leverage the Telecom background
• Create the first cable operator reference in Europe
Drivers to • Value creation by eventually moving up into True SI
enter into model.
Ziggo deal • Help the customer business by employing the industry
best practices in the IT transformation program.
• Number of customers in CE: Only 1 significant account
in 2011 v/s 6 significant customers in 2013
KRIs • Revenue growth: YOY 50%+
• Onsite associates growth – 6 in 2011 to 300+ in 2013
6
Governing the relationship
7
Governing the relationship
8
Partnership 2.0 Jan-Dirk Rundervoort Mehul Shah March 2014
Why Partnership 2.0?
● End 2011: TechMahindra selected
What went
wrong?
● End 2012: Evaluation
TechM is Ziggo’s partner to fulfill it’s strategic objectives
Time to expand TechM’s role as supplier and bring the relationship to
the level of a true partnership
● Target 2013: Partnership 2.0
TechM involved in the early stages of the innovation initiatives and the
creation of the ZUMBA application landscape.
Ziggo able to concentrate on fulfilling business demands of enhanced
and new services at optimized cost and quality by using IT as an enabler
TechM to take up responsibility for delivery of integrated IT solutions.
● Feb. 2013: Joint leadership workshop
Setup and characteristics of the Partnership 2.0 agreed
And the plan of approach to realize this with regular monitoring at
frequent intervals.
10What did we achieve?
● Joint architecture and planning
● A Zumba Delivery Council
● TechM as System Integrator
● Offshore factory
● Standardized IT delivery processes
● Partnership Governance
11How do Ziggo and TechM work together on architecture?
TechM is involved the early stages of the innovation initiatives by a Joint Design
Authority where the integrated roadmap is translated into technical, feasible blueprints
and releases, creating the ZUMBA application landscape
● Objective is to centrally:
Validate the architectural guidelines for projects in the Project Start Architecture ( PSA).
Make recommendations for projects to align on Zumba roadmap
Provide active support to ensure the guidelines can be realized
Govern the Zumba architecture: Review and validate the project designs versus the PSA
Ziggo and TechMahindra work closely together
● Scope is:
Process
Information
Integration
Application
Infrastructure
Security
● Architecture deviations
require approval of A&TT
12How do Ziggo and TechM work together on planning?
In IT planning and delivery, Ziggo and TechM work together on how projects contribute
to the realization of the ZUMBA roadmap. Based on a more predictable demand,
resources – both in the Netherlands and in India – can be jointly planned and
dependencies managed.
- Work out integrated Zumba roadmap into a detailed level
- Align business demand with Zumba roadmap,
technical dependency’s & resource capacity
- Introduce Zumba releases
- Inventory of the dependency's
- Rolling resource forecast
13What is the Zumba Delivery Counsel?
A Zumba Delivery Council has been installed, where Ziggo and TechM take
decisions on the ZUMBA roadmap realization, planning and project
dependencies.
1 Programming Board
2
2 Program Review
3a
3 Program boards 1
4
4 Zumba execution
meeting 3b
3c
14How will programs be organized?
Overall program management is done by Ziggo, driving business
requirements and business change.
Zumba Delivery Counsel
CTO Head ITPD
Director AD Delivery Director
Program Board
Program 1...m
Business Owner Program Manager
Project Board
SI Delivery
Manager
Project 1...n
Project Manager
Project team
meetings
Business Project Technical Project Operations
Manager Manager Manager
E2E Solution Delivery
Non functional Req
Business N Zumba components
Acc & Prod
Requirements M Legacy components
Deployment
Acceptance Testing Tibco Integration
Prod Acceptance Test
Business Change Dev & Test
Network components
Deployment
Project 1...n
Ziggo TechM
15How will projects be organized?
For all new programs and projects in the blue stream TechM is now delivering
tested solutions based on components made by themselves, Ziggo and third
parties, and thus acting as a system integrator. For some projects in
execution, this role is already with TechM.
Project Manager
PMO
Architect(s) Quality Assurance
Business Project Technical Project Operations Project
Manager Manager Manager
Service
Component
Business Analysts Design Team Legacy Team Component Infra lead Operational
Component
Delivery
DeliveryTeam
Team Readiness Team
Delivery Team
Implementation Integration Test Component Hardware Acceptance
Team ICC Team Component
Team Component
Delivery Team delivery Team Production Test
Delivery Team
Delivery Team
Develop/test
UAT Team Performance
deployement Deployment
Test Team
team Team
BR Test Team
TechM Ziggo 3rd Party
16Who is doing what in the IT delivery process?
Standardized IT delivery processes with Quality gates are now being used by
Ziggo and TechM for seamless handovers, thus increasing quality and speed
of delivery.
17What is a factory?
For two key technologies, components are made in an offshore factory, to
maximize efficiency of component delivery and support.
Functionality (work packages), not resources
Less coordination from Ziggo PM
Organized per technology / domain.
Create pull, ensure knowledge retention and improve productivity
18How is the success of the partnership measured?
To ensure that the desired results of Partnership 2.0 will be reached, new key
result and performance indicators are defined and used in the partnership
governance.
19How are the results secured?
The results of Partnership 2.0 are now secured in the Ziggo and TechM
organization.
Within current partnership delivery:
• SI role for TechM described and in some projects already executed.
Secured by the TechM delivery leads and technical project managers
• Joint planning and architecture, preparing decisions in the installed
Zumba Delivery Counsel and other governance bodies. Secured in
new Planning and Delivery department.
• Standardized delivery processes across Ziggo and TechM, secured
by QA functions
Within current partnership governance:
• 3 layer partnership governance (strategic/tactical/operational)
• Measurement of defined partnership KPI’s
• Contractual changes to reflect this in risk/reward mechanisms
20What are the next steps?
Results of Partnership 2.0 are secured in the Ziggo and TechM organization.
Continuous improvement on several subjects is needed
Ongoing activities:
access to Ziggo infrastructure and video conference capabilities
Optimize on-/offshore ratio
Completing onboarding procedures
further refinement of roles and responsibilities in the blue
projects and programs, roll out program/project governance
process standardization for the total innovation realization chain
component delivery and factories, to all BLUE track initiatives.
21Challenges
Great results! What are remaining challenges?
Behaviour, working together:
Chain to a Rope
Fear factor
Stereotyping and Myths
Polder model, use it in favour
2223
You can also read
