{"id":11203,"date":"2020-01-02T13:16:00","date_gmt":"2020-01-02T19:16:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blog.planview.com\/?p=11203"},"modified":"2022-04-12T13:45:16","modified_gmt":"2022-04-12T18:45:16","slug":"enterprise-agility-in-financial-services","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.planview.com\/enterprise-agility-in-financial-services\/","title":{"rendered":"Enterprise Agility in Financial Services"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Financial<\/p>\n

We facilitated a roundtable discussion of our customers at the 2019 Planview Horizons Customer Conference where enterprise agility in financial services organizations was discussed. We learned more about some of the biggest struggles financial institutions face with a focus on capacity planning, funding models, and digital transformation.<\/p>\n

The topic discussed for most of the roundtable was how to get work done with the best impact to drive business results.<\/p>\n

Since financial services institutions typically work within well-established practices to mitigate risks, new ways of working aren\u2019t always immediately accepted. Financial services companies often operate with a traditional approach to project and portfolio management where annual budgets define how projects are funded and executed. This is in stark contrast to an Agile approach, which uses self-organizing teams to reach specific goals with one common objective in mind \u2014 deliver value to the customer with speed. Teams are allocated budget as part of an Agile Release Train or larger value stream (instead of a project-wide budget tied to an annual planning or budgeting cycle) and is measured on the value delivered over a shorter period of time, usually between 3-6 months. In this case, the budget is adjusted at any time during the cycle to accommodate changes in customer requests.<\/p>\n

\"Enterprise<\/a><\/p>\n

Challenges arise when senior leadership has yet to adopt an Agile mindset, even if their teams have. Each participant in our roundtable admitted that leadership and organizational culture were the largest obstacles when implementing Agile. Even in organizations where teams were already practicing Agile, it was common for senior leadership to favor the more traditional portfolio management due to their comfort with detailed project plans and heavier governance.<\/p>\n

Teaching leadership and helping them understand a new way of working will make the shift more manageable. To lead in a scaled-Agile environment, leaders must learn to give up the driver\u2019s seat and learn to steer, by providing direction to the end destination. Agile teams are largely self-governing. Senior leaders provide space to innovate, but not how. Teams work closely with customers, both internal and external, to identify the root of problems and innovate to solve them. Therefore, it makes sense to allow the teams themselves to be responsible for setting and achieving success metrics. The best Agile leaders support their teams by staying out of the way and focusing instead on doing the things that only leaders can do: Creating and communicating long-term visions, setting and sequencing strategic priorities, and building the organizational capabilities to achieve those goals. Agile leaders are responsible for driving customer value through enterprise agility \u2013 not just productivity, or profitability \u2013 as an indicator of their success. \u00a0There are many ways to determine whether a team is increasing its ability to innovate with agility and speed:<\/p>\n