Skip to main content

A technique for advocating change

Communication is a key part of every software analyst’s work.  Some of the time we write formal documents such as design specifications or descriptions of coding standards. We write operational documentation for users and for support staff.  We write blog posts that describe our work, and we write comments in our code and e-mails to our colleagues.   We present our ideas in meetings, in formal presentations and informal discussions.

So it is important to pay attention to these skills, so that we can communicate more effectively.  There are training courses to help us with the basics.  As with any other skill, we can learn through reading about specific techniques, looking at other people’s work, and reflecting on our own work. (In his book Patterns of Software, Richard Gabriel advocates that reading poetry is a good way to improve our writing skills.  His arguments, on page 149, are worth reading for the virtues they espouse whether you read poetry or not).

In this post, I describe one way to structure a particular form of communication: that of making something happen (or stop happening).  In writing, this is most likely to be an e-mail; you could also be making the point face-to-face in a meeting.  The structure works in either setting.  The aim is to make sure that everyone understands the situation and your proposal for action.  Each person in the meeting or reading the e-mail should be clear about what you are asking them to do.

The structure has four parts: context, advocacy, illustration and inquiry.

Framing: Describe the situation.  Why are you sending the e-mail or calling the meeting?  What is the problem to be solved? 

Advocacy: What strategy do you propose to address the situation? 

Illustration: What would your strategy mean for everyone involved? There may be several ways to implement your strategy; what is your view as to how it should be done?

Inquiry:  Ask the others whether they share your perceptions, agree with your strategy, concur with the proposed implementation and understand what they have to do.

The inquiry step may reveal disagreement with any of the preceding three steps.  If people perceive the situation in a different way, they will likely advocate different strategies, so it is important to reach agreement on the context first.  Then, people may disagree on the strategy; other people may advocate a different approach.  This structure lets you work through the discussion step by step. 

It is important that all your colleagues understand what you are asking of them.  If you are sending your proposal as an e-mail message, read it through before sending and ask yourself whether each person on the To: field will understand what you are wanting from them.  It’s surprising how easy it is to write a message that contains information but does not clarify what you are expecting from the recipient.  (I know I make this mistake myself).

This technique comes from the book Action Inquiry by Bill Torbert.  I try to use this technique myself and I find it useful.  If you have any comments, please let me know.


Popular posts from this blog

Why the UCISA Capability Model is useful

What do Universities do?

This may seem a strange question to ask and the answer may seem obvious.  Universities educate students and undertake research.  And perhaps they work with industrial partners and create spin-off companies of their worn.  And they may work with local communities, and affiliation bodies for certain degress, and they definitely report on their activities to government bodies such as HEFCE.  They provide student services and support.  The longeryou think about it, the more things you can think of that a University does.

In business, the things that an organisation does are called "capabilities", which is a slightly strange term.  I think it is linked to the HR idea of a combination of the CAPacity and ABILITY to do a task.  Whatever the name, it is a useful concept.  A capability is more basic than a process: a University may change the way it educates students but as long as it remains a University it will educate them one way or another.

A capability …

"No more us & them"

WonkHE recently posted an interesting opinion piece with the title Academics and Administrators: No more ‘us and them’. In that post, Paul Greatrix rebutted criticisms of professional services (administrative) staff in Universites from some academics. To illustrate his point, he quoted recent articles in which administrators were portrayed as a useless overhead on the key tasks at hand (teaching and research).

This flows both ways, as Greatrix himself points out. As Enterprise Architect, I work with Professional Services colleagues and I have heard some of them express opinions that clearly fail to understand the nature of academic work. Academics cannot be treated as if they were factory workers, churning out lectures on a treadmill.

I think these comments reveal a fundamental clash of ideas about how a University should work. Some people who come into management positions for other sectors tend to frame the University as a business, with students and research funders as customers t…

Changing Principles

In EA, architecture principles set a framework for making architectural decisions.  They help to establish a common understanding across different groups of stakeholders, and provide guidance for portfolios and projects.  Michael Durso of the LSE gave a good introduction to the idea in a webinar last week for the UCISA EA community.

Many organisations take the TOGAF architecture principles as a starting point.  These are based on the four architectural domains of TOGAF: business, information/data, applications, technology/infrastructure.  These principles tend to describe what should be done, e.g. re-use applications, buy in software rather than build it, keep data secure.  See for example the principles adopted at Plymouth University and the University of Birmingham.

Recently though, I encountered a different way of looking at principles.  The user experience design community tend to focus more on how we should do things.  E.g. we should start with user needs, use iterative developm…