Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 4 Next »

Introduction

Document editing provides business users with the necessary tools to manage, analyze, and enhance their documents efficiently. There are two modes available: Edit Mode and Advanced Edit Mode. Each mode is tailored to different user needs, ensuring a comprehensive and structured approach to document management.

Edit Mode

This mode focuses on document scoring based on the Organisation Unit goal for each business architecture domain.

Advanced Edit Mode

Advanced Edit Mode offers a more robust set of tools for detailed analysis and prioritization of documents. This mode is designed for users who need to perform comprehensive evaluations and ensure alignment with strategic goals and industry standards. Key features include:

  • Content Analysis: Evaluate documents across multiple domains such as Strategy, Policy, Capability, and more. Each domain is assessed based on relevance, quality, and quantity, ensuring a thorough review.

  • Content Weighting: Prioritize documents by establishing criteria for importance, rating documents against these criteria, and calculating weighted and normalized scores. This helps in identifying the most critical documents that support organizational objectives.

Purpose

The purpose of both Edit Mode and Advanced Edit Mode is to provide users with flexible and powerful tools to manage their documentation effectively. By leveraging these features, users can ensure their documents not only meet regulatory requirements but also drive strategic initiatives and support overall business objectives.

By using Edit Mode for quick updates and Advanced Edit Mode for detailed analysis, users can maintain high standards of document quality and relevance, contributing to the overall success and efficiency of the organization.

Edit mode

Document Scoring

Overview

Document scoring provides a detailed assessment of a document’s business architecture content. This assessment helps in understanding the alignment, value, capability etc. of each document in relation to the organization's goals and objectives.

Document scoring.png

Document Scoring domains

Each Business Architecture domain is rated and issues are identified to provide a comprehensive overview of the document's strengths and weaknesses.

  1. Strategy

  2. Policy

  3. Capability

  4. Value

  5. Organisation

  6. Stakeholders

  7. Initiatives

  8. Product

  9. Information

  10. Performance

Rating Criteria

The following criteria are used for scoring:

  • Relevance

  • Quality

  • Quantity

  • An aggregated score based on the criteria is prepared for each business architecture domain.

Comparison with Organisation unit goal

This aggregated score for each business architecture domain is compared to the Organisation unit goal for that business architecture domain.

Interpretation of Scores

  • Green (0 issues): Indicates that the business architecture meets or exceeds expectations.

  • Yellow (1-3 issues): Indicates minor issues that need to be addressed to fully align with organizational goals.

  • Red (4 or more issues): Indicates significant issues that need immediate attention to align with organizational goals.

Learn more

Learn in more detail: See Document weighting and criteria analysis

Advanced edit mode

Content Analysis

In advanced edit mode, content analysis evaluates business architecture data within each document domain through a structured rating process. This process ensures a thorough assessment of relevance, quality, and quantity.

Documents - advanced edit mode.png

Domains and Criteria:

Each of the ten Business Architecture domains are rated on relevance, quality and quantity.

Rating Process

Relevance Rating Scale

  • 5 (Very High): The document directly aligns with the strategic goals and objectives of the organization.

  • 4 (High): The document strongly supports the strategic goals but might be one step removed.

  • 3 (Medium): The document moderately supports the strategic goals with some indirect connections.

  • 2 (Low): The document provides limited support or relevance to the strategic goals.

  • 1 (Very Low): The document has very minimal relevance to the strategic goals.

  • Incomplete: No pertinent data related to the business architecture domain.

Quality Rating Scale

  • 5 (Very High): The document meets or exceeds ISO 9001 standards for documentation.

  • 4 (High): The document strongly adheres to ISO 9001 standards with minor gaps.

  • 3 (Medium): The document adequately meets ISO 9001 standards but may require some improvements.

  • 2 (Low): The document partially meets ISO 9001 standards but has significant gaps.

  • 1 (Very Low): The document minimally meets ISO 9001 standards, with extensive issues in adherence.

  • Incomplete: The document does not meet ISO 9001 standards.

Quantity Rating Scale

  • 5 (Very High): The document provides extensive documentation, surpassing ISO 9001 requirements.

  • 4 (High): The document contains sufficient documentation to meet ISO 9001 requirements.

  • 3 (Medium): The document provides adequate documentation, covering all necessary details but lacks depth.

  • 2 (Low): The document provides limited documentation, only meeting some of the requirements.

  • 1 (Very Low): The document provides minimal documentation, barely meeting ISO 9001 standards.

  • Incomplete: The document lacks sufficient documentation to meet ISO 9001 standards.

This structured approach helps identify strengths and areas for improvement, aiding in more informed decision-making.

Content Weighting

Content weighting determines the importance of business documents within the organization, following a structured and comprehensive approach to document prioritization.

Steps for Document Prioritization

  1. Establish Criteria for Importance

    • Alignment with Organisational Goals: Evaluate support for core objectives.

    • Impact on Decision Making: Assess influence on key business decisions.

    • Scope of Influence: Determine impact on the entire organization or specific departments.

    • Compliance & Regulatory Requirements: Identify documents required for legal or regulatory adherence.

    • Stakeholder Interest: Gauge importance to key stakeholders (investors, management, employees).

  2. Rate Each Document Against the Criteria

    • Use a predefined scale (1-5) for automatic weighting.

    • For manual validation, involve stakeholders in scoring through surveys or workshops.

    • Example Scale:

      • 1: Very Low

      • 2: Low

      • 3: Medium

      • 4: High

      • 5: Very High

  3. Assign Weights to Each Criterion

    • Based on relative importance to the organization’s strategy.

    • Example Weights:

      • Alignment with Organisational Goals: 30%

      • Impact on Decision Making: 25%

      • Scope of Influence: 20%

      • Compliance and Regulatory Requirements: 15%

      • Stakeholder Interest: 10%

  4. Calculate Weighted Scores

    • Multiply scores by weights for each document and sum them to get a total weighted score.

    • Calculation Example:

      • Weighted Score = (Score for Alignment * Weight) + (Score for Impact * Weight) + ...

  5. Normalize the Scores

    • Compare importance across documents by normalizing scores.

    • Normalization Example:

      • Normalised Score = Document Score / Highest Score

  6. Rank the Documents

    • Rank based on normalised scores to determine relative importance.

    • Guides resource allocation, attention, and efforts among strategic documents.

This method ensures critical documents receive the attention they deserve, supporting informed decision-making and compliance with industry standards.

Learn more

  • No labels

© Orthogramic 2024