How can you engage stakeholders when dealing with new tech and trends in Business Architecture?

What worked for me is creating a map of stakeholders on basis of their take on eagerness to change or disruption. It is hard to get buy-in when things are already working fine. You need an appetite for innovation, learning and experimenting with what trending in tech space.

Use the Socratic method. If you cannot express someone's point of view back to them, to their satisfaction, you don't fully understand them.

Managing Stakeholder's is not about over promising nor under promising. In my opinion its about understanding the business needs and articulating the various options to address the same. You have to involve the stakeholders in the decision making process even if it might take a bit longer. When the stakeholders are involved in the decision to implement new technology and or architecture there is a sense of ownership, support and pride that leads to a successful implementation. To summarize we should focus on the business issue/needs and pitch the new technology and architecture on how best they will help solve the problem on hand. Just pursuing technology for the sake of having the latest and greatest will not help anyone in the long run.

There is no one size fits all approach so it's best to use various approaches depending on the impact and value each stakeholder is likely to gain from the introduction of the tech. Where things are not clear, I would suggest brainstorming sessions to uncover from different perspectives. In instances where you have an idea of the impact, I recommend more tailored messaging in the form of a focused audience.

One thing I've found in my experiences is to truly understand your stakeholders. And, this is done by understanding what *really* motivates them. It's typically not technology! If helping them get inventory turned around faster is the true problem, I need to realize that. Now, if I can use tech to produce a report that has all the information they need, well organized and accurate, then I can align the business with the tech and get the engagement I need from them to provide or build that report for them.

The first thing I recommend is to avoid complex accounting methods to show Cost benefit. We have to be upfront telling the Risks and potential time line delays. I would rather be under Promise and over Deliver. This will give us leverage next time.

Here's a lesson an exec with $4 Billion budget taught me. It paid big time. I was young & he had bought $100+ million solution from me. I was trying to sell him the next big thing & showed him an awesome vision, architecture & value prop. "Son," he said, "visions and value props are worth #$--". "No smart executive will be impressed with them". You want to impress them? Show them a vision with a transition plan that takes them from where they are now, to where the vision is. Visions are easy. What is hard is creating a realistic transition plan to get you there. Employ your creativity where it's most needed. It not only impresses others. It changes how you think & makes you better at changing the world.

When discussing new technology and trends in business architecture with stakeholders, it can be helpful to use clear and simple language and avoiding technical jargon when describing how the new technology fits with the organization's strategy and goals. In addition, drawing attention to the value proposition and emphasizing its advantages such as enhanced customer experience and satisfaction, cost savings, higher efficiency, or competitive advantage can attract the interest of stakeholders.

El modelo de prominencia permite identificar de manera correcta los atributos de los stakeholders y a partir de allí, establecer los métodos adecuados para comunicar la implementación de nuevas tics en la organización. Ahora bien, en términos e AE, es preciso abordar las capas de negocio y tecnología, de manera simple y concreta, al punto de dar a entender el valor agregado de las tics de acuerdo a la estrategia de la empresa,siempre alineada a su política y declaración de la visión.

A solid business case for any new tech must be clearly described, what is the vision and how will it either a) solve a problem or b) improve a process / system or c) make money. Making the business case clear and accessible for all stakeholders will help for better buy in, jargon doesn't win people over. Similarly understanding how the new tech effects current structure and staff. It may make money but if the roll out will be expensive and it is difficult to maintain this may not outweigh the benefits. Have pros and cons having an objective view from both sides will set expectations appropriately, generating a rough roadmap will help.

Effective steps to empower stakeholders: 1. Having a Risk Management framework that is reviewed with all stakeholders. 2. Encourage stakeholders to share views and suggestions that are then filtered through the Risk Management framework. 3. Bridging the gap between the tech jargon and the business jargon. 4. Implement necessary frameworks for conflict resolution, root cause analysis etc. 5. Clarity on business value of the project should be understood by the stakeholders so that they may contribute in the right direction for a better value proposition.

Facilitating appropriate exposure, education, involvement and ownership builds an experience in all participating stakeholders that promotes adoption and mitigates a sense of having change forced upon them which can lead to negative outcomes such as resistance, sabotage and unproductive competition or politics.

It is simply not possible to do this work without active participation from the stakeholders. Defining solutions without fully and deeply understanding customer issues is one of the surest paths to failure that I know. In all too many cases, stakeholders get involved in defining solutions that are unconnected to the problems they are intended to address. It's crucial to pull stakeholders through the process of articulating strategies and defining OKRs. This helps to ensure that you do not attempt to define solutions based on a superficial understanding of issues and goals. It's also important to keep them involved as your product discovery progresses. You will need to pivot as you go and you will require their participation for that.

Well - there is a lot to write here, but I would immediately start by creating a community that will have the correct motivational policy for its own development of the community around the technology and consumers of this technology or service so that this does not happen to me, the now deceased one of the leaders, the head Thomson.

If you don't live and die by the motto of 'underpromise and overdeliver' you can cause irreparable damage to progress. Try your best to describe expectations using a quantifiable metrics and ranges of achievement rather than qualitative factors and single point targets. Doing this will communicate that success will be achieved along a spectrum and that there is uncertainty about where on the spectrum it will occur.

Managing expectations is a multi layered endeavor: 1. Under-promising and Over-delivering works only with a new client for the first time. The client reframes their expectation and perception about the capability by the time the project ends. 2. A quick but short term solution to build a rapport with the client is not good for the long run. Over delivering is detrimental to the business in the long run. 3. Accepting every suggestion from the stakeholders should be discouraged. 4. Processes should be agreed to and adhered to. 5. Risk management framework should be reviewed and finalized 6. All changes should be filtered through the risk management framework and then implemented.

The math works like this. If you under-promise, your proposal could be dismissed immediately. If you over-promise, client will likely be disappointed later. It's a dilemma. Here are some strategies: 1. Overpromise a little initially, then shift to a more realistic posture 2. Segment the expectations & balance over/under promises 3. Promises are predictions. Partner with your client in forecasting benefits & risks 4. Present realistic frameworks to assess benefits & risks, & go thru them jointly 5. Engage with your client to jointly identify dependencies, risks & mitigations 5. Structure feedback loops and id metrics 6. Work with stakeholders one on one initially, then engage them to persuade each other & to assess benefits

New & emerging Technology trends that are first out of the gates help mould what the future state will eventually look like. If stakeholders have appetite to early adopt - ask yourself ‘does this enthusiasm align the broader organisational culture to be tech front runners?’ If yes, then a project to leverage new tech trends to solve a business problem has a higher chance of success due to the organic garnering of exec level support & funding - and is prime to pursue. If no, then use it as an opportunity to discover what the user insights are around the new tech and their ideation of how it could solve their business problems. Document and save for later, when the organisational appetite around adopting new tech changes with time.

One of the great risks in this type of work is a gap in understanding. If you have an active and involved set of stakeholders, this is far less likely. A major underpinning of the experimental product discovery approach is clear articulation of assumptions and hypotheses. If everyone is in sync on these, then a gap in understanding is far less likely.

Teach is not enough, people learn and gain interest and traction when they see the value of learning something that helps in their lives, so to create a learning path you most taking into account the different audiences and their interests, in order to be successful, and also you can’t train all people, so is always good to take an approach of train the trainers on different areas of the organization.

Training and support is an important element of your solutions. If they are tied to the OKR goals, then stakeholders should understand what they will be expected to do to exploit the solution you're implementing. Given this, training and support requirements should be easily identifiable.

Teach is not enough, people learn and gain interest and traction when they see the value of learning something that helps in they lives, so to create a learning path you most taking to account the different audiences and their interests, in order to be successful, and also you can’t train all people, so is always good to take an approach of train the trainers on different areas of the organization.

"people change when they hurt enough they have to.?when they see enough they're inspired to, when they learn enough that they want to, and when they receive enough that they're able to" John C Maxwell So highlight the pain of not changing, show them a way to eliminate it, teach them how they can do it, give them what they need to do it, then get out of their way and let them get on with it.

It is necessary to celebrate and award success. Every project has at least one project member who went out of their way to make the project a success. Their contributions to the project should be recognized by all stakeholders.

As I mentioned in second section. As a Business Architect - I would focus on Proof of Connect between business problem and technical solution. Once a clear connect is established, rest all will fall in place with little efforts.

Be your own lawyer AND prosecutor. Do not only sing the merits of your solution but also show why it might not work. The main advantage is actually internal. It helps YOU think and improve your solution. It is also a great way to gain credibility and manage expectations. Objectivity inspires trust. And finally, it encourages active engagement. Since you're "debating" with yourself the pluses and minuses, the stakeholders are naturally drawn in, and that is what you want. You want to engage them actively, and that will result in better solutions and better outcomes. You should do it for the internal benefits. Sharing the negatives with the stakeholders is ballsy, and should be done selectively based on their makeup.

This question is confusing the role of the Business Architect with Enterprise Architect or CTO. Also why and how are all these things put up front and people not being engaged based on providing answers to the whole question rather than individual fragments. There is a presumptuousness to this which I do not like. Please can you put me in touch with the LinkedIn Communications Manager or CTO who has come up with this!!

You must understand the overall vision for your organisation. Without this you just can't tell whether new technology even fits into its future. Even if you personally are excited about something new, like AI for example, you're not going to be able to articulate the benefit in reaching the organisations overall objectives.