Choosing the right model for your stakeholders and subject matter experts

[JasonDrost_FPUA]

First and foremost, the article Choosing the right model for you by Robert Krisher is one of the most useful reads for anyone that is at the stage of deciding on which model to choose from.  It breaks down the fundamental differences between each of the implementation models in a very detailed, but easy to understand manner for each industry.  I highly recommend reading this article.

The fundamental issue I am currently facing (and the title alludes to my anxiety) is I am not trying to choose the right model for me.  I'm trying to choose the right model for the stakeholders and subject matter experts that will be relying on and using this new UN data model.  I feel the chosen model and configuration decisions should rely on industry expertise (Electric, Gas, Water), departmental workflows and process, integrations with other systems and software, and industry trends.  Who is best suited to make those decisions but the Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) themselves.

As a GIS professional (and I have multiple Utility Networks to migrate), how do I communicate with these SMEs on the varying differences of the model configurations and capabilities without using the terms containment, association, subnetwork tracing, etc.  In addition, our communication must be tailored to the role of the SME and that can differ greatly.  For instance, explaining the value or differences between an Electric Utility Network Foundation Essential Model and Expanded Model  to a T&D Supervisor or lineman is probably different than that of a System Operator or Electrical Engineer.

From a governance perspective, how are others in this forum engaging with those SMEs and how are you communicating with those roles effectively during your model and configuration decision making process?  Is there any information available to help deliver this message and develop an effective way to communicate the differences and value of implementing a UN model in terms they can relate to or understand?

[Jens_Dalsgaard]

The thing about SMEs are, that they are likely to want solutions capable of solving all their problems - who wouldn't want that 🙂 

The thing is, that just as saying I want a Lamborghini I have to match my craving with my capabilities. Am I (and the other family members) capable of driving / managing such sports car. Are my financial situation ready for the price that comes with such beauty?

As a trusted advisor (I assume, that's your role) you must highlight the capabilities of a full implementation of utility network. As outline the capabilities and limitations of simpler implementations. They will want all capabilities.

And then you need to also balance this - or have the SMEs balance this - with data maturity today, organizational maturity today.

Assuming they will emphasize the need to grow as organization and hence move from where they are now to become a more mature organization you will likely agree.

But you must then ask the SMEs the put forth a plan for how to deliver on this transition. How will they deliver the higher, consistent, and needed data quality - what money and what resources? A plan that must be backed by their management.

By doing so, as trusted advisor you present them with opportunities and challenges, and help the organization on their path towards streamlining business processes. You move from 'simply doing IT / UN' to engaging in change management. 

[gis_KIWI4]

The way I think about it UN is more of capability/framework rather than a fixed model.
The model is flexible (within reason of course) and can be configured to the organization.
We create a custom simplified UN for our UN Implementation.
By simplified I mean - we don't use any Assemblies, we don't use any non-spatial objects, limited Asset Groups and Asset Types, only 3 tiers, No containments.

Selling the UN within our organization was easy. We are tied into the ESRI environment and with the impending demise of ArcMap, the only logical option was UN.
We sold the UN vision first and then worked with SMEs to detail the exact model. 

I must agree with what @Jens_Dalsgaard has said. It's always tempting to go for all the new shiny stuff.
When we were looking at rolling out UN we made a conscious effort of only focusing only on the essential capabilities we were trying to get out of our UN.
    Tracing a fully connected network
    Web capable applications
    a simplified model capable of storing all our assets, etc

We left behind Network Diagrams and anything else that was deemed non-essential. 

GIS systems usually tend to be deeply rooted into surrounding processes and have their own quirks. A migration to the UN must be matched with a robust change management process.

If you would like to discuss any specifics then I am sure community members can share experience and examples. 

All the best for your UN journey 🙂