The job of an IT Project Manager is a difficult one and traditional approaches to governance tended to make it even more difficult. In the best of times, these approaches employ Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) as an impediment to project teams; in the worst of times, they set IV&V up as judge, jury, and executioner for projects.

But just because that’s the way things are often done doesn’t make it right. Oversight entities can be healthy enablers instead of adversarial obstacles.

Traditionally, the role of a governance framework is to enumerate statutory requirements, promote best practices, and reduce risk. The purpose of an IV&V team within this world is to ensure that appropriate elements of the framework are followed so as to mitigate risk. Larger projects typically present greater risks and require more controls; smaller projects less so.

The big challenge has always been in defining what is required for a given project.

Project sponsors want working solutions. The CFO wants tight budgets and lower costs. Project teams want happy sponsors. These stakeholders often oppose IV&V because the cost/benefit case for everything it promotes can be difficult to justify in comparison to business needs. Also, when these stakeholders do not pay directly for development costs they can have a very high tolerance for risk – but that’s an issue for another day.

What if we re-frame IV&V from risk mitigation to added value?

• What if, instead of requiring reams of documentation, IV&V identifies information it needs in the tools and processes already in use?
• What if, instead of forcing teams to follow so-called best practices in cookie-cutter fashion, IV&V provided the metrics and data they need to take specific action when it is most effective?
• What if, instead of reciting regulations to teams, IV&V worked hand-in-hand help teams meet them in the most efficient ways possible?
• What if, instead of looking for defects, IV&V asked teams how it could help and then provided the specific support they need, where and when they need it most?
• What if IV&V helped to onboard new teams and train them in specific skills and resources they will need to succeed?
• What if IV&V assessed team needs as they worked together and then developed training courses to address those needs?
• What if IV&V built project dashboards to present useful information from development tools that helped teams surface problems quickly?
• What if these and other steps help project teams deliver value while meeting regulations, reducing risk, trimming costs, and increasing quality all around?

What if? There is no what if. This works. It really does.

These are just some of the innovative governance strategies that our IV&V team at USCIS has employed and it has made all the difference.

Let us tell you more about them…

Creating systems that accommodate users with disabilities is a requirement of all federal agencies, as indicated by the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 508. But, it’s not just a federal concern, but instead a challenge for all organizations that seek an inclusive experience for their customers, patrons, or constituents. In the process of moving to agile development models, often times accessibility testing can be forgotten or overlooked. This can result in non-compliant code being pushed to production and a remediation plan that batches Section 508 fixes in a later release. This creates a frustrating experience for users who need accessibility features to access content and complete functions. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services recognized this problem early. They have been taking a multi-pronged approach to ensure their systems provide a high quality user experience for everyone. Come hear about some of their methods.