Minimum Viable Governance for Enterprise Scale LiveOps
A streamlined governance framework that balances maintaining control and fostering agility.
Create a governance framework that is robust enough to ensure security, quality, and accountability for top-grossing titles while being flexible enough to adapt to the demands of enterprise-scale game services.
Minimum Viable Governance involves adhering to core principles designed to balance effective oversight with the need for agility and efficiency.
Implementation involves discovery, delivery of three key artefacts, addressing cultural constraints, and promoting transparency and collaboration.
You know that widely popular free game you play all the time? Maybe you even spend a few quids on it now and then. If that game is on or near the top-grossing charts, an enterprise-scale LiveOps team will likely be behind it. This team isn't just the art, design, and development folks creating the shiny new features. It includes a wide array of behind-the-scenes professionals, ensuring the game runs smoothly at scale.
Here are just a few teams:
Multiple feature teams/pods/squads/strike-teams
Product Management
Infrastructure
Security
Backend
Core Technology
CI/CD
App Delivery
Legal
Licensing
Outsourcing Procurement
Production
If you follow the value chain from concept to cash for any given feature, event, or content in that game, you'll see it likely intersect with every one of these teams at least once in its lifecycle. The complexities surrounding those collisions with the value stream necessitate governance for an effective enterprise-scale game title.
What is governance?
Governance in the context of a game service refers to the framework of policies, processes, and practices that guide and control a studio's activities to ensure alignment with its goals, compliance with regulations, and effective risk management. It involves establishing clear roles and responsibilities, setting standards, and monitoring performance to maintain accountability and transparency.
Regarding project management, governance ensures that new content, feature, events and platform updates are executed efficiently, resources are used effectively, and objectives are achieved within the defined scope, time, and budget constraints. It is the framework for making decisions regarding production oversight and defines the boundaries for team/pod self-organisation.Â
This post introduces and explores the concept of Minimum Viable Governance. This represents a streamlined approach to governance that focuses on maintaining the essential elements necessary for control and compliance without burdening the organisation with excessive bureaucracy. The goal is to create a governance framework that is robust enough to ensure security, quality, and accountability while being flexible enough to adapt to the rapidly changing landscape of enterprise-scale game services.
In this post, we will discuss the nuances of Minimum Viable Governance, how it differs from traditional governance models and why it is particularly suited for game services. We will set the context by examining the unique challenges game services face at an enterprise scale, such as the need for rapid iteration, protecting revenue, responsiveness to player feedback, and the ability to pivot quickly in a competitive market. While effective in specific contexts, traditional governance models often struggle to keep up with the pace of change in such an environment.
By implementing Minimum Viable Governance, organisations can balance maintaining control and fostering agility. We will discuss practical strategies for integrating Minimum Viable Governance into your existing processes, share real-world examples of successful implementation, and highlight the benefits of this approach. The aim is to provide game producers and studio leaders with the insights and tools needed to evolve their governance practices, ensuring they can deliver high-quality game features and events efficiently and effectively.
The need for governance in-game services
To ensure value delivery, compliance, security, and quality, governance is essential in enterprise-scale game services. However, managing governance in this context presents unique challenges. The systems and processes are often highly complex, requiring meticulous coordination and oversight. For example, a data input error can result in significant lost revenue for a top-grossing app. Teams are typically large and distributed across various locations, complicating communication and alignment. Furthermore, the industry demands rapid development cycles and frequent updates, which can strain traditional governance models and necessitate more agile approaches.
It's important to understand that those who manage governance and compliance are not trying to impose bureaucratic and unnecessary overhead on your service delivery. They aim to ensure a safe and controlled environment where your game can operate effectively. By working closely with these stakeholders, you can develop a governance approach that supports agility without compromising control and compliance.
Traditional project management governance
Traditional project management governance has long been the standard approach for managing complex projects, including those in the game services industry. It is characterised by structured methodologies designed to provide clear direction and control over project activities. Two of the most commonly used traditional governance models are the Waterfall and Stage-Gate processes.
The Waterfall model follows a linear and sequential approach, where each project phase must be completed before the next one begins. This method ensures thorough documentation and planning at every stage, leaving little room for ambiguity. Similarly, the Stage-Gate process breaks the project into distinct phases, separated by 'gates' or checkpoints. At each gate, the project's progress is evaluated, and decisions are made on whether to proceed, revise, or halt the project. This ensures rigorous oversight and a clear path forward.
One key benefit of traditional governance models is their structured approach. They provide clear milestones, which help track progress and manage risks effectively. Each phase or gate is a control point, allowing for detailed review and decision-making. This level of scrutiny helps identify potential issues early, mitigating risks before they escalate.
However, traditional project management governance is not without its drawbacks. The emphasis on rigorous documentation and checkpoints can lead to bureaucratic overhead. This bureaucracy often results in inflexibility, making it difficult to adapt to changes or new information that arises during game service update cadence. Additionally, the linear nature of these models can slow down the response time, as teams must wait for approvals at each stage before proceeding.
In a fast-paced industry like game services, where rapid iteration and adaptation are crucial, the slower response time of traditional governance models can be a significant disadvantage. While these models provide a high level of control, they can hinder the agility needed to respond promptly to market demands and player feedback. This is where a shift towards lean and adaptive governance approaches, such as Minimum Viable Governance, becomes beneficial and necessary.
Governance with an agile mindset
When thinking about governance in an agile, enterprise-scale environment, I am constantly reminded of the Manifesto for Half-Arsed Agile Software Development, which examines the original Agile Manifesto through the enterprise lens.
Individuals and interactions over processes and tools… and we have mandatory processes and tools to control how those individuals interact.
Working software over comprehensive documentation… as long as that software is comprehensively documented.
Customer collaboration over contract negotiation… within the boundaries of strict contracts, of course, and subject to rigorous change control.
Responding to change over following a plan… provided a detailed plan is in place to respond to the change, and it is followed precisely.
This reminded us that we must balance the value derived from agility with our fiduciary responsibility to the enterprise. To build governance with an agile mindset, it's crucial to continually evaluate and adapt your processes to ensure they align with agile principles and the enterprise's needs. These principles emphasise flexibility, collaboration, customer-centricity, and continuous improvement at scale.
Regularly asking critical questions ensures your governance framework supports these principles while maintaining control and compliance. This approach allows you to create a dynamic governance model that enhances agility without sacrificing structure.
Here are the key questions to guide this process:
Are we doing the right thing?
Are we doing it right?
Can we prove it?
Can we do all of this without delaying it?
1. Are we doing the right thing?
This question is about effectiveness and strategic alignment. It ensures that your efforts are directed towards activities that truly matter.
Goal Alignment: Are your tasks and projects aligned with the broader goals and objectives of your game team or studio? This ensures that your efforts contribute to the overall mission and vision.
Value Creation: Are your actions creating real value for your stakeholders? This includes players, employees, and shareholders. Focusing on activities that enhance satisfaction and drive business success is crucial.
Prioritisation: Are you prioritising the right tasks? Focusing on high-impact activities that deliver the most significant benefits rather than getting bogged down by less important tasks or indecision is essential.
2. Are we doing it right?
This question centres on efficiency and quality. It ensures that tasks are performed correctly, using the best methods and standards.
Best Practices: Are you following industry best practices and standards? Using proven methodologies can help ensure high-quality outcomes.
Process Adherence: Are you adhering to established processes and protocols? Consistency in following processes helps in achieving predictable and reliable results.
Skill and Competence: Do you have the necessary skills and knowledge to perform the tasks correctly? Continuous learning and development are vital to maintaining competence.
3. Can we prove it?
This question highlights the importance of data and evidence. It ensures that you can validate your actions and results.
Measurement and Metrics: Are you using appropriate metrics to measure performance and outcomes? Quantitative data is essential for assessing effectiveness and efficiency.
Documentation: Are you keeping accurate records of your processes and outcomes? Documentation provides a trail that can be audited and reviewed.
Feedback and Review: Are you incorporating feedback and conducting regular reviews? This helps in validating your processes and outcomes, ensuring continuous improvement.
4. Can you do all of this without delaying it?
This question addresses timeliness and agility. It ensures that processes and improvements do not cause unnecessary delays.
Efficiency: Are your processes streamlined to avoid waste and reduce delays? Efficiency in operations helps in delivering faster results.
Flexibility: Can you adapt quickly to changes without causing significant delays? Flexibility and agility in your processes help you respond promptly to new challenges and opportunities.
Resource Management: Are you managing your resources effectively to avoid bottlenecks? Proper resource allocation and utilisation ensure smooth and timely operations.
Critical Principles of Minimum Viable Governance
Implementing Minimum Viable Governance involves adhering to core principles designed to balance effective oversight with the need for agility and efficiency. These principles ensure that governance frameworks remain robust yet flexible, supporting teams in delivering high-quality work without unnecessary burdens. Minimum Viable Governance provides a streamlined approach to governance that aligns with the dynamic nature of enterprise-scale game services by focusing on simplicity, flexibility, transparency, value, and empowerment. Below, we explore these fundamental principles to understand how they contribute to a successful Minimum Viable Governance implementation.
Simplicity: Implement only the necessary governance processes to meet essential requirements, avoiding overcomplicating procedures and documentation. Focus on lightweight frameworks that provide clarity without burdening the team.
Flexibility: Ensure governance processes can adapt to changing circumstances, allowing teams the autonomy to make decisions within a framework of minimal guidelines. Encourage iterative improvements to governance practices to maintain relevance and effectiveness.
Transparency: Make governance policies clear and accessible to everyone in the organisation, encouraging open communication about governance requirements and changes. Ensure that decision-making processes are visible and understandable to foster trust and accountability.
Value Focus: Align governance activities with the organisation’s goals and values, prioritising tasks that directly contribute to business value and risk mitigation. Regularly review and eliminate non-value-adding governance activities to maintain efficiency.
Empowerment: Empower teams to take ownership of governance within their scope, encouraging self-governance and accountability at all levels. Provide the necessary tools and training to support effective governance and ensure teams can uphold standards independently.
Why Minimum Viable Governance is Essential for LiveOps
The need for streamlined and adaptive governance has never been greater in-game services, particularly within LiveOps. Traditional practices and artefacts from the development phase often linger, creating a tendency to adhere to outdated methods rather than evolving to meet the current demands of enterprise-scale LiveOps. This can hinder efficiency and responsiveness, critical components for success.
For top-grossing games, the stakes are incredibly high, with substantial revenue and, in some cases, valuable licensed products on the line. Even a simple mistake can result in service disruptions costing millions. Effective governance is critical in such an environment to prevent costly errors and ensure smooth operations.
Implementing Minimum Viable Governance can significantly enhance the efficiency of developing new features, events, or content, reducing cycle times and accelerating revenue generation. It also lowers costs by increasing operational effectiveness and efficiently using resources. Additionally, a well-structured governance framework contributes to team satisfaction and health, reducing the risk of employee turnover. Minimum Viable Governance supports a more agile, responsive, and resilient game service operation.
The demarcation between self-organising teams and Minimum Viable Governance
A fundamental tenet across the spectrum of Agile methodologies and frameworks is the need for teams to be self-organising. This principle empowers teams to make decisions, adapt quickly to changes, and innovate without being bogged down by unnecessary oversight. However, in an enterprise-scale LiveOps environment, the balance between self-organisation and governance becomes critical.
While self-organising teams thrive on autonomy and flexibility, there must be a clear line where governance begins and ends. This demarcation ensures that while teams can operate and make swift decisions, they do so within a framework that maintains overall control, compliance, and alignment with organisational goals.
If production governance does not clearly define the boundaries for self-organising teams, team members may lack a clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities. This can result in confusion, duplication of effort, or even missed tasks. Without well-defined governance, disagreements or conflicts over authority and decision-making power may arise, causing delays, lowering morale, and reducing team cohesion. Additionally, communication can become challenging, leading to misunderstandings, delays, and rework.
Minimum Viable Governance draws that line in the sand. It establishes essential policies, processes, and controls that safeguard the game service’s integrity and quality without stifling the teams' agility. Minimum Viable Governance sets the boundaries within which teams can self-organise, ensuring that their actions contribute to the broader mission and vision of the organisation.
Implementing Minimum Viable Governance
Implementing Minimum Viable Governance requires careful planning and strategic execution. It involves creating and utilising three key artefacts: the Minimum Viable Governance Canvas, the Governance Compliance Checklist, and the Governance Process Statement. These artefacts provide a structured yet flexible framework that ensures effective governance without hindering agility and innovation.
The process begins with a discovery phase, identifying the products, teams, and systems that need governance. This step is crucial for pinpointing stakeholders and defining governance requirements, laying a solid foundation for the governance framework.
Implementing Minimum Viable Governance starts with identifying the products, teams, and systems that will be governed. This foundational step helps pinpoint stakeholders and define the governance requirements. Understanding which aspects of your enterprise require oversight is crucial to establishing an effective governance framework.
Identifying essential governance requirements can be done colabrativly using a Minimum Viable Governance Canvas. This tool helps outline the critical elements necessary for governance without overcomplicating processes. Conduct a Minimum Viable Governance Canvas Canvas workshop with stakeholders to develop the governance framework collectively. Engaging stakeholders ensures that all relevant perspectives are considered, making the governance framework robust and inclusive.
Using online whiteboards like Miro can be very effective for these workshops. They offer a flexible and collaborative space for stakeholders to contribute. However, starting with a physical whiteboard and post-it notes can foster inclusivity and productivity, providing a tangible way for everyone to participate. Once the canvas is created, it’s essential to share it with all stakeholders and establish a process for updating it as it becomes a key conference artefact.
Here’s an example of a Minimum Viable Governance Canvas. You can create one using any free Business Model Canvas templates available online. This template will help structure your governance framework, ensuring all necessary aspects are covered while maintaining simplicity and clarity.
Establishing clear governance objectives ensures your framework aligns with the organisation's mission and vision. By defining the main goals, you set a direction for all governance activities, ensuring they contribute to the broader organisational purpose. Below are the key outcomes you aim to achieve, such as compliance, security, quality, and risk management, which are essential for effective governance.
Governance Focus: It is crucial to delineate the scope of your governance framework by specifying the products, teams, and systems that will be governed. This clarity helps in setting boundaries and focus areas. Additionally, explicitly stating exclusions prevents ambiguity and ensures everyone understands what falls outside the governance framework.
Key Processes: Defining the core processes necessary for governance is vital for achieving your objectives. This includes outlining the essential steps in your feature and content development lifecycle, understanding the decision-making process, and determining who is responsible for making decisions. Additionally, specifying the minimal documentation required helps balance thoroughness and efficiency. It’s important to demarcate areas where teams have autonomy versus where governance oversight is necessary, promoting a healthy balance of control and flexibility. Continuous improvement processes ensure that governance practices evolve based on feedback and performance metrics.
Stakeholders: Identifying stakeholders is a crucial aspect of governance. Internal stakeholders, such as team members, project managers, and executives, play a direct role in governance activities. External stakeholders, including regulators, customers, and partners, are interested in the governance framework and its outcomes.
Metrics and KPIs: Define performance metrics and key performance indicators (KPIs) to measure the effectiveness of your governance practices. Establishing processes for monitoring and reporting these metrics is essential to providing insights into governance performance and ensuring accountability to relevant stakeholders.
Essential Requirements: Governance must address several critical requirements, including compliance, security, and legal standards. Identifying compliance needs ensures adherence to regulatory and industry standards. Clarifying service level expectations sets the standard for service delivery. Outlining necessary security protocols protects organisational assets, while legal compliance ensures all practices adhere to relevant laws. Additionally, platform-specific requirements must be detailed to address any unique game distribution or technology stack needs.
Roles and Responsibilities: Defining specific governance roles within the organisation, such as governance leads, compliance officers, and risk managers, is essential for clarity and accountability. Clearly outlining the responsibilities associated with each role ensures that everyone understands their part in the governance framework.
Communication: Effective communication is critical for governance. Specify the channels through which governance policies, updates, and decisions will be communicated. Detail the process for status reporting on governance activities and compliance, ensuring regular and transparent updates. Maintaining transparency in governance processes and decisions helps build trust and accountability among all stakeholders.
Risk Management: Risk management is a critical component of governance. Describe how risks will be identified, their potential impact assessed, and the likelihood of occurrence determined. Outline strategies for responding to identified risks, including mitigation, acceptance, transfer, and avoidance. Identify risk managers and owners responsible for managing specific risks and coordinating efforts to mitigate and manage them. See Agile Risk Management in the Game Studio for more on this topic.
Once all your stakeholders have signed off on the Minimum Viable Governance Canvas, implement version control and share the canvas with the team affected by the governance framework. This ensures that everyone can access the latest version and refer to it as needed.
The key to success is maintaining continuous engagement and regular updates to keep the governance model relevant and effective. Regular reviews and feedback sessions can help ensure the governance framework evolves with the organisation's needs.
Governance Compliance Checklist
The second essential Minimum Viable Governance artefact is a simple checklist table. This Governance Compliance Checklist enumerates the various vital processes from the Viable Governance Canvas. It includes additional details such as compliance status, the last validation date, and hyperlinks to relevant resources like Wikis, Jira/Confluence, reports, and shared documents. This document should also be shared with stakeholders and serve as the central source of truth for tracking compliance. All team members can stay informed and aligned with the governance requirements by having this readily available.
Governance Process Statement
The final artefact is the Governance Process Statement. It’s crucial to define a clear process for their administration to ensure these artefacts remain effective. Specify who will be responsible for maintaining and updating the documents, how performance will be measured, and establish a regular cadence for stakeholder reviews.
Below is an example statement:
Governance Process Statement
Purpose
The Governance Process Statement ensures that the governance framework remains effective, relevant, and aligned with the organisation's evolving needs. This statement outlines responsibilities, performance measurement, and the process for maintaining and updating governance artefacts.
Responsibilities
Governance Lead
Role: The Governance Lead is responsible for overseeing the entire governance process.
Duties: Ensure that governance artefacts are current, coordinate with stakeholders for regular reviews, and address any issues related to governance practices.
Document Custodian
Role: The Document Custodian maintains and updates the governance documents.
Duties: Update the Minimum Viable Governance Canvas and the checklist regularly, ensure all changes are documented, and manage version control.
Stakeholders
Role: Stakeholders include internal team members and external partners with a vested interest in governance.
Duties: Provide feedback during reviews, ensure compliance with governance processes, and support continuous improvement efforts.
Performance Measurement
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
Compliance Rate: Measure the percentage of compliance with established governance processes.
Update Frequency: Track how often governance documents are reviewed and updated.
Stakeholder Engagement: Measure the level of stakeholder participation and feedback during reviews.
Review Cadence
Monthly Reviews: Conduct reviews of governance artefacts to ensure they are current and reflect any changes in the organisation or external environment.
Quarterly Performance Assessments: Quarterly, evaluate the effectiveness of the governance framework using the KPIs to identify areas for improvement.
Feedback Mechanism
Surveys and Meetings: Regularly collect stakeholder feedback through surveys and meetings to understand their concerns and suggestions.
Continuous Improvement Loop: Incorporate feedback into the governance framework to make iterative improvements.
Process for Maintaining and Updating Documents
Version Control
Implement a version control system to manage changes to governance documents. Each update should be logged with a version number, date, and description of changes.
Documentation
Maintain a change log that records all updates to the governance artefacts. This log should be accessible to all stakeholders.
Review and Approval
Before they are finalised, all updates to governance documents must be reviewed and approved by the Governance Lead and key stakeholders.
Communication
Ensure that all changes to governance documents are communicated to the relevant teams and stakeholders promptly. Use established communication channels to distribute updated documents and highlight significant changes.
This structured approach will help ensure continuous alignment, transparency, and accountability, fostering a dynamic governance framework that can adapt and improve over time. Regular performance metrics and periodic reviews will keep the governance practices relevant and aligned with the organisation's evolving needs.
Implementation and administration constraints
When Implementing governance, you may encounter significant cultural constraints that hinder its success. One major challenge is resistance to change, common in organisations accustomed to established working methods. Employees and teams may feel threatened by new governance structures, fearing that these changes will disrupt their familiar routines or add unnecessary bureaucracy.
Organisational silos are another cultural barrier. Different departments or teams might operate in isolation, leading to a lack of collaboration and communication. These silos can make it challenging to implement a cohesive governance framework that requires cross-functional alignment and cooperation.
Hierarchical structures within the organisation can also impede governance efforts. In rigidly hierarchical settings, decision-making processes are slow, and there is often a reluctance to share authority or delegate responsibilities. This can conflict with the more collaborative and transparent governance practices necessary for effective management and agility.
A lack of trust and transparency further complicates the implementation of governance. If team members do not trust the intentions behind governance initiatives or feel that the processes are opaque, they are less likely to engage positively. Building a culture of trust where transparency is valued is essential for governance to be accepted and effective.
Fear of failure or accountability can also pose a significant constraint. In environments where mistakes are harshly penalised, employees might be reluctant to take risks or fully engage with new governance practices. This fear can stifle innovation and hinder the open communication needed for governance frameworks to be successful.
Lastly, limited data-driven decision-making practices can be a substantial obstacle. Effective governance relies on accurate and timely data to inform decisions and monitor compliance. Governance implementation will likely suffer if an organisation lacks the infrastructure or culture to support data-driven approaches. Promoting a shift towards valuing and utilising data in decision-making is crucial for overcoming this constraint.
Addressing these cultural constraints requires a thoughtful approach that builds trust, encourages collaboration, promotes transparency, and fosters a data-driven mindset throughout the organisation.
Strategies for Success
Achieving success with Minimum Viable Governance requires a commitment to continuous evaluation and improvement. Regularly assess the effectiveness of your governance framework, seeking feedback from stakeholders and using performance metrics to identify areas for enhancement. This iterative process ensures that governance practices evolve in response to changing needs and challenges, maintaining their relevance and impact.
Another critical strategy is ensuring buy-in from all stakeholders. Engaging stakeholders from the outset and involving them in developing and refining governance artefacts fosters a sense of ownership and commitment. When stakeholders understand the value of governance and feel their input is valued, they are more likely to support and adhere to governance processes, enhancing overall compliance and effectiveness.
Balancing flexibility with control is also essential for successful Minimum Viable Governance implementation. While governance frameworks must provide clear guidelines and standards, they should also allow flexibility to accommodate the dynamic nature of enterprise-scale game services. Strive to create governance processes robust enough to ensure control and compliance but agile enough to enable teams to respond quickly to changes and innovate effectively. This balance is crucial for fostering an environment where governance supports rather than hinders operational agility and creativity.
Conclusion
The irony is not lost on me that I just wrote almost 5,000 words on a lightweight governance approach. However, this depth of discussion underscores the importance and complexity of implementing Minimum Viable Governance effectively. While it aims to simplify and streamline governance, its foundation must be robust enough to ensure that all critical aspects are addressed without adding unnecessary bureaucracy.
In summary, successful implementation of Minimum Viable Governance involves careful planning, stakeholder engagement, and continuous improvement. By balancing control with agility, game services can deliver high-quality features and events efficiently and effectively, maintaining security and accountability in a competitive market.