09-07-2018 The Sweeping Change of Technology Upgrading in JPMChase
I was surprised when I heard the saying has been that nobody knows what I did in JPMChase. I never explained myself to anyone because I thought everyone already knows. The change already happened successfully and my role in this successful change was never denied by anyone from Lowell technology center of JPM Chase, and it is unimaginable that any organizational change can be made so successfully without the entire management knew what needed to change and how to change cascadingly, and change has been replicated throughout the entire U.S. banking industry. Of course, can you imagine any technology executives in the banking industry to have a good night sleep when I was screaming with anxiety "the internet banking-access is a green passage."
The day I stepped into JPM Chase Lowell technology center was July 1st of 2004, the massive firm-wide technology upgrading started only a year later in Mid of 2005, it had been every weekend that there was some major upgrade went online and at the backend offices, how could all these be achieved without the massive managerial efforts?
Following is updated from my school blackboard post of the MBA503 Leading organizational change:
Exactly, what had I contributed to this change as a computer QA contractor in JPM Chase?
I alerted the management my concern about banking technology and illustrated my vision of the banking industry in the digital era.
To lead the change, I addressed all these status quo-es I listed in the table to specify what content needed to be included in the standard business requirement for technology people to understand the business objectives for technology projects, and promoted the tech-spec standard should be a shared standard between QA and development as the one and only tech-standard, etc. I had been guided by the management to input my knowledge into JPM Chase's existing best practices, through a series of conflicts between QAs, business interpreters, and developers' group in projects which made me known for confrontational and stubborn.
How was I technically capable to lead this change?
My personal experience from the change: "QAs and programmers with years' practicing experiences in the technology department were all supportive of changes. They were the group understood what I was changing before the changes in the requirements were clear. It was a sweeping change everywhere in JPM Chase with their enormous support, great changing experience."
How did the change happen in JPM Chase?
The planned change proposed in mid of 2004 was to change the existing situation of " Business units take-in whatever technology support unit can give", to upgrade the technology to make the software or applications to be designed & developed exactly as requested by the business units.
I was surprised when I heard the saying has been that nobody knows what I did in JPMChase. I never explained myself to anyone because I thought everyone already knows. The change already happened successfully and my role in this successful change was never denied by anyone from Lowell technology center of JPM Chase, and it is unimaginable that any organizational change can be made so successfully without the entire management knew what needed to change and how to change cascadingly, and change has been replicated throughout the entire U.S. banking industry. Of course, can you imagine any technology executives in the banking industry to have a good night sleep when I was screaming with anxiety "the internet banking-access is a green passage."
The day I stepped into JPM Chase Lowell technology center was July 1st of 2004, the massive firm-wide technology upgrading started only a year later in Mid of 2005, it had been every weekend that there was some major upgrade went online and at the backend offices, how could all these be achieved without the massive managerial efforts?
Following is updated from my school blackboard post of the MBA503 Leading organizational change:
Exactly, what had I contributed to this change as a computer QA contractor in JPM Chase?
I alerted the management my concern about banking technology and illustrated my vision of the banking industry in the digital era.
To lead the change, I addressed all these status quo-es I listed in the table to specify what content needed to be included in the standard business requirement for technology people to understand the business objectives for technology projects, and promoted the tech-spec standard should be a shared standard between QA and development as the one and only tech-standard, etc. I had been guided by the management to input my knowledge into JPM Chase's existing best practices, through a series of conflicts between QAs, business interpreters, and developers' group in projects which made me known for confrontational and stubborn.
How was I technically capable to lead this change?
The Window login replacement project made me a top-notch security personnel in the computer technology system as well as a full-project independent research programmer. I independently achieved prototypes of window login replacement Gina(client)/LSA(server) module, secure data transmission module, LDAP database module as well as helping functions such as admin tool and installer, etc. We only had a total of seven computer-major personnel in that company which included a research director, three programmers in this project, another three full-time in consulting (one had been in San Francisco who only visited the office during yearly holiday seasons).
Also, it is from my work experience in the pharmaceutical industry, I had learned the QA's great importance in every step of the production which even includes the facilities' designing to hosting the manufacturing.
Also, it is from my work experience in the pharmaceutical industry, I had learned the QA's great importance in every step of the production which even includes the facilities' designing to hosting the manufacturing.
My personal experience from the change: "QAs and programmers with years' practicing experiences in the technology department were all supportive of changes. They were the group understood what I was changing before the changes in the requirements were clear. It was a sweeping change everywhere in JPM Chase with their enormous support, great changing experience."
How did the change happen in JPM Chase?
The planned change proposed in mid of 2004 was to change the existing situation of " Business units take-in whatever technology support unit can give", to upgrade the technology to make the software or applications to be designed & developed exactly as requested by the business units.
This change plan was overwhelmingly supported by all JPM Chase's business units who had been so fed up with "technology person tells us what we should do about our business through computers". I remembered how technology units across all JPM Chase business lines got affluent funding to upgrade the human resources as well as the computers and related, and how it had been like when there was at least one application successfully upgraded to best serve the business needs each weekend since 2006 (should be mid of 2005).
The resisting forces were the status quo that technology developing group so got used to telling the business as well as the technical quality assurance group "we already gave the best we can do, what else do you want from us?" or technology groups were complaining "we are the computer person, not a financier, what exactly the business is requesting?", etc. Also, the realistic limits that certain business great requests just can't be achieved by existing known technology as I listed in the above table.
The shift of the equilibrium started after the Business Request was standardized by the Business-technology interpreters, which was followed by the standardizing of the technical specification shared between software(application) developing group and software(application) quality assurance group. With this two major upgrades, the human resource upgrading to enhance the quality assurance team achieved equilibrium change of "What Business requested can be achieved and should be developed exactly as requested." It had been my great experience to be the technological-leader to promote and to watch all these amazing changes.
Another Note:
I was labeled "never a research type person". It is true that I am not the person enjoy endless devoted hours in a laboratory or in office for the passion of discovery, I am the person just do my job finishing assignment. When I started my research job, my research director was about to retire, I was a commuter planned to get my green card at suburb and to find a better-paid job in New York City, all of our research team was punctual-minute in at 8:30AM or equivalent and right-out at 5 PM sharp. If any guys stayed-in, that was only because they have nothing else to do that day. This was our group and our project-ing style was "tell me what you want, I take a look and do it".
I was labeled "never a research type person". It is true that I am not the person enjoy endless devoted hours in a laboratory or in office for the passion of discovery, I am the person just do my job finishing assignment. When I started my research job, my research director was about to retire, I was a commuter planned to get my green card at suburb and to find a better-paid job in New York City, all of our research team was punctual-minute in at 8:30AM or equivalent and right-out at 5 PM sharp. If any guys stayed-in, that was only because they have nothing else to do that day. This was our group and our project-ing style was "tell me what you want, I take a look and do it".
The boss wanted us to have a project to elevate our computer & security software consulting company, so the IBM well-experienced research director gave us this "impossible project" to expect 3 full-time programmers and 2 full-time helping consulting person to replace Microsoft Window password login, this was a project achievable to his understanding and really suited our boss' ambition. I was the person asking "what do you want from me? I can devote my 8-hours on it here", the guys were all saying "we want the best, super cool technology, I do what I can but I don't have a lot of time for it". So, we achieved this window logon project in 3 years time with 40-hours per week work-on-assignment style.
This was the technology-change I led in JPM Chase's technology upgrading. It was not about how innovative the computer technology can be, it was about how creative the computer technology can be when doing a project on-assignment: "tell us what your business unit need from us technology unit, we will achieve it in our 40-hours per week working time here as in-house project".
----Sept 7th, 2018
Explanation for some confusions:
Explanation for some confusions:
The rumored confusion from that fact I did not do anything related to improve the banking industry's computer security but all these nobody-needed changes and related confusion that these upgrading made malicious efforts can be customer-ordered.
My answer to this type of confusion is: Banking industry has tons of talented people experienced enough on facilities security that if all these specialty knowledge can be helped by those computer technology upgrading to be applicable on virtue banking facility (internet banking) as well, I am and I was too green to do more on securing the banking industry's information system facility.
My answer to the related confusion is: the same also applies to anti-malicious efforts.
----October 31st, 2018