Hello Community,
Following my previous posts on the **Centricity–Autonomy dual-axis framework**, I would like to share an initial *applied assessment case* and ask for your expert feedback.
I recently used the model to evaluate the 2026 transformation action programs and selected new governance documents of VNPT Net.
The objective was not to validate strategy itself, but to test whether the framework can support:
• strategic alignment checking
• governance consistency checking
• architecture readiness assessment
The result was visualized as a centricity radar chart derived from structured scoring of transformation initiatives and operating governance elements.
---
1. What data was assessed
The scoring was based on:
• 5 transformation action programs for 2026
• new operational governance and data governance regulations
• organizational and operating model orientation
These were evaluated across centricity dimensions such as network, service, customer, value, governance, and data platform.
---
2. Key insights revealed by the assessment
Two findings stood out clearly:
a. Network operations have not yet structurally shifted toward service-centric operation**
Transformation initiatives include strong digitalization and operational improvement components.
However, decision logic, control structure, and operational focus still appear predominantly network-centric rather than service-centric.
In other words, service orientation is present at the strategic and experience layer, but not yet fully embedded in operational control architecture.
b. The data platform is currently institutional rather than operational**
A formal data governance and data platform structure exists at regulatory and policy level.
However, based on the assessed materials, the data platform does not yet appear fully embedded as an active operational backbone for decision loops, automation, or cross-domain coordination.
This creates a visible structural gap between governance intent and operational enablement.
---
3. Why this matters (from the framework perspective)
The Centricity–Autonomy model suggests that:
• centricity shift requires corresponding control architecture change
• autonomy requires executable data infrastructure, not only governance definition
The radar makes these structural gaps visible in a way that was not obvious when reviewing the transformation programs individually.
---
4. What I would greatly appreciate feedback on
This is still an experimental application, and I would value expert input on two aspects:
a. Scoring method
• Does structured document-based scoring provide a meaningful proxy for operational centricity?
• What risks or biases should be considered?
• How would you strengthen assessment reliability?
b. Dimension design
• Are the centricity dimensions sufficiently complete?
• Are governance and data platform correctly treated as distinct structural centricity domains?
• What dimensions would you add, merge, or redefine?
---
Centricity radar derived from structured assessment of 2026 transformation programs and governance documents of VNPT Net.
The chart visualizes relative centricity strength across key operational and architectural domains.
It highlights uneven centricity progression, with service-oriented operation not yet structurally embedded and the data platform primarily defined at governance level rather than fully operationalized.
If useful, I am happy to share the radar visualization and the assessment logic in more detail.
Thank you in advance for your insights. I am particularly interested in perspectives from practitioners working on operational architecture, ODA implementation, and autonomy transition within TM Forum environments.
#DigitalTransformationMaturity
------------------------------
Ngoc Linh Nguyen
Vietnam Posts and Telecommunications Group (VNPT)
------------------------------