OAV Maturity Model Assessment

Why should I do this survey?

What are the steps that should be taken to ensure that your organisation has embraced orchestration, automation and virtualisation? How would you rank your organisation regarding its current accomplishments in these areas? Have you considered all technological and organisational aspects while transitioning to OAV?

The answers to these questions can be obtained by completing this survey that provides a maturity assessment of your organisation's current progress in the use of OAV. Your responses will be analysed and the report sent to the email address you provide.

The OAV maturity assessment will help identify the areas needed to put more effort in to achieve an efficient and scalable OAV implementation that is aligned with the overall strategy and supported by the development and operations teams. You will also be able to compare your maturity stage against the average maturity of the community (based on the other completed surveys).

For more information about the OAV Maturity Model please visit [https://wiki.geant.org/display/NETDEV/OAV+Maturity+Model] or contact oav@lists.geant.org.

Survey results

The OAV Maturity assessment results based on the answers to this survey will be sent to the contact email provided after the survey has been submitted.

The detailed report of the assessment will be sent only to the provided email address and will not as a whole be shared publicly. Only general, anonymised overall statistics will be published.

Data privacy

Any personal data (your name, role and contact details) provided would be used only for the purpose of this survey data gathering and analysis on the basis of your consent which will be provided upon your fulfilment of the aforementioned data and will not be disclosed outside of the team working on the OAV Maturity Model in the project in any part of the process. The data controller of your data is GÉANT Association and you can find GÉANT's privacy notice here: https://www.geant.org/privacy-notice/Pages/GEANT-Privacy-Notice.aspx.

Question Title

* 1. Please enter the name of your organisation

Question Title

* 2. Choose the option that best describes your organisation

NREN

University

Computing Centre

Research Institution

Other (please specify)

Question Title

* 3. Please enter your name and role (person or persons completing the survey)

Question Title

* 4. Please provide a contact email to which the final report will be sent

Question Title

* 5. How would you describe the level of integration of the components that are used in your operating and business support systems (O/BSS) environment?

Totally independent - Different services and types of devices are managed independently using vendor-issued or service/device specific tools. This creates some functional and data overlaps between our components.

Very little integration - We use or refer to data from one component in other components, but this type of integration is on a small scale and there are only a few examples.

Limited to specific use cases - For certain projects or use cases all of the used components can easily exchange information and data duplication is avoided. We strive to use vendor-neutral approaches.

Basic integration level - All our components have well defined functions and data ownership (single source of truth). They are used to manage all services and devices. We don’t have any siloed solutions.

Advanced integration level - All our components can be used as services and are described in a specialised service catalogue. All of our functional components can be flexibly used just like puzzle pieces, complex operations are implemented using an orchestrator.

Federated integration - We support on-the-fly discovery of relevant information stored in federated catalogues and inventories. All of our components are easily discoverable by internal and external parties supporting intelligent self-discovery when in need of specific functionality.

Question Title

* 6. What is your organisation’s approach to APIs (Application Programming Interfaces):

No APIs exposed - Many of our components do not expose APIs at all; only readily available GUIs and exporting/importing facilities are in place.

Only for simple tasks - We use some existing APIs for small automated tasks. Available APIs may be of different nature (REST, SOAP, etc.).

Starting to use APIs - Our organisation is becoming aware that a standardised approach (like a common API definition guide) is needed and we are performing an API analysis for the components; in some cases we may need to develop additional APIs or API extensions/wrappers for certain components to facilitate automation and data exchange.

Used inside the organisation - All our components are exposing standardised (preferably open) APIs that are based on a common data model and support southbound and northbound workflows.

Used inside and outside the organisation - We use standardised open East-West API specifications when interacting with customers and partner organisations. The access control and accountability is achieved via an API gateway that redirects the calls to our internal APIs.

Dynamic APIs - We use adaptive APIs that are semantically interoperable, supporting programmable dynamic interfaces and fully automated API contract changes negotiation with dynamic systems mapping; machine-to-machine communication is fully supported.

Question Title

* 7. What is your organisation’s current status regarding compatibility and interoperability?

Not considering it - Compatibility between our tools or management components is not a requirement, nor is it being investigated in our organisation at the moment.

Starting to think about it - We do experience some compatibility issues, which are solved using workarounds. This experience has made us wary when considering new hardware and software purchases.

Some work done - As we work on automating the processes in our organisation, compatibility and interoperability issues between the involved components, along with the use of common models and data duplication issues, are being addressed in a consistent manner.

Solved within the organisation - All components and tools that are used to run processes are fully compatible and interoperable using standard approaches and models.

Solved within and outside the organisation - Our organisation can collaborate with other partners and easily exchange information in a standardised automated fashion .

Adaptive approach - Our organisation can establish interoperability agreements with a selected partner on-the-fly, intelligently adapting the communication channel between the organisations supporting new technologies such as smart contracts

Question Title

* 8. To what extent does your organisation take advantage of the use of virtualisation technologies?

Minimal use of virtualisation - The use of virtualisation technology in our organisation is minimal. We may have some VPNs in place, a few proprietary vertically integrated boxes available in our network, or individually managed VMs hosting a few services.

Standalone virtualized deployments - We are aware of the need to choose common virtualisation platforms. We have a number of isolated virtual deployments of standalone VMs, containers and/or VNFs.

Basic virtualisation environment - We support multi-vendor VNFs and horizontal scalability of virtual objects. Some of our services are transferred to virtual based hosting.

Intermediate-level virtualisation environment - Our physical and virtual components are interoperable and hybrid services can be implemented. Network function chaining is fully operational in our network.

Fully virtualised environment - We have a common virtual layer that provides a complete e2e network visibility overarching different technologies and implementation. Our organisation has a fully virtualised environment with auto-scaling support: desktop, application, network, storage, and data virtualisation.

Federation with other virtualised environments - A common virtualisation layer transcends our organisation’s domain and federates with other virtual infrastructures that belong to partner organisations in a fully transparent manner using next-gen virtualisation technologies.

Question Title

* 9. How would you describe the security architecture of your organisation?

Manual and independent configuration - We use manual configuration of our security tools and focus mostly on network security.

Centralised data storage - We have a centralised location where we store and analyse log data and security events from different devices. Our security efforts are focused on both network and endpoints.

Automatic centralised configuration and analysis - We have a centralised system for logs and security events. We use automation when configuring security tools and enforcing policies. We perform forensics analysis of past incidents for the network and servers.

AI-based centralised configuration and analysis - We have an automatically configured centralised security architecture based on threat and risk assessment. We perform security analytics with event correlation as well as complete forensics when necessary.

AI-based decentralised architecture - We have a decentralised security architecture in place with distributed security devices and advanced machine analytics that enables proactive security behaviour.

Advanced self-configurable architecture - We have an advanced decentralised security architecture that supports advanced analytics based on indicators of attack (IOA) using AI/ML and federated learning. Our security equipment setup is self-configurable.

Question Title

* 10. How would you describe modelling of services and resources in your organisation?

No standard models - We have no standard specifications or abstract models of resources/objects of interest (services, devices, metrics, etc.). If any, we use the models provided in our tools with very little or no customisation.

Separate data models - We use several data models for some of our components as needed using a flat design for resources and services.

Common modular object modelling - Our organisation has adopted a common approach to object modelling based on modularity. We are investigating the benefits of introducing hierarchy and additional abstraction layers in our models.

Common standardised data modelling - We have a fully functional standardised data model that can be used to describe physical and logical objects and their relationships.

Modular and multi-layered data modelling - New objects can be easily constructed using fine grained modules that we have defined. We also support module hierarchy and multi-layered abstractions.

Dynamic and self-optimised data modelling - Our data model is flexible and organic. Its definition can be dynamically learned and self-optimised by our intelligent system components.

Question Title

* 11. What type of analysis/analytics do you perform in your organisation?

No specific analytics tools - We have no specific analytics tools in use. We only use what is readily available in our standard off the shelf monitoring/reporting tools.

Basic analytics - We perform only basic analysis on historical data gathered from different sources.

Advanced statistical analytics - We are able to do more advanced statistical data analysis and get information on the past and current status and performances of the network

Automated root cause analytics - Our organisation supports automated root cause analysis. We are able to perform deep analytics and understand why something is happening. Our analytics process includes data discovery, data mining, drilling down and drilling through.

Predictive analytics - We use the historical data to train learning models that are used to analyse trends and patterns. Thus we are able to get predictions based on real time data.

Analytics for automated decision making - We have smart engines that can make decisions by analysing what actions are the best choice that will lead to the desired outcomes.

Question Title

* 12. How is AI applied to decision making across your organisation processes?

No AI used - We do not use AI at all, and no AI algorithms are in place for detection, classification or predictions.

Isolated basic AI modules - Initial, ad-hoc AI implementations are being put in place in our organisation for some specific operations such as reporting.

AI for classification - We are piloting the use of AI in some projects. Some of our processes are coupled with AI-based solutions that change the behaviour based on classification results.

AI for pattern recognition - We have integrated AI in several cross-department processes. We use AI to be able to generate intelligent alarms based on recognition of hidden patterns using unsupervised learning.

AI for decision making - We use AI for smart decision making across our organisation processes. The lifecycle of all AI deployments is managed by a central AI platform, and we use a standardised approach to AI development.

AI for fully autonomous systems - We use AI in fully autonomous systems that implement predefined intents. Our AI deployments are characterised with self-learning and auto-optimisation behaviours.

Question Title

* 13. What is your approach to data collection and management?

Different data formats - We collect data in a number of different files or databases, with different formats, without naming standards.

Starting to define naming standards - Our naming standards and storage structures are being developed. Metadata attributes are defined on a group/department basis.

Mainly structured data used - We use data warehouse(s), but we struggle with data quality aspects. Our organisation primarily uses structured data, but we may make use of unstructured data in some cases.

Data lake used - We share data across our organisation using a data lake, and we have a solid data management and governance plan in place. We have a unified information architecture and/or organisation-wide analytics platform.

Data quality and strong governance policies - We have integrated data quality across systems. Archival and job scheduling tasks are performed automatically, and we use an intelligent lake overarching structured and unstructured data stores. We have strong data governance policies, minimising the risk of data siloing.

Federated data lakes with external partners - There exists a data mesh with federated data lakes, where data is shared not only across our organisation but with other partners as well. We have fully automated data quality checks and scalability mechanisms in place.

Question Title

* 14. In terms of process automation in general, which answer best describes your situation?

No automation at all - All steps are done manually in our organisation using available element management interfaces. Their integrity depends on the network engineers.

Some independent automation scripts - We have a number of independent automation scripts that are task based and run when necessary.

Some fully automated processes - We have a number of processes fully automated for the purposes of specific use cases (projects).

Orchestration engine used - All of our processes are automated and run using an orchestration engine. Configuration of any element by an engineer is not allowed. We ensure integrity by using a "single source of truth" and "input validation."

Dynamic adaptation with closed control loops - Our automated processes are implemented using closed control loops, where automated adjustments are made based on the feedback information.

Based on decision engines - Our processes are auto triggered based on high-level business goals. Decision engines automatically initiate relevant processes including automated self-configuration.

Question Title

* 15. Related to service lifecycle management, which answer best describes your current status?

All are done manually - All service lifecycle management actions (device configuration, inventory record keeping, ticket updates, billing, etc.) are done manually.

Some steps are automated - To save time or increase fidelity some steps are automated in our organisation, but not full processes.

Certain services are automated - Some of our management processes for certain subset of services are fully automated, but we still depend on manual steps as well.

All are fully automated - All our services are fully automated using well understood common processes. Our self-service portal for end-users provides key information related to service instances.

The services adapt dynamically - Our automated service lifecycle management processes are able to dynamically adapt to the current network supporting advanced features such as trying alternative ways to complete the process successfully before giving up and reporting a failure.

Fully-fledged self-service management - We have implemented an intention based fully-fledged self-service management using process orchestration, intelligent inferring and advanced analytics.

Question Title

* 16. Which statement describes best your advancements in terms of monitoring and reporting?

Manual setup - We have a multitude of monitoring tools that are used as stand alone solutions with manual setup.

Some degree of automation - We have dedicated monitoring tools for each networking technology. We use some degree of automation to produce regular reports.

Full automation of some pilot services - We are consolidating our monitoring tools and reporting processes. Start/end of monitoring and reporting are fully automated for a number of pilot services.

Reporting fully automated - We have a monitoring platform where every service and resource is registered and classified automatically. This provides a single unified view of all infrastructure with fully automated reporting.

Context-aware monitoring and predictions - We have a real-time context-aware monitoring platform that also incorporates predictions of possible future alarms.

Self-triggered fully automated - Our monitoring system is fully automated and self-triggered. It provides early anomaly detection, and is constantly learning about the multi-user, multi-domain environment. Our system can automatically generate customised user reports.

Question Title

* 17. How well do you troubleshoot incidents and problems?

Manual troubleshooting - We are experiencing problems with alarm storms and find it difficult to isolate critical alarms from the rest. Combining and correlating information from multiple systems requires a lot of effort and time.

Basic automation - We analyse the information from multiple tools and datasets in order to perform troubleshooting. We correlate information manually, so sometimes root cause identification is slow. We mostly use automation in ticket management procedures.

Automatic alarm correlation - We use dashboards to view all relevant service information. We are able to automatically combine related alarms and identify affected services in some cases.

Automatic troubleshooting workflows - We have a single data pool used for troubleshooting of all services. All of our troubleshooting workflows are automated, including root cause analysis, but we don’t use any prediction modules.

Automatic remediation - We use machine learning to get insights from the available operational data and to make predictions or propose mitigation actions. Both root cause analysis and remediation are automated.

Self-healing system in place - We have a self-healing system that analyses data and repairs issues proactively with automated failover whenever needed.

Question Title

* 18. How would you describe the security management processes in your organisation?

Manual threat analysis - Security logging exists in some functional areas. Threats are recognised reactively and analysed manually.

Simple scripts in place - We don’t have formal incident response processes, or processes to manage security compliance violations. However, some of our security activities are automated using simple scripts. We are aware of some threats, but we do not follow advanced persistent threats (APTs) or all threats.

Basic security compliance monitoring - We have minimum monitoring of security compliance and response. We implement processes to manage security compliance violations, although we do not follow all threats and we have no automated incident response process.

Reactive and manual threat intelligence lifecycle - We have established a reactive and manual threat intelligence lifecycle. We have automated basic monitoring and response processes together with a basic incident response process and good visibility of all threats.

Advanced response processes - We have formal and mature monitoring and response processes with standard playbooks for most common threats. We have targeted automation of investigation and mitigation workflows. We do proactive threat hunting and we are leveraging automation to improve the efficiency and speed of threat investigation and incident response processes.

Fully autonomous automation - We have established, documented, and mature response processes with standard playbooks for advanced threats. We have an extensive automation of the investigation and mitigation workflows. We work in an environment of fully autonomous automation - from qualification to mitigation, doing automated threat qualification, investigation, and response wherever possible. We recognise and quickly respond to all classes of threats early in the Cyber Kill Chain.

Question Title

* 19. Which option best describes the service specification and design activities in your organisation?

Basic service specifications - We have service configuration procedures available outlining service-specific actions that need to be taken to manage a service. Our portfolio describes services in a text format. The service descriptions and specifications are not standardised.

Technical service specifications - The technological aspects of all our services are described in technical service specifications. We are investigating data modelling languages to try to create a formal service specification definition. We are also exploring service design practices such as customer journey.

Data models - We have defined some chosen pilot services using adopted service design practices. We build data models around these services and define their programmable service parameters (for example using YANG or XML)

Machine readable service specifications - We have service design embedded in our day-to-day activities. Our service catalogue contains only parameterised service specifications available in a machine readable format and ready to be consumed by different functional blocks. Our specification activities follow a common approach. We differentiate between RFS (resource facing services) and CFS (customer facing services).

Highly-granular service specifications - Our service specifications are defined as a combination of highly-granular puzzle pieces that represent different parts of a resource-facing or customer-facing service. Our new services can be designed by combining readily available puzzle pieces.

Automated service design - Our users are active participants in the service design. They are able to create their own custom service by putting together available service puzzle pieces. Our service design process is fully automated and streamlined to optimise the customer experience.

Question Title

* 20. To what extent have you developed and implemented your OAV related policies?

No policies - We do not have formal policies regarding OAV development and implementation.

Initial policies - The definition of our OAV development and implementation policies is currently ongoing. We already use a minor set of OAV policies in our operating activities.

Use-case-based policies - We have developed OAV policies, but they are used operationally only in selected projects and activities when deemed necessary.

Consistent policy implementation - We have implemented common, aligned OAV management policies throughout the organisation in a consistent manner. We continue to increase automation of all policies.

Automated policy development cycle - We have fully developed OAV management policies with automated implementation. They are operational throughout the ecosystem (with all stakeholders including users and partners). We work on adding continuous improvement to the policy development cycle.

Optimised policies - We have optimised our complete set of OAV management policies. Controls and procedures are put in place to make sure that excellence is maintained even if strategic leadership or direction changes.The work on policy improvements is ongoing.

Question Title

* 21. How do you govern data/information in your institution?

No governance - In our organisation information is fragmented and inconsistent across different systems and applications.

Governance silos - Our organisation is addressing data quality issues, information inconsistency and data ownership on a group/department level only.

Reactive data governance across organisation - In our organisation data/information is shared across systems with different ownership and across departments. Our information quality procedures are reactive.

Consistent simple data governance - We make use of data for decision making on different management levels, and information owners and data stewards are assigned to manage this asset. All organisation owned data is being governed in a consistent way.

Consistent advanced data governance - We have organised a high-level governance body that addresses the data management issues/challenges and ensures proper data governance across different departments and standardised data sharing with external parties. We develop, implement and improve best practices regarding data policy.

Data-supported decision making - Our information management strategies are tied to lowering risks and meeting/improving our productivity targets. Our information management activities are well formalised and coordinated with all partners and other relevant stakeholders.

Question Title

* 22. Which best describes the strategic approach or vision development in your organisation?

No interest in OAV strategic planning - In our organisation there is little or no interest in strategic planning related to OAV activities. We use a traditional strategic management style.

Ad-hoc OAV activities - Ad-hoc OAV activities are gaining interest with some of our colleagues, but there is still low involvement. The OAV goals are unclear on the business level, and we have no developed OAV vision.

Creating a strategic OAV roadmap - In our organisation OAV goals and their impact on the business are known and communicated. We are in the process of creating a strategic roadmap to OAV enablement. Although there is an attempt to coordinate efforts, we still need alignment between technical and non-technical departments.

An innovative approach to OAV - The formal OAV development strategic plan is being implemented in a coordinated way in our organisation so that an innovative approach to OAV is supported across all departments. We have developed metrics (KPIs) as indicators for planning future efforts.

Fully adopted vision - OAV is part of an all-encompassing strategy and vision development for value creation in our organisation. The strategy is shared and the vision is fully adopted across our whole organisation.

Business-OAV alignment - Our organisation has a long term vision in place focusing on continuous innovation using OAV organisation-wide and has developed clear strategic alliances. Business and OAV are also fully aligned not just within our organisation, but also across the ecosystem with all our partners.

Question Title

* 23. How does your organisation address Service Management?

No formal service management - In our organisation, there is no implementation of a formal approach to service management.

Ad-hoc service management - We have some teams and colleagues who are implementing service management, but it is in an isolated manner and with various levels of maturity.

Siloed service management - In our organisation, service management is being established using separated frameworks across teams; these frameworks’ implementations are independently governed and measured. Practices being developed include service catalogue, service level management, change management, change configuration and request fulfilment.

Centralised governance - We have a common service management approach across our organisation based on a single service management framework. We adopt a proactive approach to problem management and have a centralised governance.

Federated service management governance - We have federated service management governance supporting service management for bundled multi-domain multi-party services in addition to the common service management of single-party services.

Optimised service governance - Our service management functions have optimised governance and metrics are automated. Change management is integrated in all aspects and automated as much as possible.

Question Title

* 24. How would you describe your Agile capability within the organisation?

No agile practices - We have not yet started to adopt agile practices regarding OAV management and software development in our organisation.

Limited use of agile practices - Some of our employees or teams have decided to use chosen agile practices in their work

A small set of agile practices throughout the organisation - We adopted a small set of agile practices throughout the whole organisation. Some of our teams are more advanced in agile adoption compared to others.

Governance and adoption of agile practices - We have systematically adopted agile practices in a consistent manner with the appropriate agile governance. We are now focusing on implementing lean portfolio management.

Agile practices throughout the whole organisation and extеrnal partners - We are already experienced in all agile practices across all teams with measurable success. We also use the agile methodology when collaborating with other distributed or partner teams.

Agile practices as an integral part of the organisational culture - Lean and Agile are part of our organisational culture. While working on each project our aim is to eliminate waste and inefficiency and achieve a sustainable pace of innovation.

Question Title

* 25. How important is standardisation to your organisation while you are working on your OAV improvement?

Standards are negligible - When working on OAV related projects we are not considering standardised approaches. It is more important that the solution fulfils our requirements.

Standards are investigated and used when needed - During the implementation of important OAV aspects we aim to at least investigate existing OAV related standards. We adhere to them if this helps our work.

Development of OAV standardisation strategy - We are in the process of developing an OAV standardisation strategy. Some of our teams are striving to adhere to existing OAV related standards even if this will increase the complexity in the beginning.

Well defined and complete OAV standardisation approaches - Our organisation has a well defined internal OAV standardisation strategy and approaches. We follow standards during all stages (from design to production).

OAV standardisation approaches applied internаlly and externally - We have adopted common OAV standardised approaches that are aligned with our other partners in the community/ecosystem.

Maintenance and improvements of standardised OAV approaches - Our organisation makes proactive improvements while maintaining high performing standardised OAV approaches both internally and externally.

Question Title

* 26. When it comes to investments in your organisation, which answer best describes your situation?

OAV not considered - When it comes to capital planning or to other related resource budgeting processes, our organisation does not consider OAV-related investment requirements.

Ad hoc requests - In our organisation, we do have some ad hoc individual requests for resources or skills development investments related to OAV.

OAV capital planning - In our organisation the importance of investments in OAV is recognised when it comes to capital planning and investment control. The traditional approach to budgeting is redesigned to accommodate for any requirements that are needed to kick start the work on OAV.

OAV is high priority - All OAV related financial implications are considered as high priority and are part of the capital planning and investment control in our organisation.

Flexible OAV planning - In our organisation we now have flexible capital planning and investment control in place that is directly related to the outputs from OAV activities.

Using OAV metrics - We use OAV metrics to optimise and drive future organisation investments on a large scale. The investment planning we have in place supports flexible continuous process improvements of OAV.

Question Title

* 27. What is the structure of your teams working on OAV capabilities?

No OAV teams - At the moment, we don't have any teams working on OAV capabilities in our organisation. We may have a few individuals that are interested in employing OAV.

Ad hoc OAV groups - We have internal OAV groups formed around common interests or goals, sharing knowledge and working together on-demand.

Initial OAV teams - We have one or more specialised OAV teams that are working on specific projects. Inter-team communication and joint development is on a department level only.

High-performing OAV teams - We have several high-performing OAV teams located in different departments in the organisation. Each team is focused on different aspects of the OAV architecture and they all collaborate efficiently.

Multidisciplinary OAV teams - Our organisation has multidisciplinary cross-functional teams that work together on OAV topics. We have open communication and cooperation with other teams in the ecosystem.

Self-organising OAV teams - We have a number of experienced agile OAV teams that are formed on-demand when we collaborate with other partners from our ecosystem on common projects (i.e. joint service development).

Question Title

* 28. Related to stakeholders, which answer describes your current status?

Some initial interest in implementing OAV - A handful of engineers that may or may not work together in the same department are interested in implementing OAV without coordination in our organisation.

Initial discussions about OAV implementation routes - OAV is discussed at a department level, and the potential benefits and possible routes for implementation are being considered.

All internal stakeholders are involved in OAV strategic management - The strategic potential of OAV is taken into account, and all internal key stakeholders who are directly involved in the implementation of OAV are brought on board. This includes not only operations and IT, but also upper management, and other departments.

OAV is adopted across all departments - All management levels and all departments have successfully adopted OAV, and the needs of OAV users are being taken into account as the organisation moves toward a customer-centred approach.

Multi-domain bundled services can be provided through OAV - Partner organisations that work with us are seen as key stakeholders because OAV makes it possible to build a flexible, dynamic ecosystem that can meet the needs of users for bundled services that extend beyond a single domain.

OAV is adopted for open, external collaboration - Our organisation engages in collaboration with external stakeholders on various topics (design of new services, extending the user base, etc.) by embracing open OAV collaboration both internally and externally.

Question Title

* 29. How would you describe the ability to learn and build skills and expertise related to OAV in your organisation?

Sporadic OAV learning and skills development - We have traditional network management expertise, but there are no formal opportunities for learning and building OAV skills. Only sporadic OAV learning and skills development efforts exist on an individual basis with unpredictable results.

Some OAV skilled individuals and increasing training demand - Most of our efforts are on the level of self-upskilling. As a result, our first OAV skilled individuals are emerging and are driving an increasing demand in OAV training. Our learning needs are being recognised by our organisation.

Formally established and structured OAV training program - We have a formally established OAV training programme and upskilling and expertise development are available in a structured manner. Our organisation is investing in our staff recognising the value of OAV talent. Our engineers with knowledge in network technologies as well as DevOps and OAV showcase the potential of building OAV expertise.

Effective internal talent management approach for OAV continuous learning - OAV skills are considered essential and there is a well-defined programme for continuous learning and upgrading. We use an effective internal talent management approach to guarantee successful talent acquisition and development.

Effective joint-ecosystem talent management approach for OAV talent development - We have an effective talent management approach that supports OAV talent acquisition and development across the ecosystem. There is a joint effort in upskilling and expertise building together with the partners in the ecosystem.

Optimised training programme according to long-term OAV strategy - All our upskilling and talent management efforts are fully aligned with the organisation and ecosystem business drivers. Our OAV training programmes are optimised according to the innovation requirements and long term OAV strategies.

Question Title

* 30. How advanced is your organisation culture regarding OAV?

No trust in OAV - Our organisational culture is traditional. OAV is considered as something new, not to be trusted or embraced.

Little trust in OAV - Our organisation is considering to shift towards OAV but we have no concrete steps to change the traditional mindset. Culture-wise there is little trust in OAV based methods and tools.

Limited OAV adoption - Our organisation has started embracing OAV and we have team(s) that have changed their internal culture to fully adopt and trust OAV. However, we still have some traditionalists that do not adopt any new initiatives.

OAV embraced - Everyone in our organisation accepts the changes brought by OAV adoption and understands the related benefits.

OAV adopted in the organisation - OAV is the core philosophy of our organisation culture. OAV based solutions and approaches are proposed in all efforts. We have adopted openness and collaboration organisation-wide.

OAV adopted in the ecosystem - There is deep trust and open communication about OAV not only within the organisation, but with all our partners in the ecosystem. We aim to nurture all OAV innovation and continuous improvement efforts ecosystem-wide.

Question Title

* 31. What is your approach to customer experience, and to what extent do you apply your digital capabilities to enhance it?

No customer experience management - Our organisation does not implement any customer experience management activities.

Traditional communication channels - We use traditional channels for customer communication. Customer engagement is a shared responsibility throughout our organisation.

Partially proactive customer experience management - Our organisation is invested in customer experience. Our approach to customer engagement is partially proactive.

Unified approach - Our organisation is using its connected systems and unified processes to heighten customer experience. Customer experience is one of the main business drivers for our organisation.

360-degree customer view - Our organisation has a 360-degree customer view, and digital presence with cross channel capabilities is provided to our users. Customer experience drives our organisation's decisions.

Omnichannel experience - Our organisation exhibits omnichannel capabilities. We use integrated and smart systems to provide customer self-actions with zero contact.