Skip survey header

TBM Modernization Feedback Second Round

Thank you for contributing your feedback to the TBM Council's Modernized TBM Taxonomy and Technology Resource Towers. We value your input, and every response will be read in full. Our full release detailing all the changes and adjustments that are being considered or proposed is here (link). 

Please find below two images that detail the revised taxonomy and Technology Resource Towers for version 5.0 as a helpful reference. 

Again, your participation and contribution is deeply appreciated by the council!
1. One key change in the Modernized TBM Technology Resource Towers is the addition of Resource Domains, which group related technology resource towers for easier categorization:
  • Applications
  • Infrastructure
  • Operations
  • Field & Office
After reviewing the changes in the documentation and in the visual above, how do you feel about each of the following statements?
 
Space Cell Strongly AgreeSomewhat AgreeSomewhat DisagreeStrongly Disagree
Adding Resource Domains is beneficial.
The Resource Domains listed are appropriate.
The Resource Domains align well with the Technology Resource Towers.
3. Artificial Intelligence: Added support for AI-specific resources within Compute, Storage, Network, and Platform Towers. NOTE:  The intention of these sub-towers is to model resources strictly dedicated to AI solutions, such as GPUs, specialized AI storage for model training, or AI optimized network hardware, while general-purpose compute, storage, and networking resources that support AI but are not exclusively used for AS will continue to be allocated to their respective generalized sub-towers.

How do you feel about the AI resource support included in the Technology Resource Towers framework?
 
5. Do you think the addition of a tower specifically for data and its associated costs will make it easier to model the costs, consumption and alignment of data resources? 
 
7. Do you think creating separate towers for Security and for Risk & Compliance will make it easier to model the costs, consumption and alignment of those resources?
 
8. Do you support creating separate towers for Security and for Risk & Compliance, as well as increased visibility for risk generally with towers, sub-towers and a separate domain  – and do you plan to leverage these updates?
 
10. A proposal was made to retire the “End-User Software” sub-tower from the End User Tower as well as the “Business Software” sub-tower from the Application tower.  The intention is to capture all of these costs within newly designated  “Licensing & Software” sub-tower under the Application Tower, and any delineations between business, end-user, or other types to be addressed via tagging or at the Solutions layer of the Taxonomy.  This would allow for improved benchmarking of a universal resource type while allowing for increased granularity in the software type and consumer than was achieved in v4 Taxonomy.

Do you feel these proposed changes will hurt or improve your organization’s planning and insights into the costs, consumption, and alignment of software licensing?
 
12. The updated Technology Resource Towers includes an Smart Devices Tower with these sub-towers:
  • Internet of Things
  • Industrial & Control Systems

How do you feel about this structure?
 
14. If you have expertise in IoT, Industrial Control Systems (ICS), or Process Control Systems (PCS) and are interested in further discussions, please provide your contact information:
 
15. Overall, how do you feel about the proposed Taxonomy 5.0 Technology Resource Towers in support of your organizations needs compared to Taxonomy 4.0?
 
0%