Revisiting Your IT Governance Model- Kelly Block, University of Illinois

Reference www.itpc.uillinois.edu

Be interesting to see what their definition of IT Governance is – starting off with a description of “an ERP, surrounded by chaos”, & their Enterprise System Structure for Administrative IT systems – which isn’t where I’d start.

Governance process focuses on Administrative IT systems, process for directing the enterprise systems structure, & what projects will go through the governance process. Controlled by an ITPC – which I think was the IT Process Committee – & has a $1.5m budget pa. Looks to me more like Programme Management/a means to manage a portfolio of IT-related projects or rather the way that our Systems & Projects Development Programme functions under the auspices of the Development Programme Steering Group (in place since 2003) – but this is subordinate to our Information Management Steering Group, & also we look at all IS projects, not just what would traditionally be called ‘administrative’. Where are Architecture & Principles? Their IT Governance model is clearly/really a process for prioritising & managing IT projects – so a good thing but not what I thought it would be.

In terms of their process – seems very resource driven, budgetary constraints are making this more rigorous. Looking for projects that are mission critical, at ROI, more rigorous prioritisation. Looks effective as a means for engaging the business in decision-making about IT projects, which is important of course. Mission criticality review – good exercise, some projects removed, some higher/lower priority, some reduced budget – could be a good approach to follow.

Use a PPM tool from Clarity – very useful for measuring effectiveness of projects. Supports a more rigorous approach to programme evaluation. Our own PMO should look into this. Very comprehensive information available about projects at all stages – pipeline, in progress – & particularly in terms of resource profiling.

So – overall a good presentation on a comprehensive PPM process, but not what I’d call IT Governance – no mention of ‘encouraging desirable behaviour in the use of IT’, also at the PPM level no mention of benefits realisation. Mentioned that need to do more about ‘post-project surveying’ which looks like the benefits realisation process, but not articulated as such.

Process has improved direction & accountability, strategic alignment, transparent prioritisation/resourcing, & raised profile with senior management – pretty much what our stuff is intended to do/has done quite successfully, but makes me think we maybe need to tighten up a bit.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s