Readings
- Describe the five IT questions that Weill & Ross (see Figure 3-4) see all organizations making?
- How do the Weill & Ross questions line up to the McKinsey questions? What’s changed in the last 15 years?
- What is the difference between EA and IT strategy? Do you need both?
- What is the difference between and IT Strategy committee and an IT Steering Committee?
- What archetypes do you see in your company? How well do they work?
Steve Praino Presentation
Steve Praino of Dow Chemical spoke to an earlier section of this class on IT Strategy. Please watch the video and post your takeaways in response to this post.
Rich
Vince Kelly says
Steve Praino of Dow Chemical spoke to an earlier section of this class on IT Strategy. Please watch the video and post your takeaways in response to this post.
Great video. The following were some of the things that I took away from it, actually in VIOLENT agreement with many of Steve’s points.
One bullet point in Steve’s presentation, (I believe that it was on slide 2 or 3), that jumped out at me was;
“Hire the right people who can further the cause and cultivate the right leadership.”
I couldn’t agree more. This was also part of our Week 3 COBIT5 discussion around APO07. I agree that, (per APO07.02, .03, and .04), Hiring and retaining the right people, maintaining their skills and competencies and providing timely and relevant feedback are absolutely essential to any organization – IT or non-IT.
Individuals and particularly leaders must be able to buy-into and communicate the organizations values, mission and vision otherwise they will never become ingrained in the culture of the company. Given the relentlessly dynamic nature of IT, finding people who can do this,(in addition to their day jobs), is exceedingly difficult. As Steve noted in his presentation;
“..being smart is not enough….”
In general, I thought that almost the entire presentation could be distilled down into one very useful theme which was – Communication.
For example, Steve’s second slide highlighted the CEB findings that
– “75% of business partners (I’m assuming that means ‘internal senior leadership’ and not external partners
to the business), believe that IT is ineffective at strategic planning.”
– “93% of business partners feel that IT strategic planning is important but < 25% think IT is effective at it.”
I think there are a variety of reasons for this but among the most important is that, (in my opinion) very often these percentages hold true because IT leadership does not or cannot COMMUNICATE the value of IT to their business partners – or pretty much anyone else outside of a technical role for that matter.
Steve also pointed out, [paraphrasing here] that while it is important to possess the skills that enable you to understand and think in terms of the business (in order to develop an appropriate strategy), having those skills is pointless if you are unable to communicate the “what, why, when, and how” across all of the organizations and at all levels of the company.
I thought that he outlined an excellent process for how they achieved stakeholder buy-in for the strategy refresh project – i.e. “locking everyone in a room” and involving /requiring the business presidents to actively participate in brainstorming sessions. This created a sense of 'collaborative ownership' with the business leadership. This in turn ultimately led to a positive relationship and executive sponsorship on the IT Governance board.
I did have somewhat of an issue with the CEB finding that:
– “63% of business leaders think that IT is too slow to respond to new technology opportunities.”
This may seem completely cynical, and again just my opinion, but I believe that the reason for this is that many times, ideas that senior business executives consider to be “technology opportunities” only pop up after they’ve read the latest issue of Venture Capital Journal, Wired or Techcrunch magazines.
In other words, I believe that many times these people literally gorge themselves on ‘brain candy’ that comes straight off the front slope of the Gartner Hype Cycle Bell Curve. And nine times out of ten, they begin this ‘meal’ before even a single engineering standards body has gathered to discuss the topic.
Fortunately, during his talk, Steve also intimated that there was a simple solution to this problem – it’s called “Credibility”. Mastering the ability to communicate, to influence and to garner the respect of business leaders provides you with a certain amount of ‘latitude’ when trying to at least *pretend* that one of these ideas might have merit – “hmmmmmm, yes, buying a D-Wave quantum computer might allow us to streamline some of our logistical costs, but we may want to look at some other alternatives first don’t you think?” ;););)
Overall I thought that it was a great (and relevant) presentation – time well spent
Richard Flanagan says
Vince. – I think you have picked some excellent highlights. As I said last Wednesday, I think IT Strategy is a right-brain activity (EA is left-brained) and communication is a big part of it. You make the point that all the understanding of the business and planning don’t mean anything if you can’t communicate. There are two important points about this communication.
First, you need to present IT strategy in the terms of the business, constantly. As an example, IT often makes unlikely financial claims. Claims of general productivity of 10% in a business case is very unlikely. To be real, you need to layoff 10% of the staff which is hard if you don’t have 10 people in each role. You need to be able to explain how you are going to reach your benefits in terms of the business processes that the company uses. If you are putting in an inventory system and talking about anything other than Days Sales Outstanding (DSO) then you really aren’t speaking in business terms.
Second, you need to be willing to argue with the business. If you are just taking orders there is very little reason for the business to include you in its strategic discussion.s. When you challenge the business logic of some IT related issue and you are correct, you build that credibility that Steve was talking about. The next time you question something, business leadership will be inclined to hear you out
One of the best ways for IT is to show it understands the business is to tell the company that some particular IT investment is a bad idea and should be avoided. Hopefully you can show them other ideas with a better return, more directly related to the company’s business processes. If you don’t have any better ideas, then saying don’t spend the money is the best thing to do. IT expense savings drop directly to the company’s gross profit and I believe that IT always needs to be aware of that.
Vince Kelly says
Great point. In addition to talking from the business perspective, I think it also includes thinking from a business perspective as well – i.e., understanding *how* the business makes money – what their business model is as well as the rest of your company’s competitors in the industry. It includes understanding organizational structures (formal and informal) outside of the IT organization, understanding the company’s big three – income statement, balance sheet and capital statement – where they are currently, how they are changing, etc., etc., etc.
Professor, just to confirm – per our class meeting last week I believe that you told us that we only needed to watch the video presentation on IT strategy and post our opinions on his presentation correct? i.e., we were not required to answer the five questions above – correct?
Richard Flanagan says
Vince – actually I think I said that watching the video replaced the case so I am still expecting answers to the five questions.
You are absolutely correct about knowing the business model for each line of business in your organization. When someone new, like Steve Praino, joined my group the first task he had was to interview members of his assigned business and then document their business model using Osterwalder’s business model canvas. If you don’t know this tool I highly recommend it and you can read much of his book for free here: https://strategyzer.com/books/business-model-generation. Then he had to review his model with the head of the business. That established a great deal of credibility for my team with our ten LoB’s.
Vince Kelly says
..absolutely familiar with the nine points of the BMC professor (and agree with them and their use). There’s probably no better way to start to understand your customer or partner and how they can provide their own unique value proposition to their customers.
But that being said, I do think that the concept of BMC ‘right brain’/ ’emotional’ versus ‘left brain’/’pragmatic’ structure is a bit of a stretch though – don’t you?
i.e., I think things like key partners, key resources and cost structure is absolutely as relevant in the right side/’how are you capturing value for your organization’ discussion as customer segments, channels, customer relationships and revenue streams are in the left side/’how to do it’ discussion – all of the factors more or less contribute to a composite value proposition. In other words, I don’t think that you can reasonably understand their revenue streams and pricing structures without considering their cost structure as well, (again only an opinion here),
Richard Flanagan says
Vince – I seem to have mislead you. When I was speaking of left and right brained I was speaking of the relationship of EA and IT Strategy. EA being a very logical and well thought out direction and process. IT strategy being how are we going to get everyone to where we need them to be.
There was a very good example at a session today. An individual was speaking about his company’s move to the cloud. He mentioned how they had planned the move (EA) but couldn’t proceed with business buy in until they addressed two outstanding issues. Once those two issues were taken care of (it took a year) the business got on board and the move was exceuted flawlessly.
Michelangelo C. Collura says
Your point about arguing is well said, Professor. This would fit into the soft skills/business savvy being encouraged in MIS/ITACS; the best IT professional is only as good as her ability to persuade or even charm the stakeholders. This isn’t the same as arguing, but I believe both cater to that notion of a capable diplomat, if you will.
Richard Flanagan says
Correct, many IT people think this is just about changing the words they use to sell a project. It’s much more than that. It’s about learning and truly understanding the business and being able to speak about business issue whether or not an IT issue is involved.
Michael Gibbons says
I appreciate the way Steve described his first meetings with the different business groups in this regard. Having worked as a DBA, an Information Security Manager and an IT Auditor, people have an opinion of what the meeting is going to be like before they ever meet me or see the topic, it’s automatically ‘here comes audit to say no’ or ‘i must have done something wrong because information security is here’. I am fortunate to work in a diverse group where our skills complement each other and there is a willingness to assist where necessary. Point being – I work very closely with a Financial auditor (CPA and many other certifications after his name) and between his financial skills and me being able to speak to the IT side, we are able to effectively communicate issues to either side of the business and provide multiple solutions that may make their lives easier, just things they may not have had the time to think about because of always doing something the same way.
Pascal Allison says
Every organization using information technology make decisions that influence the value provided by IT. One of the points stressed is the decision/question should be made/answer by somebody other than the IT organization.
• IT principle – an answer about cost, equipment usage, goals, application, and uniformity is required for success. Policy or methodology of IT existence – the acquisition, maintenance, deployment, and usage) is paramount to answering question that governs IT. It gives clarity of IT role in the business setting.
• IT Architecture – question will exist about investment and kind of equipment. There should be answer that define that merger/incorporation will occur and requirements for investment, and equipment to ascertain the requisite benefits. It sounds technical, but it is more of a business role.
• IT Infrastructure: More technical than the business role, it looks at the structure and setup of the application and equipment. As business is continuity and IT is a part of business, IT needs to have a structure to face the present and future problems. That means, IT must determine and share empowering services to resolve problems today and tomorrow. There must be answers to questions about the present and future of IT and business progress;
• Business Application needs: There are needs for improvement and resolution to problems in businesses. There are challenges (institutional, environment, and government) along the way to success. IT has it contribution to the success of the business. They must answer questions that specify the business need for purchases of IT equipment (application) or to developed IT applications inside;
• IT Investment & Prioritization – spending money is one thing, spending money on needed item and when the money is spent is key to achieving goals. Answers to questions about funds spending, timing, purchases must be available.
Richard Flanagan says
Pascal – for IT principles be sure to recognize that this is a question of how much the organization wants to spend on IT , where ( generally) to spend it, and how much risk they are willing to take. These are very high level issues and rarely get into any technology discussions.
Michael Gibbons says
Professor, I know we have seen in our case studies (i.e. Accenture) where the business required the project sponsor to go back and provide metrics on whether the project implemented actually saved or if the cost benefit was actually realized, do you see this feedback loop of information often in these types of processes?
Pascal Allison says
The questions are worded differently. The answers have the same meaning or goal.
• IT principle and how will does technology enable the business core? How much money do we put the IT? Where is the business goal? What are we buying?
• IT Architecture and What value is the business getting from its most important IT projects? To every investment, there must be some return. Are we investing? What is the return (benefits) on investment?
• IT infrastructure and How long does it take the IT organization to develop and deploy new features and functionality? Do we have the necessary equipment or application? Can they handle all our problems today, tomorrow, and in the future? If not, is it possible to change or update them to address issues? These are questions and answers that branch the gap.
• Business application needs and How efficient is IT at rolling out technologies and achieving desired outcomes? – Business will always have needs, requirements for development, and problem resolution. The questions and answers to these are the same. What application do we get for improvement and problem resolution? How can they contribute to the business needs?
• Investment and Prioritization and how strong is our supply of next-generation IT talent – the need to buy equipment will exist. Which equipment is purchase? The time and cost of the purchase need to match business need. How are the equipment managed? Who is managing the equipment, are they trained to commensurate the functionality? Both questions and answers are parallel.
IT functionalities, environment, and relationship in the business environment have changed. Before IT decision (acquisition of equipment, functionalities, and maintenance) were up to the IT department. Today, business participate in decisions surrounding IT activities.
Pascal Allison says
IT strategy is the plan (principles, objectives, and tactics) to use information technology in an institution (business organization). Enterprise Architecture gives the definition of the structure and operation in an institution. IT strategy is what is to be done and how it is to be done while EA facilitate or supports the delivery of the strategy. When there is need for change? EA is effective, and EA can manage an organization venture. Both EA and IT strategy are needed. Planning to build a house is great, but not having an engineer is perfect recipe for failure. IT strategy is the plan, EA is the engineer to put the infrastructure. To have a complete building project, both a plan and engineer are required. Thus, IT strategy and EA are needed.
Pascal Allison says
The difference between an IT strategy committee and an IT steering committee is that the IT strategy committee makes sure IT and business strategies align. It is done through enterprise IT governance. Some functionalities are: serves a subject matter expert, ensure implementation of IT strategy plan, and mitigate IT risk while the steering committee supervises or facilitate resource allocation and provide direction on primacies. The strategy committee guides the steering committee. Strategy committee is accountable to the owners and stakeholders while steering committee is monitored by the strategy committee and reports to management. Steering committee dwells on operation and execution while the strategy committee set direction/plan
Richard Flanagan says
Pascal- it varies of course but in general think of the IT strategy committee as setting the IT principles and approving the IT strategy but not working on the details. This committee is often just the CEO, CFO, and COO and they oversee the work of the CIO. The it steering committee is who works with the CIO on the details of the strategy and oversees the investment into projects.
Pascal Allison says
The federal system is used where I work. There are different departments of the state and systems interfacing. Besides, all departments work on a single platform. Any change to the platform, the state(executives/administrators), the federal government, and other organizations are part of the decision-making process. It is working well. Sometimes, all parties are not available. Where there are interfaces and one system has issues, some functionalities are impeded, and data are restricted or unavailable. If there it is a simple fix, it is done immediately. If the fix requires changes, there is a delay.
Michelangelo C. Collura says
Describe the five IT questions that Weill & Ross (see Figure 3-4) see all organizations making?
The five questions revolve around a firm both understanding the value of EA and effectively implementing the recommendations of architects. There is a combination of quantitative analysis (time length to deploy new features, dollar savings/gains from given projects, etc) and qualitative (how would hiring the best architects increase value for the firm 5 years from now? 10 years?) An extremely important concern for firms is that, according to the article, c-suites don’t often know how to identify the right areas for investment, and therefore they risk wasting IT funding on cost-ineffective projects. Another key point made is that IT personnel need to be proficient in the language of the business, so this means that firms need to cross-train both management and IT staff to understand, at least basically, the worlds of their opposites. By spending time and money on this, firms can communicate more effectively – between the tech-savvy EA staff, for example, and the C-suite – to truly appreciate the concerns of their colleagues and incorporate those concerns into project planning and funding.
Richard Flanagan says
Michelangelo – don’t oversell EA. You can still have an IT strategy without a formal EA. This is often true for good smaller companies. They simply do not have the resources to do an EA. Having neither is a real problem.
Michelangelo C. Collura says
Thank you, Professor. I definitely don’t want to sound like a sales pitch, because I think a decent manager would immediately get suspicious from such an approach.
Michelangelo C. Collura says
What is the difference between and IT Strategy committee and an IT Steering Committee?
The strategy committee is born of the firm’s IT governance, while the steering committee comes from its IT management. This is the simple answer; governance is going to allow a firm to structure its IT planning to best align with the firm’s business goals/strategy. The strategy committee will likely oversee the steering committee, helping to guide its efforts based on those business needs, and with the input of other business operations, such as HR, legal, finance, etc. They are going to be looking at the overall enterprise architecture and how it can be improved. Moreover, with such a big-picture view, they are better able to identify and plan risk mitigation techniques. In no lesser role, the steering committee will focus on a lower level, as on a large-scale transition away from a legacy application. They will work closely with the strategy folks so as to simplify the line of communication and not need to connect with dozens of stakeholders themselves; this is handled for them by the other group. My understanding is that the steering committee does concern itself with strategy, and it communicates that down to project teams, but the overall marching orders for the firm are determined at the strategy committee level.
Michelangelo C. Collura says
What is the difference between EA and IT strategy? Do you need both?
I would consider EA to be the overarching framework for a firm, describing its many different components, including IT. It concerns itself with seamless integration of and communication between business processes. IT strategy is one piece of this puzzle, and so it is subsumed into the framework. However, it is unique from other business processes in that it provides EA the tools it needs to achieve those integrative/communicative efficiencies, and so it is not just another piece for EA to get working within the larger whole. It should instead be structured via planning/resource allocation to realizing EA goals, and therefore realizing the goals of the firm overall.
Michelangelo C. Collura says
Based on some input, I wanted to revise this a bit to say that a firm without EA would obviously not need to structure their IT strategy around such concerns and would rather focus on business goals and more likely just processes directly. In a small company with little infrastructure, they would still need their know their landscape, but it’s going to be much easier to handle. Hopefully, that would mean it would also be easier to streamline, but that would depend, I imagine, on how effectively their implement their IT strategy.
Patrick DeStefano (tuc50677) says
Hi Michelangelo, I’m wondering if I’m reading it correctly, but it appears you mentioned that IT strategy is a part of Enterprise Architecture. I would have said the opposite. It is my understanding that the IT Strategy is more closely aligned with the business strategy and determines how the IT organization can meet the current and future needs of the firm as a whole. Enterprise Architecture would be a piece of the IT strategy as in it would be one of the ways the IT organization would be achieving it’s goals.
Richard Flanagan says
Patrick – both should be closely aligned to the business strategy. EA is more a logically examination of the issue and IT strategy more of a “how are we going to get there” plan.
Pascal Allison says
Takeaway – Steve Praino of Dow Chemical spoke to an earlier section of this class on IT Strategy.
The should be strategy to manage the day-to-day decision points. This strategy needs to be contemporary. The adjusting of strategy to address today and future problem brings IT strategy refresh to existence.
IT is very important to business, business executives understand the importance but cost, competition, and business goal give a different sight – IT, cost, and benefits.
How well IT is developed and the thoughts of IT depends on the IT professionals.
Business executives will think cost and goals, IT professional have to communicate the importance of IT and the contribution IT make in achieving business goal.
IT Strategy is vibrant for a successful business environment, but because of change and competition, IT strategy needs to be contemporary. IT is no good if it is not addressing today and future problems. That says the need for IT strategy refresh.
IT strategy refresh comes with changes; thus, adaptation is eminent and security is prime.
Communication is very important when it comes to IT and business alignment.
IT strategy has to cover:
the people working the strategy
goal and metrics – measurement of success and determination of failure
activities of IT and the trend to success
cost and time for spending funds
goal clarification
Vince Kelly says
1. Describe the five IT questions that Weill & Ross (see Figure 3-4) see all organizations making?
The Weill & Ross article outlines five types of governance decisions and uses a matrix to align those decisions with the various types of archetype ‘styles’ of governance. The five decisions include:
1. IT principles: How IT will be used
2. IT Architecture: Resource investment in IT
3. IT Infrastructure: Understanding the enterprise direction
4. Business Application Needs: Creating an innovative environment
5. IT Investment and Prioritization: Establishing the target investment mix and managing the portfolio.
The archetypal styles include:
– Business Monarchy: Typically small company, owner driven mentality
– IT Monarchy: Business executives abdicate all decision making to IT
– Feudal: Common in companies that grow through acquisition
– Federal: Decides/sets standards which the rest of the organization follows
– Duopoly: Decisions are made by senior business and IT leaders. Typically manifested as a steering\
committee
– Anarchy: ITIL refers to this as a ‘Level 1, reactive, ad hoc’ processes and governance.
Vince Kelly says
2. How do the Weill & Ross questions line up to the McKinsey questions? What’s changed in the last 15 years?
There seems to be a close alignment between the HBR article and the McKinsey article but I think that there is the closest alignment between the HBR article, the McKinsey article and the COBIT5 process model. The McKinsey article aligns with the other two in the following way:
– How well does technology enable the core business? I think this question lines up well with the Weill &
Ross IT principles decision – deciding how IT will be utilized within the organization
– What value is the business getting from it most important IT projects? This probably aligns better with
COBIT5 EDM02 – Ensure Benefits Delivery
– How long does it take the IT organization to develop and deploy new features and functionality? This
aligns with the HBR article question of Business Application Needs and COBIT5 APO04 principle of
Manage Innovation.
– How efficient is IT at rolling out technologies and achieving desired outcomes? I thought that this lined
up well with the Business Application Needs decision principle (Its ability to innovate)
– How strong is our supply of next-generation IT talent? I didn’t really notice a line up between the HBR
article and the McKinsey article here but there was definitely a strong alignment between this McKinsey
question and COBIT5 APO07 – Manage Human Resources.
In terms of what has changed over the past 15 years, I would say – ‘everything’ – in fact I think that the only real constant is in COBIT5 APO07, managing human capital. The increasing complexity of technology as well as the pace and globally competitive nature of today’s business environments has created a critical need for good, skilled people – but this is something that has always been true.
Outside of this constant, there are numerous examples of radical change over the past 15 years – from simply a tactical perspective alone, a couple of examples include;
– Productivity has increased massively, (relative to 15 years ago). For example, today’s collaboration tools have increased productivity and shaved substantial T&E expenses. 15 years ago, a one hour meeting in San Jose would require almost 24 hours of travel time, and a hotel expense and car expense to the company. In addition, that meeting would need to be meticulously planned and scheduled well in advance (in order to book the hotel, car, etc.). Today, that same meeting can occur on an ad hoc basis. Most importantly, because there is no need to physically travel the company not only saves on the T&E expense but also benefits (intangibly) from the fact that *more* meetings can be conducted during the same time period than it was 15 years ago.
– Another example is the fundamental change in how IT expenses are recognized – i.e. the shift from CapEx to OpEx. Technologies that had to be capitalized 15 years ago are treated as current expenses today (which the company derives tax benefits from). This in turn has lead to the rise of ‘Cloud native’, ‘mobile’ and microservice application architectures which in turn has created an opportunity for companies to participate in ‘application spot markets’ – i.e., an ability to choose where to run an application workload, (in the data center, public cloud, hybrid cloud, etc.) based on the cost of the resources needed to run the workload *in near real time*.
Vince Kelly says
3. What is the difference between EA and IT strategy? Do you need both?
This is a bit of an ‘Apples to Oranges’ question. You don’t need to have both – in fact it’s quite common for companies to implement parts of an EA without implementing an entire EA. For example, many companies spend a vast amount of time and energy putting together a comprehensive informations systems architecture and then turn around and take a short-sighted, ‘nickle and dime’ approach to their technology architecture. The result is that they create a flexible, agile IS architecture that becomes constrained by their technology over time.
That being said, at minimum, you must have an IT strategy – unless the goal is to promote complete confusion and mayhem:)
The difference between an EA and an IT strategy:
– EA is a common view of the current state of the business architecture, information systems architecture and technology architecture. It also contains the migration and integration plans, governance frameworks, (e.g., methodologies and process models like COBIT5), and the implementation and operation, (service delivery model) frameworks. In an optimal Enterprise architecture, all of these things are completely integrated.
– EA is a repository where architectural artifacts for the *entire company* are stored and reused. This promotes reusability and a common architectural approach.
– EA is a roadmap. It essentially provides baseline views of the current environment; i.e., ‘where we are now’ in relation to business process, applications, data, technology, governance and operational environments. These views are used to create a future state that aligns with the business strategy. The difference between the two,(i.e., the gap analysis) becomes a ‘topological map’ of how to get from the current state to the future state.
An IT strategy on the other hand is the plan of how resources and capabilities,(people, processes and technologies) are deployed in order to meet the goals of the company and the objectives of individual organizations within the company – i.e., it’s the ‘directions’ for how IT will support individual business entities and the overall company objectives.
Both IT strategy and EA are dynamic entities and must be continuously reviewed for relevancy and then updated accordingly. Both IT strategy and EA must also be completely oriented around the requirements of the business and address all levels of the business organization.
Michelangelo C. Collura says
Appreciate this description based on some of your experiences, Vince. I’m particularly interested by your description of how companies implement IS architecture. This seems like an issue of management at least theoretically understanding the value of the architecture, but perhaps due to not completely understanding it, they end up with that “nickle and dime” problem that accumulates into a dysfunctional mess of applications over time. Put another way, they like the high-tech solutions but don’t quite understand, or listen to those who do, on how to implement them. If anyone else with experience has a chance to chime in, I’d enjoy hearing how it appears to everyone.
Vince Kelly says
Michelangelo,
To be fair, I have to point out the old maxim, “…you buy the solution not the technology…” I think your right, many times business management does understand the value of the architecture but only in the sense of a *solution* architecture. They don’t understand the large, negative ripple effects that can occur as a result of a seemingly innocuous business decisions or the value of having a holistic, integrated enterprise architecture. Two of the advantages that an EA provides – (among others ) – are a view of the current environment from pretty much every angle of the business and an ability to reuse architectural building blocks that were successfully used before. Avoiding ripple effects are exactly what a good EA is intended to do.
For example, I know of more than one situation where business leaders were shown a really cool demo of how SAP HANA could be used to provide a complete solution to real business problems – one case it was the need for real time predictive fraud analytics engine, in the other is was a financial services risk engine. They were shown how the complete system was sold as a fully pre configured appliance,(the inference being that it could be put to use almost right away), with free training and extremely reasonably priced technical support, They already had extensive SAP in-house expertise so – no brainer, out comes the checkbook.
Now absolutely everything that the business leaders saw and were told was absolutely true, and there is also no question that in-memory databases like HANA are completely awesome. BUT that being said, they almost immediately ran into serious integration problems with their business processes, their technology infrastructure, their project management, budgeting, cost overruns, operations, etc., etc., etc., etc. In other words, they bought the solution without considering the potential ripple effects across the entire enterprise.
Patrick DeStefano (tuc50677) says
I’ve seen this situation many times where the solution to one problem ended up causing a mountain load of compatibility and maintenance issues down the road. We had been in the market for a new simulator for testing purposes. Due to new enhancement with the security technology of the product my company produces, our old simulators were not up to the challenge. After the process and demos from several suppliers, we chose one and implemented it. Everything seemed to work okay at first, but as time goes on and security controls are tightened, and other software upgrades are deployed, we continue running into compatibility issues, which require many hours of maintenance and updates from our end. Even when there is IT Strategy and EA, companies may still run into these types of issues.
Michael Gibbons says
We have had many solutions not work because of someone going to a conference and getting a great sales pitch (along with a t-shirt/coffee cup/other vendor souvenir) and then come to find that solution does not work with anything we have currently setup. The worst was a switch with X number of SPAN ports so we could monitor anything we wanted without being inline. Problem was, this switch encapsulated all packets it was capturing and the monitoring tool was not able to read the packets due to the proprietary nature of the encapsulation. Great throughput without any visibility.
Vince Kelly says
4. What is the difference between and IT Strategy committee and an IT Steering Committee?
According to the blog; “To Steer or to Strategize –Differences between IT Steering Committees and IT Strategy Committees”
http://www.escoute.com/2013/08/12/to-steer-or-to-strategize-differences-between-it-steering-committees-and-it-strategy-committees-2/
An IT Strategy committee operates at the board level and ensures alignment between IT and the business. The IT Strategy committee doesn’t carry decision authority directly, it’s more like ‘dashboard’ authority in that it monitors strategic IT plans, provides insights and provides subject matter expertise. The committee also ensures an appropriate level of enterprise resources are available.
An IT Steering committee operates at the executive level of a company and is guided by the IT Strategy committee. The steering committee manages project teams and initiatives and prioritizes and allocates resources as needed.
Vince Kelly says
5. What archetypes do you see in your company? How well do they work?
Our company leverages both organic and inorganic growth strategies and has a pretty diverse product portfolio so there are many archetypes involved. Probably the two most prevalent forms in our company would be the federal and duopoly approaches to governance. The federal archetype is prevalent in some cases because given the high rate of acquisitions we make, the alternative – feudal governance would be a disaster.
The focus of our company, when it makes an acquisition is primarily on two things; the people and the intellectual property that is being acquired. Almost everything else, (asset transitions to the balance sheet, goodwill recognition, liquidity, leverage ratios, etc., etc., etc.) is of secondary importance,(obviously except for maintaining existing legal obligations and agreements;).
In fact, the company maintains a cross functional transition team that goes into the acquired company and literally rips everything out in a very short period of time. It then replaces everything with company standard equipment, software, processes and procedures. While this can be expensive, it absolutely makes the transition (and revenue contributions) from the new company easier and faster and avoids creating technology fiefdoms over the long run.
In my opinion, Tyco and many financial service ‘holding companies’ are good examples of where feudal governance lead to more harm than good.
Richard Flanagan says
Vince – Federal would imply that you would leave somethings in place when it sounds like you rip everything IT out. It sounds more live a duopoly to me. Are IT decisions made by a team of business and IT execs?
Agree totally about feudal, it usually results in a mess.
Vince Kelly says
Your probably right professor but given that we’re required to put some thought behind these questions, I don’t think that “I have no clue” would have sufficed as an answer:)
Interesting that the Federal governance implies that you leave some things in place – I didn’t notice that in the articles – I just based the conclusion on the presence or absence of the five principles to determine the style.
Here’s the rational that I used to come to the conclusion – probably way off base here so your insight is more than welcome:
Again, we do leverage both organic and inorganic growth – i.e., we have been designing and spinning our own ASICs for decades. But we also ‘spread the IP peanut butter’ of acquisitions across other product lines as well,(for example one of the microkernels that we acquired in a previous acquisition several years ago is also used in other platforms today – even though that product is no longer available).
I concluded that we probably use some measure of both styles (Duopoly and Federal) for a couple of reasons. It makes sense to me that, as the article points out, the majority of the companies that they evaluated leverage the Duopoly approach when it came to questions like;
– Principle 1 (“How does IT make money?”)
– Principle 4 (“Business application Needs”)
– Principle 5 (The choice of which initiative to fund and how much to allocate).
I also went with Duopoly because, as I understand it, this style is used to “provide input into architecture and infrastructure decisions”. But this is exactly what does *not* happen when we make an acquisition, (the inorganic growth part) and hence my “rip and replace” pontification:)
Again, as I understand the differences;
– A duopoly consists of the IT group and another group – usually top management or business
unit leaders.
– A federal style of governance on the other hand is a combination of the corporate center and the
business unit with or *without* IT people involved.
So the reason that I went with the Duopoly/Federal conclusion was that – for acquisitions, there is no input from the acquired company’s IT organization, there is no quibbling about what the integration and standardization requirements will be (Principle 2) or what services will be offered (Principle 3).
This being the case, I thought Federal governance best described that process. Now obviously there may be extensive migration work involved in the acquisition process, but,(outside of the people and the IP), there is no ‘pick and choose’ activity, there is only the ‘Borg-like’ process:)
In one respect, I think it may be somewhat like the Systems Integrator business model was at one time in which they would buy the business, move the assets and IT headcount onto their books and then try to ‘glue’ all those pieces into all the other systems that they owned from other acquisitions – i.e., take a Feudal approach. In these cases, they would try to sweat those assets until they could be profitable after recovering their acquisition costs.
In our case we don’t sweat the assets – we factor them into the acquisition costs up front and count on the future revenue streams that they (hopefully) produce to recoup the costs:) In order to do that we rely heavily on standardized architectural acquisition building block ‘templates’ – which sounded to me like what’s described by Federal governance – right?
I guess the question would be – does the governance structure laid out in both articles also apply in “M&A-like” scenarios? (which is essentially what both models above describe I think). If so, I still gotta go with the mix of Duopoly/Federal conclusion;)
Thoughts?
Richard Flanagan says
Vince – Page 5 of the reading describes the Federal model as involving coordinated decision making between the central organization (you company’s HQ0 and the business units (ie the acquired companies). Borrowing from the American federal model, certain decision making rights belong to the federal government and others belong to the states. In IT terms this would suggest that the central organization set certain IT standards and the business units set others. From what you’ve described it sounds like the center does all the decision making. This would mean its either a business monarchy or a duopoly. Again, given your descriptions, it sounds like businesses are involved in the center’s decisions, therefore I am prone to agree with your conclusion of duopoly.
Duy Nguyen says
1. Describe the five IT questions that Weill & Ross (see Figure 3-4) see all organizations making?
• IT Principles: is IT governance, it’s the how an organization makes IT decisions. IT principles describe the structure of IT in an organization, who is involved in the making these decisions, and which initiatives are right for the organization.
• IT Architecture: is the mechanism of IT implemented, what is the framework of IT. How is IT setup within the business?
• IT Infrastructure and strategies: what are the process policies and procedures of IT. How and what does it produce for the business.
• Business decisions need: How is IT assisting with the business needs. How is IT improving the business? How is IT making the business initiatives more effective and efficient?
• IT investments: is how much are we spending on IT vs how are we getting it back. Analysis of ROI based on IT spending vs the business.
Michelangelo C. Collura says
Thank you for this Duy. For some reason I didn’t know where to find the Weill and Ross questions, so this helps.
Richard Flanagan says
Duy – check the first couple of W&R questions – they are about more than who makes the decision. They are about how IT will be used in the company. How much will we spend? Where will we invest this money? Common everywhere? How good is good enough. These principles, usually agreed by the IT Strategy committee, set the parameters within which the CIO and the Steering team must work.
Duy Nguyen says
2. How do the Weill & Ross questions line up to the McKinsey questions? What’s changed in the last 15 years?
McKinsey questions:
• How well does technology enable the core business?
o Board members using metrics to make digital business decisions on projects that would make the core business processes more effective and efficient. Developing KPIs for this system, gives the board metrics to measure the success of digital initiatives and validation the high costs of these IT projects.
• What value is the business getting from its most important IT projects?
o The value could be something measured as in KPIs or any other system metrics. Because of the high cost of these IT initiatives, project’s outcome and benefits should be regularly tracked based on cost, schedule, and scope. Based on the McKinsey’s analysis measuring the project’s benefits can reduce the risk of project failure by more than 10 percentage points. Other values that are not measured could be the positioning an agency’s system to be more flexible and robust more along the line of EA.
• How long does it take the IT organization to develop and deploy new features and functionality?
o Depending on the nature of the business one might need ASAP and one might have a complicated approval process. Depending on the infrastructure, resources, and capabilities of an agency, one can operate at a two speeds setup. Two speeds consisting of a product-development team that operates with a traditional IT development role and an IT operations staff tasked with rapid launch initiatives.
• How efficient is IT at rolling out technologies and achieving desired outcomes?
o To answer this question, IT must be monitored and KPIs reviewed regularly. Regular assessment of metrics on productivity, product quality, and average costs is the only way for a firm to know exactly what it’s getting from their IT investments.
• How strong is our supply of next-generation IT talent?
o Firms are ensuring that its IT talent level is updated and up to par with continuously measuring its talent development efforts. Metrics are developed in 3 categories: how often IT professionals are rotated, the degree the firms are hiring outside people, and how effective they are developing in-house employees to fulfill pivotal roles.
McKinsey questions seem to be in the same line with Weill & Scott’s questions. But in my opinion, McKinsey questions brings to question how IT aligns with the Business aspects. Not just who makes the decisions but focuses more on the strategies of IT and how it will affect the strategies of Business. This is the changes that happen with spending on IT see a tremendous increase. Since spending on IT has skyrocketed, organizations have to justify the spending with strategies that will align and makes sense with the Business side in the long run.
Duy Nguyen says
3. What is the difference between EA and IT strategy? Do you need both?
• Enterprise Architecture is the framework for an organization to position it’s IT so that it’s flexible and robust for industry changes. Making sure that the organization always has room for improvements and innovations. IT Strategy is making sure an IT decision is aligned with the strategies of the business. EA is a higher level of strategic decision-making that encompasses the organizational IT and business now and prepares itself for the future. IT strategies just align IT and business with the now mindset. Yes, an organization would need both. An organization would benefit greatly with both strategies of AE which considers both business and IT and IT strategies for the now.
Vince Kelly says
Good points Duy. As you point out, an enterprise architecture is useless (and even counter-productive) if its not TIGHTLY aligned to the business requirements and strategy. One of the benefits of a well implemented enterprise architecture is that almost anyone should be able to walk in off of the street, access the company’s EA repository and get an *extremely* detailed and accurate understanding of almost every strategic aspect about the company. Now image if the EA artifacts that the new employee was ‘digesting’ were completely obsolete or even wrong! – talk about doubling or tripling the cost of the ramp-up time needed for that employee ! 🙂
Richard Flanagan says
Its hard for small organizations to do both, usually there is an IT strategy and no EA. That puts them at a disadvantage in an ever changing technical environment. Think of EA as a logic analysis and plan for how to align and stay flexible and IT strategy as the political process (ie communications) that attempt to make the EA reality.
Duy Nguyen says
4. What is the difference between an IT Strategy committee and an IT Steering Committee?
• IT Strategy committee is the committees that carry out the initiatives of the IT Steering Committee. The IT strategy committee is known as the experts in IT that would report to purpose to the Steering committee. The IT Strategy committee is responsible for making sure that IT is aligned with Business strategies and is usually made up of IT directors. The Steering committee is responsible for major projects and aligning resources to carry out the purposed or initiatives coming out of the Strategy committee. The Steering committee is often made up Executive management from across departments.
Richard Flanagan says
Duy – you have it the wrong way around. The strategy committee is the highest level group working with IT. There are usually only 2-4 members, usually the CEO, CFO and maybe the COO. They may only meet and review IT as a function once or twice a year. They are usually focused on the IT Principles as described in your reading. The IT Steering committee works much more closely with the CIO and help generate the IT strategy, specific project plans and investments. They probably meet at least quarterly, maybe more often depending on what is going on.
Duy Nguyen says
I see, I see. Got it..
Duy Nguyen says
Yes, this was mentioned in the enterprise video in week 4. IT organizational leaders working with business leadership teams create an IT strategy and strategy is then proposed to the IT Steering committee. Once it gets passed the IT Steering it might need review/approval from an executive team called the IT Strategy committee.
Patrick DeStefano (tuc50677) says
The general rule that I use to make sure I don’t get these things mixed up is that if it has the word “Strategy” in it, it is most likely the highest level form of whatever it is we are talking about at the given time. Whether it is Business Strategy or IT Strategy, they are both developed by senior executives on the business or IT sides. You can think of it like traveling from point A to point B. What will my strategy be to get from A to B? I will drive my car. How will i drive my car there? I will ‘Steer’ my car in the direction of the destination.
Duy Nguyen says
5. What archetypes do you see in your company? How well do they work?
• My organization employs the IT Federal approach, which consists of the IT group and the business group. Aside from decision regarding upgrades to our Enterprise systems, all other applications involve the user groups with input from the Executive from the respective department. Working in this methodology seems to work well a good percentage of the time. There are other times when the user group is not involved as much as needed or decisions made by respected Executive of the department are not fully agreed by the department staff.
Richard Flanagan says
Duy – are businesses allowed to do their own thing in some areas and not others? Federal implies that certain functional areas are reserved for the corporate whole (email and accounting are often examples) and others for the business (web sites, CRM, etc.)
Duy Nguyen says
Yes there some applications that the business has more control or input over. For example the website, there is a front end where the Communication department post and does their own work on.
Heiang Cheung says
Steve Praino presentation
In the video I like how Steve emphasized how important communication is for IT and for IT to succeed. Being able to communicate IT to other business leader in an organization to make sure that they know how important IT is because if they don’t know, companies would just outsource IT. This makes me think that this program we’re in should include a sales course to provide us a skill to communicate to other business unit within an organization. Being able to sell ideas and influence other people is a really helpful skill in IT. I also like how he talked about his experience of setting up IT strategies. He also talked how strategies are not set in stone and need to be refresh every so often due to changes to technology and business strategy. I also like how he talked about having other people in the business beside IT in the committee because you have to align IT with business strategy and it also spreads the accountability and responsibility around, so people can’t just blame IT if a project fail.
Heiang Cheung says
4. What is the difference between and IT Strategy committee and an IT Steering Committee?
IT strategy committee provide IT insight to the board, monitor strategic IT plans and make sure there is alignment between IT and business strategy through IT governance. IT strategy committee IT steering committee communicate strategic goals and recommend changes to strategic plans. They monitor and approve various architecture to support IT strategy. IT steering make sure everything is going as planed put in place by the IT strategy committee.
Donald Hoxhaj says
Describe the five IT questions that Weill & Ross (see Figure 3-4) see all organizations making?
The five questions that Weill & Ross see all organizations make relate to the following:
– How does the enterprise govern IT Principles?
– How does the enterprise govern IT Architecture?
– How does the enterprises govern IT Infrastructure Strategies?
– How does the enterprises govern Business Application Needs?
– How does the enterprises govern IT Investment?
For many organizations, the Business usually drives the conversation in terms of IT Principles, Business Application Needs, and of course IT Investment. Weill & Ross then explains the different Archetypal approaches for IT decision making that could be beneficial for different organizations.
What is the difference between EA and IT strategy? Do you need both?
IT strategy is more related to identify opportunities for IT improvements that will contribute to the overall alignment of IT delivery to the needs of business. EA strategy is the overarching strategy in which it will drive, supervise and review the company’s overall technology related strategies.
What is the difference between and IT Strategy committee and an IT Steering Committee?
A strategy committee sets the visions, goals and objectives for the IT organization. It is usually comprised of 2-4 people and they mostly operate in a business monarchy in which the senior executives make IT decisions that will affect the entire enterprise. A steering committee is usually larger in size and includes business executives, most commonly the CFO and CIO. A steering committee is important to the operations of the organization, reviewing IT performance and approving the IT policy and Strategy documents. The Strategy Committee aligns the business needs with the IT. In most companies, the CIO acts as the bridge between these two groups.
What archetypes do you see in your company? How well do they work?
In my company, I often see the IT duopoly archetypal approach to IT decision making. This specific archetype works well because both business and IT needs are represented. Since the nature of my industry is centered on collaboration, this approach seems to be almost second-nature to the company and I feel that it has helped to produce an overall synergistic environment. Decisions should be made with IT executives and integrating a high level business leader as well in order to ensure the decisions made are best for the company.
Heiang Cheung says
3. What is the difference between EA and IT strategy? Do you need both?
EA is how an organization can achieve it current and future objectives more like a blue print of the organization that defines the structures and operations. IT strategy is more about what we’re going to do and how we’re going to use IT to align with business strategy for the future of the business. are we going to use a new technology to enhance sales is it going to to be measurable. I think you definitely need both because it goes hand and hand you.
Heiang Cheung says
5. What archetypes do you see in your company? How well do they work?
I might be wrong but from what I see as an accountant at my company and looking from the outside in it looks like an IT duopoly. I don’t think business unit are involved in major IT project that much. Project might go through the CFO but I don’t think there are any inputs by the people who are actually do the functions. Most of the time IT would have to fix all the problems we have after something is implemented.
Richard Flanagan says
Heiang,
Duopoly would imply some input (through a committee probably) but no real decision making power. If there is no input at all, its more likely a business monarchy.
Heiang Cheung says
Describe the five IT questions that Weill & Ross (see Figure 3-4) see all organizations making?
The 5 questions are who make the decisions for, how each is effective, how much resource should be put in each, how are they govern and How it aligns with the business.
IT principles sets the strategic role for IT across the enterprise
IT architecture, the framework of IT
IT infrastructure strategies,
Business application need
IT investments
Heiang Cheung says
How do the Weill & Ross questions line up to the McKinsey questions? What’s changed in the last 15 years?
Mckinsey five question are below but they all look just about the same for W&R questions. The things that changed are that now people realize that IT work efficiently when the board is involved in IT. For example How long does it take the IT organization to develop and deploy new feature It’s the same W&R with business application needs.
• How well does technology enable the core business?
• What value is the business getting from its most important IT projects?
• How long does it take the IT organization to develop and deploy new features and functionality?
• How efficient is IT at rolling out technologies and achieving desired outcomes?
• How strong is our supply of next-generation IT talent?
Richard Flanagan says
Heiang – check out VInce’s not above. He points out that the McKinsey article talks about the strength of your “next generation IT talent”, W&R don’t really address that although the others are very similar.
Michael Gibbons says
1. IT Principles – How will IT be utilized by the Organization
2. IT Architecture – What is IT going to do and what investments do we need to make for IT
3. IT Infrastructure – Enterprise Architecture, how will IT Support the organization today and be flexible enough to meet the organizations needs tomorrow
4. Business Application Needs – Innovation
5. IT Investments and Prioritization – Portfolio Management
Michael Gibbons says
How do the Weill & Ross questions line up to the McKinsey questions? What’s changed in the last 15 years?
The Weill and Ross questions line up almost one for one with the McKinsey questions. The only thing that has really changed over the last 15 years is the technology and bringing IT more into the business side of an organization. The high level questions and the questions every board should be asking fall into a strong IT Governance.
IT Principles => How does technology enable the core business?
IT Architecture => What value is the business getting from its most important IT Projects?
IT Infrastructure => How long does it take IT organization to develop and deploy new features and functionality?
Business Application Needs => How strong is our supply of next generation IT Talent?
IT Investments and Prioritization => How efficient is IT at rolling out technologies and achieving desired outcomes?
Michael Gibbons says
What is the difference between EA and IT strategy? Do you need both?
Enterprise Architecture is more of the technical side of IT for an organization. It is basically how are we going to support the organization today and how are we going to make it flexible enough to meet our needs tomorrow. IT Strategy is more of the business side. What is IT going to do to help the organization and what investments does the organization need to make in IT to make that happen.
Richard Flanagan says
Michael – don’t fall into the trap of EA being only technical. To be successful it must understand the business goals, model and processes. Yes the outputs are technical, but some of the critical inputs are not.
Michael Gibbons says
What is the difference between and IT Strategy committee and an IT Steering Committee?
The difference between an IT Strategy committee and an IT Steering Committee is the function those committee’s serve. The Strategy Committee should be focused on high level – how will we succeed as an organization and how will IT help. It then looks at higher level items to keep that Strategy on point (capabilities, IT contribution, principles, governance, financial management, metrics, services, architecture, people and sourcing). The IT Steering Committee then approves what projects and resources are necessary to keep the organization on the path of meeting the strategy.
Michael Gibbons says
What archetypes do you see in your company? How well do they work?
On paper, we would say we have a Duopoly where there is an IT Steering Committee and the Committee prioritizes projects and spending based on business objective and IT assigns resources based on the plan. Being able to step back and see how things have evolved over the past several years, we also show strong signs of an IT Monarchy as the members of our IT Steering Committee are VP’s from every business unit so the majority do not have a technical background and at this point in their careers, their focus remains on their business unit. The IT Steering Committee is headed by IT and the project management group resides in IT so all projects that go to the IT Steering Committee from any business unit have to be vetted to IT prior to even making it to the Committee (IT basically controls whether something becomes a project or if resources will be available for that project). That has led to what I refer to as “rogue” IT departments or signs of Anarchy. The loophole some business units have found is if they can’t get the resources or the items they want from IT, there is nothing preventing them from going to a hosted solution or hiring consultants. This isn’t extremely common but one department has basically written off using IT for their core functions. Parts of all 3 types that I see work to some degree but from Steve’s presentation, if we had a strong leader that brought everyone into the room and forced them or made them feel like they were making the decisions or a bigger part of the solution, I think it would function much better. Keeping everyone workings towards the same goal is difficult because the long term plan changes almost as frequently as the short term plan and because we do not have a formalized EA, we are not very flexible or agile when the plan changes.
Mohammed Syed says
Question 1: Describe the five IT questions that Weill & Ross (see Figure 3-4) see all organizations making?
Weill & Ross first question is how enterprises govern arrangements for IT principles?
IT Principles are used by enterprises in various ways as they play a stratagem role for IT. Most companies use numerous approaches such as duopoly – where senior management leads in decision making, and works in partnership to ensure IT is dedicated to business principles. Or business monarchies – who ensure IT principles are associated with business plans. Federal models guarantee that in defining the role of IT business inputs have a strong influence. And finally IT monarchy has strong technical development, however it might not be resourceful when it comes to business architecture.
How enterprises govern arrangements for IT Architecture?
IT monarchies are depended on by most enterprises to decide on IT Architecture. “…senior managers view architecture more as a technical than a strategic issue.” (Weill & Ross) Managers’ view that IT principles are best translated to IT architecture by IT professionals. Very few enterprises use duopolies to make architecture decisions, as “… duopoly approach is an overt recognition of dual business and technical nature of architecture decisions.” (Weill & Ross)
How enterprises govern arrangements for IT infrastructure strategies.
Similar to IT architecture, IT monarchies are involved in decision making regarding infrastructure strategies allowing IT unit to have independence in constructing decisions. However enterprises also use duopoly to discuss technology, business, and political matters for infrastructure strategies.
How enterprises govern arrangements for IT Business Application Needs?
Various methods are used for IT Business Application Needs. From federal model, to duopolies, to feudal model, and business model. Each model has a specific approach for example, the federal models leans more towards the employment of local business applications to duplicate or modify software. Whereas IT duopolies have a greater impact on business application decisions by having restrictive amounts of choices in regards purchasing applications. Feudal model is used in some enterprises specifically for business application needs “…for high business unit autonomy and permit business unite to move faster when they find packages or define requirements to meet a unique business need.” (Weill & Ross)
How enterprises govern arrangements for IT Investment and Prioritization?
The following three models are used for IT investments and prioritization, business monarchies, federal, duopolies, and each of the models have different views on how an enterprise can capitalize on IT investments. Business monarchies outline and reserve the organizations overall budget, and allow IT projects to contend for funds with other departments. While the federal model is involved in IT investments with business units priorities either by allocating the funds to senior/ central management or by allocating the funds to the regional office. Duopoly model on the other hand views IT and a unit, and can identify any risks in regards to the infrastructure and investment thus enabling a faster reimbursement in major infrastructure investments. Other than these models, a minimum number of enterprises allow IT professionals to be involved in decision making in regards to IT investments due to business tradeoffs.
Mohammed Syed says
Question 4
What is the difference between and IT Strategy committee and an IT Steering Committee?
IT STRATEGY COMMITTEE – Guarantees arrangement amid IT and business strategy via enterprise IT governance. With a dashboard authority the committee oversees IT management along with various committees. Most of its responsibilities include being a subject matter expert, and contributing various visions along with monitoring resources and strategic plans.
IT STEERING COMMITTEE – Overlook projects by regulating priorities and distributing assets with direction from the IT Strategy Committee. There may be many steering committees within an organization. Their main responsibilities is to ensure business requirements are aligned with IT strategy. To spread IT value the committee largely regulates the allocation of resources. The committee also observes and supports architecture, and discuss goal and changes with project teams
Mohammed Syed says
Question 3:
What is the difference between EA and IT strategy? Do you need both?
EA strategy is basically an organization’s operating model. It ensures an organizations is guided in regards to design and evolution of the overall organization. While IT strategy ensures decisions made are affiliated and connected with business strategies. Any enterprise would benefit in using both the strategies as they warrant the combining of business and IT for the present and the future
Richard Flanagan says
Mohammed – EA does have a very strong technical component. So strong in fact that in many places it is seen as a purely technical exercise which it should not be.
Mohammed Syed says
5. What archetypes do you see in your company? How well do they work?
In my organization the Business Monarchy model is used and the C level executives, and senior business executives make decisions. In regards to the IT department any feedback that is generated is passed down to the managers and senior executives. Any major changes that occur are only due to output from the executive level.
Richard Flanagan says
How do the senior exec’s know what’s possible in the IT space? Could they miss a significant opportunity by not understanding the implications of technology?
Jonathan Duani says
Describe the five IT questions that Weill & Ross (see Figure 3-4) see all organizations making?
There are 5 different questions that Weill & Ross see all organizations making these are IT principles, IT Architecture, IT Infrastructure, Business Application Needs, and IT Investment and Prioritization. IT Principals focus on how will IT be utilized in the organization. IT Architecture focuses on what projects and things are going to be accomplished by IT and how much to invest in them. IT infrastructure focuses on enterprise architecture and how IT can support the needs of the organization in the current standing and how it will be able to scale for the future. Business Application Needs focuses on what the administration wants to do to innovate and have the next big thing and finally IT investments and prioritization will focus on how the companies return on invest stacks up to IT. They will see what they spend vs what they receive in return.
Jonathan Duani says
How do the Weill & Ross questions line up to the McKinsey questions? What’s changed in the last 15 years?
Weill & Ross questions lined up almost directly to the McKinsey questions. After looking at the both questions you can see a direct correlation between each one, for example, IT Principles will directly correlate with how does technology enable the core business. However, with this being said nothing really has changed in the past 15 years. The only thing has changed is the kind of technology we are integrating into the organization and the frequency of change within the organization. Also through the years business has played a much bigger role in IT.
Jonathan Duani says
What is the difference between EA and IT strategy? Do you need both?
I think it is very important to have both enterprise architecture and IT Strategy. This is because they work well together however, if you are missing one then it is like part of the IT organization is missing direction. EA is more focused on the technical side of things. Where IT strategy will look more to the business side of things. You will need to have both technical and business to have a properly running IT enterprise
Michael Gibbons says
I agree that it’s important to have both but have seen success with pieces of an Enterprise Architecture in place and a basic IT Strategy in place. My organization struggles with the Enterprise Architecture piece and at times, it feels like we change directions way more often than what we should. Many of us feel if we had these items solidified and the buy in from the top level, it would play out like it reads in the book – IT Strategy – how we will succeed and how will IT help.
Michael Gibbons says
I came across this article for my other class and realized how much it relates to our discussion on EA and IT Strategy.
https://www.darkreading.com/iot/caterpillar-eyes-competitive-edge-with-connected-asset-security-program/d/d-id/1330001?
Jonathan Duani says
What is the difference between and IT Strategy committee and an IT Steering Committee?
They difference between IT Strategy and IT Steering Committee is the objective of both. The IT strategy will focus more on the big picture. They will look at what needs to be done in the organization and how it will affect IT. The IT Steering Committee will focus more on how IT will spend its money. It looks at the project that the company are working on an allocates the proper resources needed to complete the projects and keep them on track.
BIlaal Williams says
The five IT questions Weil & Ross see all organizations regarding IT are based around the following:
IT Principles- This describes how IT is viewed in the organization and what is its mission. Its focus is how IT will be used in the organization, what type of projects will be invested in, etc.
IT Architecture – Most closely linked to the enterprise architecture of the organization. This involves how will the IT architecture be aligned with the business goals, and ultimately how can IT add value to the business.
IT Infrastructure – Like IT Architecture, however it involves more technical aspects of the infrastructure. This involves what systems will be used to reach the goals set in the previous step.
Business Application – This involves IT adapting and innovating the strategy according to the needs of the business. This ensures the strategy promotes agile development and response, which is needed in an industry that changes so rapidly.
IT Investment & Prioritization – Involves where the actual spending and investment in IT is positioned.
BIlaal Williams says
The Mckinsey questions line up well with the Weill & Ross. Although technology has changed significantly in the past 15 years this is an example of how a strategy should be able to adapt to the current business climate. Each question can be mapped to questions posed by Weil & Ross. For example, question 1 of Mckinsey, how efficient is IT at rolling out technologies and achieving desired outcomes coincides with Weill & Ross’ questions regarding IT Principles. The Mckinsey questions are more specific, while the Weill and Ross questions are broader and leave room for a more granular explanation as to how the goals should be achieved.
BIlaal Williams says
An enterprise architecture is a blueprint that defines the structure and operation of an organization. Its main purpose is to define how the business processes align and are implemented to reach business goals. An IT strategy should be a blueprint as to how IT will be implemented to meet these business goals. An IT strategy will use enterprise architecture to ensure that the strategy is aligned with the business needs. Enterprise architecture is an important tool which can be used to develop an effective IT strategy to ensure IT is a business enabler and adds value to the business, while remaining flexible and agile to a changing business environment.
Richard Flanagan says
Bilaal – not sure I would use the term “blueprint” for IT strategy. I think “construction plan” might be a better team. Any general contractor knows that stuff happens once you start building. The architect’s blueprints are still what you are trying to do but you may have to make a few compromises and deviations to get there.
BIlaal Williams says
An IT strategy committee develops the strategy for how IT services will be implemented in the organization. It should be comprised of business leaders and IT management to ensure the strategy will meet the needs of the business and add value. The IT steering committee makes the decision on what IT projects will be implemented. These decisions should be made in alignment with the IT strategy, but the ultimate decision as to what IT projects are implemented belongs to members of the steering committee.
BIlaal Williams says
The archetype I see most in my current organization is feudal when it comes to IT development and implementation. There are many different systems throughout the organization with little integration. Some departments are using legacy software which is no longer supported and runs on antiquated equipment, while others are using SaaS apps and cloud services..
Michael Gibbons says
Bilaal, do you see alot of silo effect with the various legacy systems and SaaS and cloud services? I have seen many instances where the business unit wants the newest platform (HR, Accounting, Lending) and may not realize how many other systems are tied into their respective system. IT may not be willing to or able to put them on the new platform they want so the business unit sees no value in IT and goes the cloud route and bypasses the need for IT resources. A major issue that comes into effect here is that cloud solution now needs integrated with other legacy systems that people did not realize was a dependency to their former legacy system (back to the hairball diagram from EA last week).
BIlaal Williams says
The most important takeaway for me from the video with Steve Praino was the importance of communication and building a partnership with business leaders to ensure the IT Strategy is aligned with the goals of the business. In order for IT to be effective in the organization, business leaders must agree that IT adds value to the organization and is not a cost center. This is done by educating the business side of the organization. Often it is important to speak the language of the business which is profit. If business leaders are certain about how IT will add value to the organization they will be more willing to invest in something that may not be easily quantifiable. A key method to accomplish this is to develop a relationship with those on the business end and have them involved in the development of the overall IT strategy.
Patrick DeStefano (tuc50677) says
1. Describe the five IT questions that Weill & Ross (see Figure 3-4) see all organizations making?
Weill & Ross outline the five types of governance decisions that they see organizations making as follows:
1. IT Principles: set the overall strategy for the IT organization. How can the IT organization support the overall business strategy of the organization? The most popular types used in organizations in 2003 was a Federal system for input into the decision while the Duopoly was the most popular overall decision making system for the organizations IT Principles
2. IT Architecture: How is/will IT be setup and delivered? How much will be invested in IT? According to the article, in 2003, the most common setups for providing input were Federal and Duopoly while the most common overall decision making setup was an IT Monarchy
3. IT Infrastructure: What types of infrastructure do we currently have and what investments will need to be made to get us to our goal future state? According to the article, in 2003, the most common setups for providing input were Federal while the most common overall decision making setup was an IT Monarchy
4. Business Application Needs: What types of investments will we need to make to remain innovative with our future business applications to meet the needs of our end users/customers? According to the article, in 2003, the most common setups for providing input were Federal while the most common overall decision making setup was Federal or Duopoly
5. IT Investment and Prioritization: Which investments should we prioritize to best meet our business users and customers needs? According to the article, in 2003, the most common setups for providing input were Federal while the most common overall decision making setup was split three ways between Federal, Duopoly, or Business Monarchy.
Jonathan Duani says
What archetypes do you see in your company? How well do they work?
In My company I see a lot of different archetypes. I do see all 6 of the different types of the archetypes through the organization however I do see a couple are more prevalent. I see IT Monarchy a lot where a couple people make all the big decisions for the organization. I actually have been seeing a lot of fall out already. If the higher ups do not like a product and they want it out, it’s out and something is going to replace it and there is no talking them out of it. It is a very poor plan in my eyes because then not only do you not grow as a company but you are in turn take a step forward and then 5 steps back. On the research side of things, I see a lot of Anarchy. A lot of the departments in the research side of things run off of grants and since this is a case they do not have to answer to anyone but themselves and the person who issues the grant, (sometimes the federal government). Since, they do not have to abide by our standard they can order whatever they want and we need to support it and incorporate it into the environment.
Patrick DeStefano (tuc50677) says
3. What is the difference between EA and IT strategy? Do you need both?
An IT strategy relates more to the overall business needs and can be closely tied to the business strategy. It speaks more to what role IT will play within the organization in order for the firm to meet it’s business need. EA on the other hand, is more on the technical side and speaks more to the architecture of how the systems are all setup and integrated together. There is definitely strategy involved in both and, in an ideal world, an organization should have both. That being said, for small organizations, or organizations with a very small IT presence (are there really any of these left though?), they may be able to get away without having a very structured or formal EA strategy.
Jonathan Duani says
In the Steve Praino lecture there were a couple things that he touched on that I found very interesting. First I found that him starting on the help desk was rather interesting and it was cool to see someone starting legitimately at the bottom can build their way up. I also enjoyed the things he had to say about working on the help desk and it was very true. It takes a specific set of skills to deal with angry and enraged peopled cause they are only calling when thing go wrong, you do not see someone calling the helpdesk just to chat. Also, I found farther into lecture when he is talking about IT strategy that it security was one of the most important aspects about it. It is interesting to see that companies now are starting to see the importance of security moving forward and are starting to incorporate it as they are reworking and rebuilding their IT.
Patrick DeStefano (tuc50677) says
5. What archetypes do you see in your company? How well do they work?
Over the past several years, I’ve noticed a lot of T-shaped Duopoly in my company. It’s a large organization to the point where it would be extremely inefficient to use a Federal system, so generally there is a team of business managers and business users as well as a group of IT managers who get together to pick which projects will be getting slotted for certain releases based on capacity and how closely aligned the projects being considered are to each other.
This process seems to work pretty well for the most part. There is always room for a little improvement, however overall, it ensures everyone is on the same page and understands the constraints of the IT organization.
Tamekia P. says
1. Describe the five IT questions that Weill & Ross (see Figure 3-4) see all organizations making?
All organizations make decisions related to:
IT Principles – Strategic role for IT across enterprise
IT Architecture – The IT architecture is the technical portion of how the IT principles will be executed within the organization. IT professionals are expected to be able to translate the principles to the architecture.
IT Infrastructure – Similar to architecture, infrastructure supports the IT architecture. IT professionals are also expected to be able to develop infrastructure without the business managers.
Business Application Needs – This relates to the systems necessary to support the business. Given that this is dependent on the line of business, the decisions are less centralized.
IT Investment – Where business application needs are more reflective of the current needs, the IT investment relates to future needs of the organization. What do we need to get where we are going? These decisions are typically made by a small group of people and pushed down.
Tamekia P. says
2. What is the difference between EA and IT strategy? Do you need both?
EA is the technical capabilities needed to meet business needs. IT strategy is the alignment of IT with the business. You need IT strategy more because to me EA is like framework – how will we chose structure the IT organization. Where IT strategy is making sure that the structure is built strongest where needed. As an example, EA might say we need mainframes because that’s the produces the fastest result but IT strategy would say we only need to employ Mainframes to support the tools needed most by the organization.
Brandan Mackowsky says
1. Describe the five IT questions that Weill & Ross (see Figure 3-4) see all organizations making?
Weill and Ross claim that every organization must answer about IT Principles, IT Architecture, IT Infrastructure, Business Application Needs, and IT Investment and Prioritization for its IT aspect. When consulting about IT Principles, it is important to note how much the business has planned to spend on objectives. It is key to understand what exactly they want to do, where they want to invest capital for projects, and how they want to set up IT and determine its utilization within the organization. IT architecture links to IT strategy because it is used to say what IT is going to use and where the best place to invest the organization’s money lies in order to leverage benefits and value. It is more focused on a business stance rather than a technical end. IT infrastructure relates to the overall enterprise architecture. It focuses on a technical side but can overlap with the business stance. It takes a standpoint and claims that it is important to support what we have today but crucial to see what can be put in place to handle tomorrow’s problems. Business application needs explain that it is important to have strategies in place but realize that nothing ever goes right or according to plan. The goal is to meet new market challenges or understand valuable opportunities that they want to pursue that are not in the IT strategy. This is essentially innovation and maps well to the business application needs. Lastly, IT investment and prioritization simply explain how an organization decides where to spend the money it has and it links to portfolio management.
Brandan Mackowsky says
2. How do the Weill & Ross questions line up to the McKinsey questions? What’s changed in the last 15 years?
The Weill and Ross questions essentially line hand and hand to the McKinsey questions. Each has a similar goal of ensuring that an organization is properly checking in with itself to ensure current and future success and growth. Each focus on the business and technical standpoint of the company.
Brandan Mackowsky says
3. What is the difference between EA and IT strategy? Do you need both?
An EA focuses to develop a core standpoint for an organization so that the technical end of the company can align with its business case to ensure that the company is making strategic decisions in order to keep its infrastructure safe, secure, and expanding. An IT strategy differs in that it sets up a baseline for the company to follow as to how its IT needs and demands should be executed during its operations. Its key is to focus on developing a guidance for all IT related activities. Both are needed within an organization as they both focus on different technical aspects.
Brandan Mackowsky says
4. What is the difference between and IT Strategy committee and an IT Steering Committee?
The difference between an IT strategy committee and an IT steering committee is that the strategy group tends to focus on upper level demands and how the organization will continue to grow and succeed. It works to define how the company should operate and the methods it should take to ensure it remains relevant. The steering committee focuses to keep the members of the organization compliant and on pace with following and achieving the strategy that was set in place.
Brandan Mackowsky says
5. What archetypes do you see in your company? How well do they work?
In my company, I see a mix of a Federal and Feudal approach. At my company, a great deal of the business became part of the organization via merger and acquisition. Due to this, each business typically had their own way of managing their IT and some of that aspect is still seen ten years after they became a part of the organization. In audit services, we push the Federal approach within the company to ensure that all IT aspects are generally focused around similar baselines and standards. It allows us to hold each business partner to the same standards when evaluating their structure and compliance to ensure success for my organization. By using a Federal approach over a Feudal approach, the IT side of the business flows nicer together and provides a unified approach. The issue with this are employees who have been employed with the old organization for a long period of time and do not want to change their ways of doing things that work, a big cause for the failed elimination of any type of Feudal approach.
Richard Flanagan says
Brandon – read my earlier comments on federal. Its only accurate if you would like to leave some of the decision making in the business’ hands. Otherwise, it sounds more feudal, which iis what results from most M&A activity in the absence of really strong leadership.
Patrick DeStefano (tuc50677) says
Steve Praino Presentation
1. “63% of business leaders think IT is too slow to respond to new technology opportunities.”
–I’m wondering if these business leaders are aware of all the analysis, vetting, troubleshooting, and testing which is required by most large organizations today in order to implement a new technology in todays security concerned environment. Possibly they may just need to be better informed of why it is not a quick process.
2. “Adapt as needed”
–Adaption to changing times and situations is imperative to having any sort of successful IT strategy. You can set a plan in motion, however you WILL hit speed bumps and setbacks along the way. You will need to be able to pivot and change direction if needed in times of crisis.
3. “With large size comes slowness”
–In general, the larger the organization is, the slower it is to implement change. I work for a company with 200,000+ employees. Technology change moves extremely slow when it affects that many employees.
4. “IT Strategic Objectives”
–Since you can’t manage everyone’s day-to-day activities, set a strategic goal and allow people to be empowered to figure out their own ways to meet the end goals. This allows creativity as well as increases employee engagement and satisfaction
5. “Us vs. Them”
–This attitude is extremely detrimental to relationships, yet it exists in almost every company. It is extremely important to communicate effectively and to break down barriers, if possible. The “us vs them” attitude creates a negative relationship and paints each other as an enemy.
6. “Know what businesses need: Speak like a business person, not an IT person”
–We need to all be able to communicate effectively about the overall goals of the project. A majority of projects are for business purposes and have business requirements. If you are going to be communicating about the project, you need to be able to understand the business need and business requirements surrounding the project.
Paul Needle says
1. Describe the five IT questions that Weill & Ross (see Figure 3-4) see all organizations making?
Not sure why but I struggled with this one all week. I don’t really understand the questions I guess.
IT Principles – What is the strategic role for IT Across the enterprise?
It Architecture – What is the business strategy considerations in the architecture?
IT Infrastructure – What is the design and appropriate price point for the service offerings?
Business Application Needs – What business needs are required in the IT to move forward, adapt and innovate?
IT Investment and Prioritization – How do we ensure maximum value from our IT investments?
Paul Needle says
2. How do the Weill & Ross questions line up to the McKinsey questions? What’s changed in the last 15 years?
The questions are eerily similar when considering how much has changed in IT in the past 15 years. They all center own how the business is integrated with IT, how quickly can they adapt, and how to keep moving forward. Not too positive that my interpretation of the W&R questions are accurate but certainly feel strongly that both are similar.
IT Principles – What is the strategic role for IT Across the enterprise?
How does technology enable core business?
It Architecture – What is the business strategy considerations in the architecture?
What value si the business getting from its most important IT Projects
IT Infrastructure – What is the design and appropriate price point for the service offerings?
How long does it take IT organization to develop and deploy new features and functionality?
Business Application Needs – What business needs are required in the IT to move forward, adapt and innovate?
How strong is our supply of next generation IT talent?
IT Investment and Prioritization – How do we ensure maximum value from our IT investments?
How efficient is IT at rolling out technologies and achieving desired outcomes?
If I had to pick a difference I would say that Mckinsey seems to be stressing the measured side of the benefits which I think is appropriate.
Paul Needle says
3. What is the difference between EA and IT strategy? Do you need both?
A smaller company may not have an EA but they end up being vulnerable to adaptation and change. The EA’s focus is to bring a fragmented company together from an IT perspective which will allow it to be more agile and freely integrate after implementation or an acquisition. A smaller company as Professor noted earlier probably doesn’t have an EA if there are a handful of divisions and they aren’t making acquisitions. All companies need to have an IT strategy in place. It is going to align IT decisions with the business strategy. Without this IT investments will likely go over budget. I think all companies need both but realistically probably don’t implement EA’s as much as they should.
Paul Needle says
The IT Strategy committee is there to align business strategy with IT. It’s goal is to develop a big picture that should stay intact with a changing environment. It’s typically made up of the C -Suite. It’s important that it’s big picture and not changing quarterly. The IT Strategy can change the plan from time to time but overall the IT Strategy Committee is to set a culture that can be followed. The IT Steering committee is there to execute the plan that’s put in place by the IT Strategy committee. They should be made up with representatives of various business units.
Paul Needle says
Our company and typically the insurance industry is a business monarchy. We are known for lagging in technology and have great difficulties implementing change. Some would say that the insurance idea is so old that technology is not needed which couldn’t be farther from the truth. The problem is that many companies are still using paper aren’t investing in technologies. Many executives are stuck in past relying on years of experience with insurance but not innovation. A few companies in the Insuretech space have turned a few heads such as Lemonade. We recently hired a new CEO that finally hired a CTO which we never had in the past. I believe that all insurance companies are extremely fragmented because it’s strictly a business monarchy archetype. If it was a federal or duopoly with an EA overseeing everything the company would be extremely successful.
Lezlie Jiles says
5. What archetypes do you see in your company? How well do they work?
I am not absolutely sure what archetype my company uses, but in making a logical guess I would have to say Federal. Weill & Ross describes the federal decision-making as is weighed on by ‘both the center and the business units”. This process is stated to be somewhat difficult because the leaders don’t share the same concerns. However, in my company, this seems to work well, and I believe the differences in concerns is what drives our continued success.
Weill & Ross also points out that with the federal models “the biggest, most powerful business units often get the most attention”, and I could not agree more when comparing this model to my organization. We have several different business units, but the biggest ones are definitely known. However, their achievement within their infrastructure allows other units to mimic the process at least parts of it.
Lezlie Jiles says
4. What is the difference between and IT Strategy committee and an IT Steering Committee?
Cobit defines IT Strategy committee as ” A group of senior executives appointed by the board to
ensure that the board is involved in, and kept informed of, major IT-related matters and decisions. The committee is accountable for managing the portfolios of IT-enabled investments, IT services, and IT assets, ensuring that value is delivered and risk is managed. The committee is normally chaired by a board member, not by the CIO.” While the IT steering committee is a group of ” An executive management-level committee that assists in the delivery of the IT strategy, oversees day-to-day management of IT service delivery and IT projects, and focuses on implementation aspects. In other words, the steering committee fulfills the IT strategy, making sure the daily processes are being meant, and the strategy committee set-up to ensure that the board is kept abreast of the IT matters.
Lezlie Jiles says
3. What is the difference between EA and IT strategy? Do you need both?
According to Cobit IT Strategy (APO02) is business oriented, and EA (Apo04) is technically oriented. IT strategy is about aligning with the business and having a deep understanding of the business, thereby being prepared to fulfill their needs, define target IT capabilities, and perform a gap analyst. As for EA it is having the knowledge to maintain the current system and the ability to change. EA looks at the current state, evaluate the design and plans for the future of the system by connecting the gaps between IT and the business which will, in turn, assist the company in being more efficient in servicing their customer base and increase their success.
Jason M Mays says
Q1
IT principles represent C-level questions about the part IT will play in the organization. Cost, deployment, implementation, etc. This is like the vision of IT over the long term.
IT Architecture is a short-term goals of IT. It delves into the details of how to achieve alignment from the business side.
IT Infrastructure looks at the technical aspects of achieving goals set out on the Architecture side. IT Architecture and Infrastructure overlap at multiple points. IT Architecture also keeps the longterm vision of in mind to make sure the current structure can handle necessary and desired change.
Business Application Needs look at the fast pace changes the business operation decides it needs but was not planned for. These decisions may come about due to opportunities to generate profit or increase value in processes.
IT Investment and Prioritization represent the final decision to pick and choose the plan and tech that your org feels can achieve the goals of the strategy.
Jason M Mays says
Q3
I think the McKinsey question closely line up to the financial sided questions of 2 & 3 of the Weill & Ross questions. They actually feel somewhat antiquated. The McKinsey questions sound like the conversations that Dave Aron said to avoid. The questions are important but can lead to the dismissal of strategy or the selection of the wrong plan if prioritized.
Jason M Mays says
Q4
According to COBIT 5, The strategy committee is a board-level committee and the steering committee is a C-level committee. The strategy committee looks at the long-term governance of IT in relation to the governance of the entire organization. They review decisions made by the Is equity level to keep them in line with the direction of the organization. The steering committee looks at the day-to-day operation aspect of IT within the organization. They make short-term IT strategy and implementation related decisions.
Jason M Mays says
Q5
In my last stint of employment as a real estate agent I worked in a business monarchy/ anarchy environment. Our broker had several businesses under the same umbrella and considered himself to be quite savvy in all aspects of the business. He didn’t have an understanding of IT strategy at all. This didn’t stop him from making purchases based on what he either over her from colleagues or saw somewhere in the media. I use the word anarchy because the individual in charge of implementing IT processes was a contractor who did not care about the actual business. He made no substantial input or recommendations on the actual applications the boss wanted. He did what he was paid to do and if he could avoid it he would not be in the office at all. One of the smaller businesses under my broker’s umbrella failed in part because he had no expert advise on the IT strategy of the business.
Jason M Mays says
My takeaway from the Dow video is that the job of a high level IT manager is to get your organization to eat their vegetables. From the point of view of the non-IT C-level management, IT strategy appears to be a costly nuisance and a boring new flavor of the month. There is an awareness of its vital importance. This importance doesn’t justify making a meeting longer.
This feels like a parent who has to convince a kid who dislikes their vegetables. To make it more appetizing it needs to be paired with tastier food. In the IT manager’s position, the tastier foods are buzzwords like security, lower cost, and breach. While this can be effective it trains C-level management to crave the wrong content.
The real challenge of IT leadership is the same as all leadership. You need to communicate to the management in a way that establishes a real relationship. This honestly makes me feel better. I have spent the last few years developing those skills. I’m not perfect at it, but I do understand it well. My first few weeks have felt like trying to learn to swim in a sea of risk lingo. This realization makes me see the value in lessons I learned as a community leader and legal studies undergraduate.
Donald Hoxhaj says
1. Describe the five IT questions that Weill & Ross (see Figure 3-4) see all organizations making?
The five questions that Weill & Ross see all organizations make relate to the following:
– How does the enterprise govern IT Principles?
– How does the enterprise govern IT Architecture?
– How does the enterprises govern IT Infrastructure Strategies?
– How does the enterprises govern Business Application Needs?
– How does the enterprises govern IT Investment?
For many organizations, the Business usually drives the conversation in terms of IT Principles, Business Application Needs, IT Investment. Weill & Ross then explains the different Archetypal approaches for IT decision making that could be beneficial for different organizations.
Donald Hoxhaj says
2. How do the Weill & Ross questions line up to the McKinsey questions? What’s changed in the last 15 years?
The Weill & Ross questions are relatively similar to the McKinsey questions. The only change would be that focus on IT as a group of individuals that bring a skillset to the organization and how bringing IT and strong governance can benefit the overall business.
Donald Hoxhaj says
3. What is the difference between EA and IT strategy? Do you need both?
IT strategy is more related to identifying immediate opportunities for IT improvements that will contribute to the overall alignment of IT delivery to the needs of business. EA strategy is the overarching strategy that encompasses both IT and business to ensure decision making is focused on enabling an organization that is equipped for future technology needs and the ever changing environments. EA will not be successful unless it is aligned to the organization’s business strategies.
Donald Hoxhaj says
4. What is the difference between and IT Strategy committee and an IT Steering Committee?
A strategy committee sets the visions, goals and objectives for the IT organization. It is usually comprised of 2-4 people and they mostly operate in a business monarchy in which the senior executives make IT decisions that will affect the entire enterprise. A steering committee is usually larger in size and includes business executives, most commonly the CFO and CIO. A steering committee is important to the operations of the organization, reviewing IT performance and approving the IT policy and Strategy documents. The Strategy Committee aligns the business needs with the IT. In most companies, the CIO acts as the bridge between these two groups.
Donald Hoxhaj says
5. What archetypes do you see in your company? How well do they work?
In my company, I often see the IT duopoly archetypal approach to IT decision making. This specific archetype works well because both business and IT needs are represented. Since the nature of my industry is centered on collaboration, this approach seems to be almost second-nature to the company and I feel that it has helped to produce an overall synergistic environment. Decisions should be made with IT executives and integrating a high level business leader as well in order to ensure the decisions made are best for the company.