Doing Governance Making IT Matter John Townsend Deputy Director (Corporate Information Systems) Liverpool John Moores University

Agenda Background –Does IT Matter? –IT Does Matter –Importance for SOA –IT Governance – the Key? The JISC Toolkit The LJMU Experience Conclusions

IT Doesn’t Matter As information technology’s power and ubiquity have grown, its strategic importance has diminished. The way you approach IT investment and management will need to change dramatically. Nicholas G.Carr ‘IT Doesn’t Matter’ Harvard Business Review May 2003

IT Doesn’t Matter Spend less Follow, don’t lead Focus on vulmerabilities, not opportunities Nicholas G.Carr ‘IT Doesn’t Matter’ Harvard Business Review May 2003

IT Does Matter Extracting value from IT requires innovations in business practices. Companies that mechanically insert IT into their businesses without changing their practices for exploiting the new capabilities will only destroy IT's economic value. Unfortunately, all too many companies do this. John Seely Brown, Former Chief Scientist, Xerox, Palo Alto, California and John Hagel III, Management Consultant and Author Burlingame, California (HBR 2003)

IT Does Matter The differentiation is not in IT itself but in the new practices it enables. IT does indeed matter. Although IT may be ubiquitous and increasingly less expensive, the insight and ability required for it to create economic value are in very short supply. It has never been true that IT matters in isolation. It only matters in the context of a concerted effort to innovate based on new possibilities and opportunities created by the technology. Then it matters- and will continue to- a lot. John Seely Brown, Former Chief Scientist, Xerox, Palo Alto, California and John Hagel III, Management Consultant and Author Burlingame, California (HBR 2003)

Does IT Matter? Indeed, as the strategic value of the technology fades, the skill with which it is used on a day-to-day basis may well become even more important to a company’s success. Nicholas G.Carr ‘Does IT Matter?’ Information Technology and the Corrosion of Competitive Advantage Harvard Business Press 2004

Governance & SOA “In 2006, lack of working governance mechanisms in mid size to large post-pilot SOA projects will be the most common reason for project failure ” (0.8 probability – Gartner)

Evolution of IT Doing it to them Doing it for them Doing it with them Them doing it to themselves

Changing Roles IT Director –Infrastructure –Inward facing –Support –Conservative –Technical CIO –Outward facing –Business value –Strategic –Dynamic –Business-oriented

Internal Drivers Clarity & transparency in decision making Make sure IS developments in line with institutional strategic objectives Promote understanding of the implications of IS investments & the effective & efficient use of IS in support of management & operations Address the people aspects of IS implementations & promote new ways of working

JISC* Information Systems Management & Governance Toolkit JISC commissioned a team from the University of Strathclyde to develop: –A framework to guide the analysis and review of information systems and IT management and governance –A self-assessment toolkit…that will assist institutions in evaluating their approach to information systems management and governance through comparison with best practice across the sector. * Joint Information Services Committee

JISC LJMU Provided opportunity for structured reflection Encouraged creative thinking about IS Management & Governance Led LJMU to the IT Governance (Weill, 2004) book & model which has been adopted in principle – primarily because of this model’s focus on behaviour

IT Governance - JISC Toolkit Definition ‘IT governance’ can be seen to encompass the full range of information systems and IT management activities, together with a governance ‘layer’ encompassing the need to provide assurance to stakeholders that the requisite policies, structures and systems are in place to manage information systems and IT effectively and that these are aligned to the institution’s strategic objectives

COBIT – Another Definition IT governance is the responsibility of executives and the board of directors, and consists of the leadership, organisational structures and processes that ensure that the enterprise’s IT sustains and extends the organisation’s strategies and objectives (COBIT 4 – IT Governance Institute )

IT Governance – & Another IT governance: Specifying the decision rights and accountability framework to encourage desirable behaviour in the use of IT. (Weill and Ross, 2004, IT Governance, HBSP)

Key IT Governance Decisions IT Principles Decisions High-level statements about how IT is used in the business IT Architecture Decisions Organising logic for data, applications, and infrastruc- ture captured in a set of policies, relationships, and technical choices to achieve desired business and technical standardisation And integration IT Infrastructure Decisions Centrally co-ordinated, shared IT services that provide the foundation for the enterprise’s IT capability. Business Applications Needs Specifying the business need for purchasing or internally developed IT applications. IT Investment and Prioritisation decisions Decisions about how much and where to invest in IT, including project approvals and justification techniques. (Weill and Ross, 2004, IT Governance, HBSP)

IT Governance Archetypes STYLEWho Has Decision or Input Rights? BusinessA group of business executives or individual executives (CxOs). Includes Monarchycommittees of senior business executives (may include (CIO), excludes IT executives acting independently. IT MonarchyIndividuals or groups of IT executives. FeudalBusiness unit leaders, key process owners or their delegates. FederalC-level executives and business groups (eg business units or processes); may also include IT executives as additional participants. Equivalent of the central and state governments working together. IT DuopolyIT executives and one other group (e.g. CxO or business unit or process leaders). AnarchyEach individual user. (Weill and Ross, 2004, IT Governance, HBSP)

LJMU Governance Model (Initial) Development Programme IT Membership Business Membership (Federal) Decisions Architecture Principles (? – internal to IT?) Business Applications Needs Infrastructure (Internal to IT) Investment & Prioritisation (only for major applications projects, not for Infrastructure) Major Business Applications Developments Methodology: Programme Management Methodology: …

LJMU Federal Governance Model (Continuing) Information Management Steering Group Business Membership Development Programme Business Membership IT Steering Group Business Membership Architecture Principles Infrastructure Business Applications Needs IT Membership Investment & prioritisation Methodologies: MSP ITIL Monitoring Compliance Review

MSP & ITIL IT Steering Group: Infrastructure service delivery –Methodology: ITIL (Information Technology Infrastructure Library) Development Programme: Business Applications Needs –Methodology: MSP (Managing Successful Programmes)

What Can Governance Do For You? Get buy-in across the board Do it with them, even if they don’t do it to themselves Change behaviour, not just technology

LJMU Enterprise Architecture Pilot (LEAP) Part of JISC Enterprise Architecture Programme Building on existing IT work in Information Systems Architecture, Governance and technical web services development, & strategy/process development in the business Sponsored by Information Management Steering Group – responsible for Architecture & Principles

LJMU Enterprise Architecture Pilot (LEAP) Funded for CY2008 to pilot the application of the Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF) in HE/LJMU Involves definition of specific architecture for LJMU and feeding back to generic JISC model Focus on SOA opportunities Other pilot projects being conducted at Cardiff & King’s College London

Plan Using TOGAF approach: –Define high-level business architecture –Define IT Architecture Principles –Focussing on ‘student recruitment, development & support’, model ‘as is’ & ‘to be’ business, information systems & technology architectures –Develop implementation plan –Alongside, identify suitable EA tool

Current State Governance structures in place  Principles agreed  High-level business architecture available  Business process models for chosen domain available  EA tool selected (BiZZdesign Architect)  Working on building EA using selected tool

EA & Governance Executive buy-in to EA approach –Within LJMU Governance structure, Architecture already identified as responsibility of Information Management Steering Group Demonstrate value of EA approach –‘burning platform’ required, provided by existing Student Experience Review initiative Visibility –Exposes Senior Management to EA approaches

Selling EA & Governance Speak the language of the business –Or something as close as you can get It’s all about value –The business has to see that this will promote better IS decision- making to support the business better Show them pictures –Not like I’ve been doing in this presentation… –EA development will provide the pictures –See JISC SOA animation work/soa.aspx work/soa.aspx

References & URLs COBIT: MSP: ‘Does IT Matter?’ Nicholas G.Carr, Harvard Business Press 2004 ‘IT Governance’ Weill & Ross, HBP 2004 LEAP: TOGAF:

References & URLs COBIT: MSP: ‘Does IT Matter?’ Nicholas G.Carr, Harvard Business Press 2004 ‘IT Governance’ Weill & Ross, HBP 2004 LEAP: TOGAF:

Q & A