The Hicks, Oervan & Oeriin (2012) reading on Blackboard is about IT governance at Australian universities. It identifies a number of significant issues that arose as a result of the “unplanned evolution” at eight universities.
From the issues identified, which do you think is the most significant and why?
If you were the CIO of a university that was facing this issue, how would you go about addressing it?
One of the most significant issues is lack accountability and control. This is due to people not having the right attitudes towards IT in their university, and see it as solely as support unit. University staff need to see IT for its potential to help enhance and create opportunities in their work. Having more accountability will ensure IT is more thoroughly looked after as people will be held responsible for it if it isn’t. Furthermore, once people become responsible for their IT, control will occur and become apparent. This control will help maintain and sustain the IT around the university to ensure it continues to work and benefit all those who use it.
ReplyDeleteTo address this issue, a team would need to be established from all the divisions present at the university. This will consist of representatives from all the parties that currently play a role in the decentralised current IT system. This team will then be able to discuss a way to form a more centralised system that will cater to all their needs no matter what faculty, school, or type of user you may be. The centralised system can include such strategies such as merging resources and processes to make it easier for top management to control their IT investments.
The most troubling problem found in universities was that I.T. was not being aligned to support core business processes. I.T. and Information Systems are implemented to allow for flexible organisations that can not only support, but enhance their business processes. Without supporting the core business processes, the information system is not doing as intended. Universities appreciated this issue, and in order to improve their organisations alignment to I.T., as well as their I.T. governance structures which were also faulted, the organisations increased user involvement in I.T. decision making.
ReplyDeleteInvolving users in the development stage is a crucial step, and one that I would highly recommend as a CIO, because by bringing in members from throughout the organisation, the universities can easily find out what the system actually requires. The core business processes are going to be the most understood by those who are going to be constantly interacting with the information system, and not those who are providing the information system. In order to ensure that those users are satisfied with the information system aligning to their core business processes, a much more agile approach should be taken into developing the Information Systems in the future. This will involve bringing members throughout the university into the development stages, which links back to one of the recommendations in the article of a university wide approach to I.T. Governance. This way, user requirements are bound to be met as users who will be supporting the core business processes with offer constant input on the Information Systems.
After reading the case in my opinion I think the most significant issue identified would be as stated in the reading failure of IT to support the core business activities or research and teaching as well as lack of management of IT risk in the decentralised IT operations as shown in the reading “But in the absence of there being a burning bridge and typical of a university where even a CEO can’t state how things are going to be necessarily. He can’t tell people how things are going to be. You rely on people [Faculties] agreeing that this is the most sensible thing to do”. This is because they didn’t have the correct resources to implement and carry out the right support in order for the core business activities or teachings. As for the lack of management they needed to have staff that had prior knowledge and a leader who could lead and prevent them from coming across as much IT risk as they had faced. If I were the CIO of a university that was facing this issue, the way I would address this would be by would be to carry out an SWOT analysis first which would enable me to be able to work out the strengths, weakness, opportunities and threats once I have established this I would thereby moved forward with the next step which would be enable the organisation to then put a plan into action regarding the current issues and then can be implemented to the managerial level in order to get a more positive outcome in the near future by having a more strategic approach this would allow me to undergo a complete analysis of how to address the issue under the current circumstances as stated in the reading.
ReplyDeleteI concur with the notions above and also want highlight the paramount importance of focusing on the component of interaction between the development stage and the ones who use it. This interaction does not only reveal what is necessary to be included for it to work it also speed up the learning process for the workers and makes the system customized to their need both enabling value creation and a platform for improved processes.
ReplyDeleteFrom the case the main issue identified is the failure of IT to support the core business activities of research and teaching. These are universities, IT in universities are a must, they are a teaching tool, without such tools research and teaching cannot be achieved at the highest level. In order for the universities to reach strategic alignment the IT must support the core activities of the 8 universities. How this should have been achieved is through the interview stage, more through reviews of both the research and teaching representative. Through these reviews they could have highlighted an issue that might occur and prevent the issue from happening.
ReplyDeleteI think the most important issue was the “inefficient use of IT resources, including widespread duplication”. This was a direct result of allowing groups in the university to adopt their own IT due to decentralized governance. However, as expressed by the Deputy Vice Chancellor Academic, it caused him to be accountable to millions of IT resources. Due to these duplications, he also had a difficult time to oversight. This was because of the number of resources and the lack of knowledge about the IT being implemented. Therefore, I think this was the most important issue of duplication as the IT was out of control and inefficient. This resulted in poor controls over why IT was being implemented and caused the university to spend more on systems than necessary.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a CIO at the university, I would implement a standard procedure to get approval for implementing items. In this procedure for approval I would advertise the business goals of the university need align with any new IT. This justification would reduce unnecessary IT from being implemented.
I would also start an education scheme based around “where would you put your money?” for each faculty. This scheme would encourage faculties to look at whether the university already had an IT they needed so that these funds they were asking for may be used elsewhere. This would result in both the CIO reducing duplications, increasing efficiency of resources and ultimately reducing the cost and confusion resulting from the main issue.
One of the most significant issues is low level of control and accountability of IT. This particular case emphasises that this is due to the decentralised structure of the universities. Ineffective actions would be taken and this would have led to even worst situations as a result of the lack of control and IT governance. Duplication of work which doubles the cost and occurs due to each department having to make their own choices would cause inefficiency to occur. This does not assist the organisation in reaching their overall goal efficiently. Details such as IT staff and IT expenditure would be difficult to identify. IT governance is vital as it helps clarify between business strategy and IT initiatives. From this you can draw the connection between business objectives and project objectives as well as helping to clarify through the preparation of a business case for each initiative. As a CEO I would increase transparency throughout the organisation. This would be done by clearly outlining through documentation the roles and responsibilities of all employees and which resources staff can have access to.
ReplyDeleteI too think that aligning the IT to support the core activities of research and teaching is the most important issue that has to be addressed. If the system does not deliver value in these areas then how is the system exactly improving the way the universities do things, especially when these activates make up a core component of how the university functions.
ReplyDeleteThe CIO firstly must develop a casual analysis to identify all the key activities of a university to understand what is required from the system that will improve the activities currently existing. The CIO should then design a system that is able to realise the value of all these activities, which would require the use of the best practice of user involvement. By having users from each activity help review the system before its fully implemented, the system can be adjusted from IT bias and thereby deliver functionality that the users want, can use, and are able to understand, to use the system to support the key activities and deliver value.
The biggest problem was that of not realising the potential of the IT at universities. They need to view it as a teaching tool and something to enhance the learning experience. IT can be used very cleverly if used right and it should be encouraged to help increase the learning experience.
ReplyDeleteIf I was the CIO I would put together tutorials etc with how the staff can incorporate IT and reach its full potential. It would encourage the use of IT within universities and show the clear benefits it has and can help deliver.
I agree with steph. I presume that it is mainly cause by not fully realising the value of IT. They should know what are the other capabilities of IT or what it can do more for their business. Basically, IT for many businesses seen as their solution for them to increase profits. However, IT can also be their key to competitive advantage. Its not just providing technical solutions for their businesses, it can also help realising the full value of IT and can develop their goals for long-term purposes.
ReplyDeleteIf I was the CIO, I would develop and increase the transpercy to improve decision making. IT risk management plan should also give an attention to it. Through this, it could at least prevent any events might happen.
From the issues identified, I think that the difficulty in achieving institution wide alignment with strategic business objectives would be the most significant issue. This is because it is essential for the organization to have aligned business objectives so the organization understands how IT governance can implemented and aligned with its business objectives in order the full potential of IT can be realized. It also provides accountability for each department, especially in IT, as well as provides a guideline for efficient use of IT resources, and identifies how IT is to support the core business activities.
ReplyDeleteIf I was the CIO of a university, I would involve users and other top management – key supporters, when I chose to address this issue. This is because, at the planning stage, it is important for the organization, key users and other top management, such as the CEO to work on what achieving institution wide alignment with its strategic business objectives as it provides a guideline for how IT governance would either change or be adopted into the organization.
I agree with the above post that the most important issue in the case is the lack of control and accountability in their IT. These issues are significant because if their do not get their act or their responsibility right, they will running their company into more mayhem than they are now. Furthermore, this is significant because they are a very big organization, and most decentralized organization are generally known to require to a strong decentralized structure. However due to the lack of control in the organisation, it may result to workers to become imperious hence seek other employment elsewhere. Thus, if university would want to still uphold their competitive position, they need to get their accountability in place and take control of their governance activities and their management.
ReplyDeleteThus, as a CEO I would establish a communicative and collaborative team, who will be free to make any decisions that would. Furthermore, I would initiate a centralize environment as Catherine Mcllvride stated, in hopes that it will not only cater the needs of their people but hopefully build a strong leadership that would enable to make quick and easier decisions as well as co-ordinate and control their financial budget and governance easily.
The lack of control and accountability of IT was the most significant issue at Australian universities. People within the organisation and management regard IT as a ‘support’ function but do not realise it is an opportunity for sustainable development and a competitive advantage. In order for universities to better utilise resources and achieve maximum benefits from their investments, IT resources need to be controlled and have establishing accountability measures.
ReplyDeleteA possible proposal to the Pro-Vice Chancellor is to have a centralised IT function to address the issue. When successful, it means both resources (people and IT) could be merged ultimately making it easier for the university’s IT investments to be controlled and managed effectively for the CIO. There is also the opportunity to align the university’s goals which could include improving the student’s experience by enhancing the way they learn.