IT Governance Propelled IT Revolution IT Governance Summit Denver, CO September 10-11, 2007 Laurie G. Antolovic’ Deputy CIO and Finance Officer Office.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Connecting Phoenix to Information IT Governance in a Decentralized Organization Charles T. Thompson Chief Information Officer City of Phoenix.
Advertisements

IT Governance and Enterprise Architecture CAUDIT Enterprise Architecture Symposium – Nov 2006 Leo de Sousa, Enterprise Architect British Columbia Institute.
University of New Hampshire Responsibility Center Management Update.
STUDENT SUCCESS CENTERS : WORKING BETTER TOGETHER TO ENSURE STUDENT SUCCESS.
1 IT Governance Presentation to DCO’s Forum 8 June 2005.
The Changing Face of Higher Ed and the Role of IT as a Strategic Enabler Dave Wallace Chief Information Officer University of Waterloo December 4, 2012.
A Commitment to Excellence: SUNY Cortland Update on Strategic Planning.
Queensland Treasury Department Role and Function of Treasury Financial Framework Charter of Fiscal and Social Responsibility and Priorities in Progress.
Facilities Management 2013 Manager Enrichment Program U.Va.’s Strategic Planning Initiatives Colette Sheehy Vice President for Management and Budget December.
Strategic Financial Advisory Role Rising To The Challenge Thursday, February 19th, 2015 FMI Professional Development (PD) Day Daniel Le May Financial Management.
What’s Happening in Sacramento System Office Update Dona Boatright Interim Vice Chancellor, Ed. Services AS Vocational Leadership Conference March 12,
SEM Planning Model.
Research Computing Governance Brad Wheeler Office of the VP for IT & CIO © 2007 Trustees of Indiana University Creative Commons Attribution.
Institutional Effectiveness Operational Update Presentation made to the Indiana State University Board of Trustees October 5, 2001.
IT Governance and Management
Alliance for Strategic Technology (AST) SUNY Business Intelligence Initiative January 8, 2009.
1 Presentation Ivy Tech Community College Terre Haute, IN Jackie McCracken April 21, 2007.
ENTERPRISE Improving IT Governance in Higher Education Jack McCredie UC Berkeley, Emeritus & ECAR.
INDIANAUNIVERSITYINDIANAUNIVERSITY 1 IT FUNDING STRATEGIES "IT IS DO YOU KNOW WHERE YOUR IT DOLLAR IS?" EDUCAUSE Midwestern Regional Conference.
Manoa Budget Committee Update Kathy CutshawFebruary 18, 2015.
Information Technology Assessment Review Presented to the Board of the State Center Community College District.
Enterprise IT Decision Making
Re-organizing Information Technology University at Buffalo.
SAR as Formative Assessment By Rev. Bro. Dr. Bancha Saenghiran February 9, 2008.
University Strategic Resource Planning Council Budget.
EASTERN WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY Eastern Washington University EWU ODP Maps EWU ODP Maps
PROJECT OBJECTIVES Identify, procure, and implement software that provided a common system for students, faculty, and staff to enter and measure.
Value & Excitement University Technology Services Oakland University Information Technology Strategic Planning Theresa Rowe October 2004 Copyright Theresa.
Responsibility Centered Management (RCM) Case Study: Engineering and Technology By H. Öner Yurtseven Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis.
Information Technology and Enterprise Planning Status Report for The University of Georgia UGA President’s Cabinet April 21, 2005.
NASA IT Governance Overview Gary Cox August 18, 2010.
Mission and Mission Fulfillment Tom Miller University of Alaska Anchorage.
Information Technology Services In Progress Review July 15, 2008.
University of Massachusetts Boston FY11 Budget Process February 25, 2010.
1 Strategic Thinking for IT Leaders View from the CFO Seminars in Academic Computing Executive Leadership Institute.
Division of Information Technology Services Strategic Planning Summary September 2007.
Leadership Team Meeting March 24,  Project Based Approach  Cross Functional Project Teams  Projects Support Multiple Operational Expectations.
DRAFT – For Discussion Only HHSC IT Governance Executive Briefing Materials DRAFT April 2013.
Milking the Model: Getting the most out of integration and centralisation Janice Rickards Pro Vice Chancellor, Information Services Geoffrey Dengate Director,
NC STATE UNIVERSITY Campus Systems and Calendar Systems: a self assessment Sarah Noell, ITD, Project Coordinator Harry Nicholos, ITD, Technical co-chair.
All the Moving Parts: Designing a Merged Library/IT Organization EDUCAUSE Mid-Atlantic Regional Conference January 10, 2006.
CSG Short Workshop: Metrics and Activity Based Costing & Measuring the Value of IT to the Institution Brad Wheeler & Laurie Antolovic, IU Bernie Gulachek,
Aligning Institutional Strategic and SEM Plans: Indiana State University November 12, 2012 Tom Green, Ph.D. Senior Consultant.
No More Fat Here Mike Dennis Garland Elmore Greg Topp Lori Temple.
Presentation to the Chancellor’s Cabinet October 14, 2013 Inspiration. Innovation. Graduation. Presented by Mr. Roy Stutzman, RvStutzman Consulting.
Report on the Reorganization of UITS IT Leaders Program 13 June 2007 Presented by the Indiana University Cohort Debby Allmayer Human Resources Officer.
+ using Integrated Planning & Budget In a Participatory Governance Context Realizing our Foothill Vision 20/20.
New Frameworks for Strategic Enrollment Management Planning
Response due: March 15,  Directions state that the report must “focus on the institution’s resolution of the recommendations and Commission concerns.”
Strategic Planning Linked to Long Range Planning Presentation to Faculty and Staff February 13-14, 2008
Matakuliah : Pengantar IT Governance
October 25, 2007 Charting the IT Path: Unifying IT Strategic Planning with Central and Decentralized IT Goals EDUCAUSE 2007 Annual Conference October 23-26,
IT Strategic Plan 5 Years Later Fall Dr. Bradley C. Wheeler Assoc. VP of Research & Academic Computing and Dean of IT (Acting) Office of the Vice.
.62 STRATEGIC PLANNING Framework, Process, & Calendar June 2008 LOMA LINDA UNIVERSITY ADVENTIST HEALTH SCIENCES CENTER.
Indiana University Kokomo Strategic Enrollment Management Consultation Final Report Bob Bontrager December 8, 2007.
Information Technology Assessment Findings Presented to the colleges of the State Center Community College District.
What IT Governance Works Best Pertemuan ke-15 & 18 Matakuliah: Pengantar IT Governance Tahun: Feb
Towards an Enterprise Architecture for Wits In the context of the new Student Information System programme Prof Derek W. Keats Deputy Vice Chancellor (Knowledge.
Jonathan P. DeShazo, Laishy Williams-Carlson, Rich Pollack.
UTPA 2012: A STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THE DIVISION OF THE PRESIDENT Approved by the President in Spring  Provide students with a quality educational.
6/13/20161 South Seattle Community College College-wide Meeting Budget Planning for FY March 10, 2008.
Superior Infrastructure – Phase One Lenora Chapman & Michelle Stevenson Presenting.
Principles of Good Governance
IT ALIGNMENT: IT Governance
IT Governance Planning Overview
Measuring Course Quality: Development of a Micro-Analysis Tool
Meeting of the Finance Committee September 14, 2012
Allocating Decision Rights
Data Center Consolidation in California
Research Computing Governance
Presentation transcript:

IT Governance Propelled IT Revolution IT Governance Summit Denver, CO September 10-11, 2007 Laurie G. Antolovic’ Deputy CIO and Finance Officer Office of the VP for IT & CIO © 2007 Trustees of Indiana University Creative Commons Attribution License 2.5

Presentation Outline Governance Models Governance in the Academe IU Experience Realities Conclusions 2

3 IT Governance “Specifying the decision rights and accountability framework to encourage desirable behavior in using IT.” Weill & Ross, (2004) IT Governance, HBS Press.

4 Decisions Three governance questions... 1.What decisions must be made? 2.Who should make these decisions? Input rights Decision rights 3.How will we make and monitor these decisions? 5 types of Decisions….6 Archetypes… Weill & Ross, (2004) IT Governance, HBS Press.

5 IT Principles IT Architecture IT Infra- structure Strategies Acad/Admin Application Needs IT Investment Acad/Admin Monarchy IT Monarchy Feudal Federal Duopoly Anarchy Don’t Know Domain Style © MIT Sloan CISR Adapted

6 How Enterprises Actually Govern - Survey IT Principles IT Architecture IT Infra- structure Strategies Business Application Needs IT Investment Business Monarchy IT Monarchy Feudal Federal Duopoly Anarchy Don’t Know Domain Style © MIT Sloan CISR InputDecisionInputDecisionInputDecisionInputDecisionInputDecision

IT Governance in the Academe Business objectives often unclear; vary with levels of business monarchies (system, campus, college, departments) General culture of federalism and anarchy Faculty governance IT dollars opaque Investment decisions made at many levels Turf v. cost efficiencies; economies of scale 7

IU Experience 8

Early 1990s Administrative Computing (University) University Telecommunications (University) Academic Computing (Bloomington) Communication Services “Phones” (Bloomington) Instructional Support Services (Bloomington) Integrated Technologies (Indianapolis) Regional Campus Computing 9

Mid-1990s Business Monarchy Decisions Defined role and structure of IT Brought semblance of corporate model (new cabinet-level position: VPIT) Aligned campus IT organizations Articulated enterprise business goals 10

Environment Responsibility-Centered Management (RCM) culture Campuses had disparate IT cultures, infrastructures, services Funding for IT all over the place Aligned campuses but what about the colleges within the campuses? 11

Goal for IT at Indiana University "To be a leader in absolute terms in information technology." - IU President Myles Brand, 1996

Strategic Alignment IU Strategic Directions Charter: o 30 recommendations, 3 broad themes: communities of learning, excellence, accountability & best practices o Incentive funding: $25M seed fund Institutional vision for Indiana University o American public research university o Leadership in the creative use and application of IT

IT Strategic Plan

Most comprehensive IT plan ever at IU University-wide in scope Comprehensive six-year blueprint: major recommendations, 68 detailed actions Commenced implementation in Completed in 2004

IT PRINCIPLES Business Monarchy Decides 16

IT Principles Major Themes Transformational Power of Information Technology Teaching and Learning Research University Information Systems Telecommunications Access to information, computation, communication Life-cycle funding of information technology

IT Principles 10 Major Recommendations 1. Sound Fiscal Planning 2. Access to Network Resources 3. Faculty & Staff Engagement 4. Teaching & Learning 5. Research 6. University Information Systems 7. Telecommunications: Convergence 8. Student Computing 9. Digital Libraries 10. Security

IT Monarchy Communicates Consultation within the University after presentation to the President More than 150 briefings (Faculty councils, Advisory committees, Campus chancellors, etc.) Comments and input requested Advice as to priorities particularly sought Recommendations and priorities of IT Plan were endorsed Promote awareness of the IT Plan Identify areas of collaboration or partnership Encourage local IT planning

Business Monarchy Approves IT Investment Total cost over implementation period and beyond (5.5 years $207M) Identified Funding ($86M) Additional Funding Required ($121M) On-going Base Required After Full Implementation Period ($16M) Note: Doubled student tech fees on all campuses when state funding was withdrawn

ARCHITECTURE, INFRASTRUCTURE IT Monarchy Decides 21

APPLICATIONS Duopolies Decide 22

Implementation Plan Detailed implementation plan for each action Defined implementation “owner” for each action Engagement at the highest levels (VPIT and AVPs) Accountability Regular status and financial reports IT Plan basis for IT Annual Reports IT Plan Accomplishments incorporated in annual budget process

24 IT Principles IT Architecture IT Infra- structure Strategies Acad/Admin Application Needs IT Investment Acad/Admin Monarchy IT Monarchy Feudal Federal Duopoly Anarchy Don’t Know Domain Style © MIT Sloan CISR Adapted for Higher Ed X XX X X

Assessment, Communication, Action Annual Accomplishment Reports Tied to IT Strategic Plan Distributed widely

Assessment, Communication, Action Mid-term Assessment –(Dec 2001) Identified and implemented mid- course adjustments

Realities Governance is never pure Multiple layers of inputs and decisions o Hybrids at those layers Governance can be evolved 27

Duopolies Standardization, Cost Efficiencies, Economies of Scale: Life Cycle for Desktop and Supporting Systems Local (School-based) Technical Support Staff Centers for Teaching and Learning Classroom Technology 28

Evolving Governance Frontier o Principles, Structure o Architecture, Infrastructure o Applications, Investment Growth & Devel o Execution o Assessment o Adjustments Maturity o Maintenance o Assessment Renewal o Natural Cycle o Disruptive Forces 29

Post-Frontier Phase 30

31

32 Futures Wheeler/Antolovic’ Quality (User Delight) Elmore Stewardship Antolovic’

Stewardship, Quality Annual Activity-based Costing $ Services Annual User Survey Services User Satisfaction 33

Stewardship, Frontiers, Quality Expenditure Review Committees “ERCx” (Service, Process and Structure Reviews = Budget Reallocations) Reinvestment in New Services o Security o Wireless o Course Management o Information Commons o Research Cyber- infrastructure o Arts and Humanities Cyber- infrastructure, o etc. 34

Mechanisms VPIT/CIO Cabinet UITS Operations Committee Council of CIOs (all campuses) Frontiers Council Quality Council Stewardship Faculty Council Technology Committee Student Councils Budgetary Affairs Committee 35

36 IT Principles IT Architecture IT Infra- structure Strategies Acad/Admin Application Needs IT Investment Acad/Admin Monarchy IT Monarchy Feudal Federal Duopoly Anarchy Don’t Know Domain Style XXXXX © MIT Sloan CISR Adapted for Higher Ed

37 IT Duopoly IT Executives and one other group 2-party arrangement where decisions represent a bilateral agreement Differs from a federal model in that federal always has both corporate and local business representation Duopoly has one or the other – but not both – and always includes IT professionals Duopolies can take one of two forms Bicycle wheel or t-shaped Weill & Ross, (2004) IT Governance, HBS Press.

38 Bicycle Wheel IT Duopoly IT BU RM Weill & Ross, (2004) IT Governance, HBS Press. BU = Business Unit RM = Relationship Mgr

39 T-Shaped IT Duopoly X X X X X X Y X X X X X X YYYYYYYYYYYY Executive Committee IT Committee X = Business manager Y = IT manager Weill & Ross, (2004) IT Governance, HBS Press.

Realities in Higher Education Not structured for effective IT governance No clear unifying enterprise goals Decision-making too slow Business monarchy has no interest nor understanding of IT in the context of the enterprise Investment decisions (funding) drives the debate 40

Conclusions Revolutionary change needed Proxies essential – drag the pond to the horse? CIO translates, aggregates discussions and decisions of business monarchies to business goals, IT goals IT monarchy must earn trust IT monarchy fills leadership gap through purposeful duopolies 41

Conclusions Permission-based IT culture is paralyzing Communication is never out of style  Gather and glean broader community input Stewardship, Quality and Frontiers at top of IT monarchy agenda 42

About Indiana University Seven campuses (core campuses in Bloomington and Indianapolis) $2.4B budget, 25% from the State 11,183 appointed staff 5,051 faculty 98,545 students 42,000+ course sections 1,115,164 credit hour enrollment $1B+ endowment

About UITS $100M annual budget 650+ full-time staff; 300 part-time staff Seven Major Portfolios Research TechnologiesEnterprise Infrastructure Learning TechnologiesEnterprise Software SupportNetworks Information and Infrastructure Assurance

Presentation Outline 45 Governance Models Governance in the Academe IU Experience Realities Conclusions

IT Governance Propelled IT Revolution IT Governance Summit Denver, CO September 10-11, 2007 Laurie G. Antolovic’ Deputy CIO and Finance Officer Office of the VP for IT & CIO © 2007 Trustees of Indiana University Creative Commons Attribution License 2.5