IT Governance

Data quality conference: Data governance and data quality

by

I seem to have missed blogging about the fact that Ark Group asked me to present a session at their conference in Sydney today (30th April 2008).  My presentation was entitled ‘Advancing data governance to create improved data quality frameworks’.  I promised people in the audience that I would blog my notes to today’s presentation, which I will do as soon as I am back online (probably tomorrow around midday I’d say). 

Anyway – the taxi driver couldn’t find the address for the conference – the address is 1 Olympic Drive, Milson’s Point in Sydney.  The fun part?  This must be the first data quality conference in the entire world held in a theme park – 1 Olympic Drive is the Crystal Palaces in Luna Park.  I have to say – what an impressive venue!  A shame that the hot dog stands, the cartoonist, and the laughing clowns weren’t operating!

Anyway, it was a lot of fun, and I feel I got good feedback from various people after the conference in the audience.  I spoke at 4.10pm on the second day of a 2-day conference.  That’s always a tough call but hopefully I was energetic enough – it’s kind of hard when you had to wake up at 4.10am to give a presentation at 4.10pm (rather crazily, I asked Aimee Rootes of Ark Group to get me ‘the first flight down’ and ‘the last flight back’.  Which is why I have now been waiting for the flight for three hours at Sydney Airport now.

Talk about your lessons learned.  Anyway, I was glad to share a taxi with Suzette Bailey of Sensory7 and we got to speak the same language in the back of the taxi – there aren’t all that many people in the western world who actually understand the language I speak, so it was refreshing to do so.

Next post:  advancing data governance to create improved data quality frameworks. 

CPA Australia ITM CoE meeting

by

Well I’m off to Melbourne again this morning for the first face-to-face meeting of the ITM Centre of Excellence this year.  In some ways we’ve been a bit slack this year – but our work plan is still cranking out because we’ve got the dance card aligned. 

There’s a major publication coming out on the business management of IT (that is very, very excellent and I love Chris Gillies’ and Jan Barned’s work on this one – you’ll be able to buy it online very soon), a research publication on telework has come out (thanks John Campbell from University of Canberra and Jon Heales from UQ- read it on the weekend and it looks good), there’s been an article for the CFO Software Guide that comes out next month (on social networking – thanks me!), and there are two forthcoming articles on the impact of social networking on your career and business (June and July issues).

These last two are for InTheBlack and again, thanks me!

There is also a major publication coming up that is a guide to ICT Outsourcing, which wraps up a stream of work that has been around for a couple of years now. 

CPA Australia has also commissioned me to write a policy and procedure guide to social networking.

As well as that I believe there is a ton of work coming through on the telework research front, and I am down to give three presentations at CPA Australia PD sessions in the next four months or so (Townsville, Brisbane, and Sydney and Melbourne, and Brisbane again). 

As well as continuing on with the IT Specialists assessment panel. 

There is also a total review of the websitre, and our content has been, finally, rebranded as “IT Management” rather than eBusiness, and as well as that we came up with some points to go to the 2020 Summit with.  However I don’t know that that produced very much :). 

So when I say ‘slack’ I actually think I may mean it in the ‘quite busy’ context. 

I think our work plan is still going strong – that will be the focus today and to align the dance card for the rest of the year.  April is a bit late for our first face-to-face meeting but no doubt it will all come together.

On another note – I’m thinking about setting up a video blog on this blog – technically, it’s all sorted.  I just need to find something to say.

But this is a nice post on IT alignment…

by

And of course what operating system one uses doesn’t really matter – it’s a matter of thinking about how business value can be delivered (still, hate that ribbon):

5 Tips on IT Alignment That Can Generate Profit

Matches nicely with the IT Strategy and methodology I’m developing in my ‘spare’ time…

Technorati Tags:

IT Governance: A definition

by

There is a slight difference of opinion between a pure "governance" approach to IT and the IT governance approach espoused by COBIT.  In this series of blog posts I’ll be adopting the definition of Broadbent & Weill 2003 for IT Governance:

IT Governance is about who is entitled to make major decisions, who has input and who is accountable for implementing those decisions.  IT governance is different from IT Management.

Whereas I would contend that the approach under COBIT (alack and alas – managed by the IT Governance Institute) is not really about this true governance framework.  COBIT (Control OBjectives for IT) is about the control framework, identifying the maturity of IT processes, and who has what responsibilities in its role (using RACI charts – Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed).  COBIT identifies the controls that should be put in place around IT, and some of its processes do in fact call for processes that support the kind of governance brought forward by Broadbent & Weill 2003, but in essence it is a framework for advising how to manage the business of IT.  IT Governance in this sense is more a concern of a board – the body that says "to address our requirements for corporate governance, thou shalt implement COBIT" – rather than IT managers – the body that implements COBIT. 

I do think that there is a distinct difference between IT Governance from the point of view of the Board, and IT Governance as put forward by COBIT.  This doesn’t mean that COBIT is not useful – on the contrary, COBIT is exceptionally useful.  However COBIT is by its nature focussed on the business of IT and is just… different.

Next week:  does IT Governance really matter?  WIIFTB (What’s In It For The Board)?

IT Governance Day: Is IT governance just for geeks?

by

Well if it’s Monday – and it isn’t (at least not in Australia) -  that means it is IT Governance day at the blog.  I could start with a fundamental overview of the world of IT Governance and set out an agenda of blog entries for the next few weeks – but I won’t.  That would probably be too ambitious – so I’ll start with a fundamental flaw in, apparently, just about everyone’s thinking.

Tying this post back to the subject line, not only is IT Governance not just for geeks, it isn’t for geeks.  IT Governance is ensuring that the entirety of the IT system works towards achieving business aims and strategy.  It relates to ensuring that the portfolio of IT people, processes, and technologies is in balance.  That role absolutely has nothing to do with IT speak.  And yet I have been approached by journalists and clients alike in the past with the absolute underlying assumption that IT is very technical and that it cannot be managed without an understanding of the technicalities below that threshold. That is absolutely not true and in fact the opposite is true – it is probably less-than-helpful at a Board and committee level  to have that technical understanding of IT.  You do not need to be an IT geek to be on the Board and governing IT operations.  All members of the Board are equally responsible for IT Governance, not just a board member with technical expertise. 

No-one expects a board member to understand how the engines in the fleet of delivery vehicles work – and, news flash, the modern vehicle is fairly complex!  Yet information technology instantly draws shudders of revulsion from some quarters and dark murmuring of witchcraft, magic smoke, and database normalisation (all of which are the blackest of black magic and therefore clearly evil and not to be understood by anyone).  The role of the board member in IT Governance is, in my view at least, to focus on the portfolio of activities, require monitoring and feedback regarding the performance of IT, and to provide direction in the allocation of resources.  Certainly this requires advice from IT professionals – particularly around the area of resource allocation – but good IT Governance does not require that the mechanic be at the board table just because he or she knows how to rebuild an engine.  .

I think the situation that we have has come about because in the past IT professionals have been guilty of portraying IT as some form of dark magic rite, as that was felt to give power and direction over IT.  There is certainly a danger for IT professionals in comjmunicating only half the story behind IT to the board.  I have met with more than a few IT professionals in the past who complain that their IT budget has been slashed because they opened up and tried to explain to the board what was needed.  In most casese, the board listened, heard mutterings of dark magic, and then found a language they could understand – the language of the bottom line.  Which, with great glee, the board slashed – with little regard for what that meant to business outcomes.  The danger here is that IT is seen as a cost rather than a benefit – and the lesson for IT in dealing with the board and those responsible for budget allocations is to focus on the benefits of IT rather than just the costs.

There is a great publication that I was involved with two years ago through CPA Australia called IT Governance:  A Practical Guide for Company Directors, and it is a very accessible and usable publication with great ideas for implementing IT Governance.  It can be purchased here and is something that any company should consider purchasing if they are serious about seeing value from IT. 

I will use this guide as a framework for my future posts around IT Governance.  I will make the note here and now that, as chair of the ITM CoE for CPA Austrralia, there is a publication focussed on the business management of information technology in the pipeline, and a publication of the IT Governance Guide aimed squarely at SME’s.  These will be interesting future publications – probably coming out in the second half of 2007 and first half of 2008 respectively.