Upload
cayla-philipps
View
217
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
IT Governance and Enterprise ArchitectureCAUDIT Enterprise Architecture Symposium – Nov 2006Leo de Sousa, Enterprise ArchitectBritish Columbia Institute of Technology
Agenda
• Historical Governance – IT Decides/IT Pays• A Governance Model and EA’s Role• New Model for IT Governance• IT Needs Assessment Thoughts• Questions
Historical Governance – IT Decides
• business and educational areas submit IT work/want requests to a work list
• IT Services would revise the list semi-annually and make an assessment
• We used a simple 2 dimensional scale– stakeholder – compliance, students,
faculty, employees, other– Payback – under 3 mo, 3-6mo,6-12mo,…
Historical Governance – IT Pays
This approach creates problems:• When IT decides, there is a lack of
transparency to our clients• IT is accused of playing favourites or only
responding to the “squeaky wheel”• Ultimately, IT’s reputation in the client
community is poor** IT should be informing NOT making these
decisions – push back to the business
“So this is where we get I.T. involved”
Changing Client Value Perceptions
As IT organizations attempt to become strategic partners with theirclients, they first need to gain respect & trust
Strategic Governance ModelSupport
Program
Enterprise
Departmental
Innovative
Opportunistic
Funding
Institute
Program
ProgramControl
IT
Program = schools or departments
Institute = centrally governed
Program = schools or departments
Institute = centrally governed
Enterprise Architecture Philosophy 100:When introducing new functions, features, or infrastructure, we will ALWAYS look at our current vendors and products FIRST. This will:
• Ensure we are making fiscally sound decisions• Allow us to leverage existing relationships and licenses• Avoid unnecessary complexity by introducing yet another technology to learn and support • Leverages native integration within existing vendors/products/features• Prevent further dilution of ITS staff skill sets
EA100 will then apply the following tests (assuming an existing vendor or technology can be identified):
• Does the identified solution adequately meet the identified needs• Is the solution fiscally responsible
If we pass both tests, then we WILL license/implement that solution.
Business Strategy
IT Strategy
IT Alignment without Governance
Lagging
Misalign
Correction
Cross Purposes
Over-shoot &Correct
Over Time
Str
ate
gic
Dir
ecti
on
s
= Periods of “Relative Alignment”
= Strategy Change
Business Strategy
IT Strategy
IT Alignment with Governance
Over Time
Str
ate
gic
Dir
ecti
on
s
= Periods of “Relative Alignment”
Business LeadsIT Strategy
IT LeadsBusiness Strategy
= Strategy Change
New Model for IT Governance
• Vice President of Learning and Technology Services chairs the Technology Committee
• Membership includes all 6 Vice Presidents• Enterprise Architect acts in an advisory/consulting role
Process • VPs present proposals for transformative projects • Proposals that receive approval move to formal Business
Case• Business Cases are presented to the Technology Committee
for endorsement• Endorsed Business Cases are submitted to the President’s
Executive Council for funding
IT Needs Assessments thoughts … RelationshipsPEC
BCITTechnologyCommittee
Responsible for large, strategic,investment initatives> $1m
All of theseare 100%incrementallyresourced
ITS OperationalSteering
Committee
IT Services
Assigned resources to core activities and services (the approx90% of ITS resources) through existing Operations Planning
Rep
orts
ou
t to
Responsible for considering and priorityranking all I.T. Needs NOTconsidered by Tech. Committee
Pan Institutional representationat the tactical / operational level(eg. Director of Finance, Facilitated & supported
By ITS
Chaired by non-ITS repFor objectivity and transparency
Ranked list will be addressed throughthe approx 10% of non-core ITS base funded resources.
Responsible for Funding approvedBusiness Cases
Still need to:• ID all channels for work coming to ITS• Establish firmer criteria for where to direct work for review (eg. When does it go to Tech Comm and when does it go to Op Steering Comm. • determine cycle frequency for each process• how transparent should this be
Filter Criteria
I.T. Needs
ATCInfra. TEK IAM BCP/DR ITS Worklist
ITSLiaisons
Work is directed to oneof five possible outcomes based on review and criteria
BCIT Tech Comm.• Strategic• Transformative• Investment > $1M
ITS Core Services• Already doing it• Marginal impact on resources & budget• No incremental Cap Budget • Resourced in the approx 90% of existing ITS staff
ITS Core Funded Projects• reviewed by Ops Steering Comm for ranked priority order• Resourced by the approx. 10% of remaining ITS staff• criteria based ranking (see next page)
Recomm. Alt. Delivery• ASP Model (pay as you go)• requires little of no commitment from ITS • Opportunity based
“No” – we can’t do it• everything else and whatever is not resourced in the Ops Steering Comm list after we have allocated the 10% to the top priority activities
IT Needs Assessments thoughts … Processes
ITS Operational Steering Committee Criteria for Priority Ranking
(suggestions only)
This committee needs clear terms of reference and broad membership.
Velocity
Expenses
* Mandatory / legal compliance
Capacity
Satisfaction
Decisioning
Leverage
Market Share
Innovation
Risk
IT Needs Assessments thoughts … Criteria
Questions