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