Discussion 1Post 1Top of FormToday, data quality and privac.docx

Discussion 1
Post 1:
Top of Form
Today, data quality and privacy are important components in
any organization around the world. Thus , project managers are
required to come up with proper ways of ensuring better data
quality and privacy to ensure there is availability and improve
customer service that will go to the heart of enabling the
organization have a proper and functioning system at the end of
the day. The managers need to adopt the following
recommendations for the business as follows. The first
recommendation is the need to have a high level of accuracy
and measurement when it comes to degree where the data values
are obtained. Data accuracy is very important in the business as
wrong values will produce wrong output and this will affect the
quality of decision making process at the end of the day
(Chiregi & Navimipour, 2016) Another important mechanism is
to ensure that all the data is complete and contains all the
required attributes that will ensure there is proper data that will
used in the decision making process. Also, there is need for the
data to be consistency and this means that all the attributes
should be uniform and all the instances and references from the
set of data (Pearson & Wegener,2013). Thus, all the data
collected need to be accurate and all values be consistent form
the source. Finally, there is need to have a unique
demonstration of the records that will need to be represented
within the data sets and this will remove the element of
duplicates at the end of the day.
References
Chiregi, M., & Navimipour, N. J. (2016). A new method for
trust and reputation evaluation in the cloud environments using
the recommendations of opinion leaders' entities and removing
the effect of troll entities. Computers in Human Behavior, 60,
280-292.

Pearson, T., & Wegener, R. (2013). Big data: the organizational
challenge. Bain Co.
Response1:
Post 2:
Top of Form
Recommendations that IT managers group collectively provide
In the modern workplace, Information Technology Managers (IT
Managers) plays a vital role. IT managers helps to implement
and administrate technology within their organization. He gives
proper direction to the organization, the communications system
and the structure. He ensures that the long-term objectives are
translated into concrete plans of actions and understood and
supported by people working at various levels. Other
responsibility of the manager is a system of communications
which enables managers throughout the organization to be
aware, and the manager responsible for the systems stay
informed of the changes that are taking place (How do
Managers (Leaders) Contribute to an Organizations?, 2012).
Below are some recommendations that an IT Managers provide:
Planning and Assessments: The organization need to identify
the strengths, weaknesses and outside threats to work against its
success and name the problem or issue that they are concerned
about. It should utilize their current network to identify more
people interested in the issue and need to propose a meeting to
get together and discuss possible ways to work together.
Create a structure: A well-designed structure help the group to
maintain order and resolve disagreements. It gives the identity
to the people who join the group, as well as to the group itself
(15. Improving Organizational Management and Development,
n.d.).
Plan for finances: Organizations identity depends upon the size

and scope of the organization's finances. The organization
should make sure that they have enough funding to provide
services, keep initiative going. It will help them maintain good
relationships with suppliers, and anyone else whom the
organization pay for goods and services.
Enabling the communication within and outside the
organization:Employee engagement is one of the most written
and talked about issues today in business. The organization
should have rust on the employees and employees need to know
that their managers and executives care about them as people as
well as being committed to their success. The organization
should focus on each department on improving its procedures
and targeting its activities on better achieving the company’s
competitive differentiation through what people do and how
they do it (15. Improving Organizational Management and
Development, n.d.).
References
Ctb.ku.edu. (2020). 15. Improving Organizational Management
and Development | Community Tool Box. [online] Available at:
https://ctb.ku.edu/en/improve-organizational-management-and-
development [Accessed 20 Feb. 2020].
Rao, S. (2020). How do Managers (Leaders) Contribute to an
Organizations?. [online] Citeman.com. Available at:
https://www.citeman.com/19881-how-do-managers-leaders-
contribute-to-an-organizations.html [Accessed 20 Feb. 2020].
Response 2:
Running head: DATA SECURITY PRACTICES1
DATA SECURITY PRACTICES7

Discussion 2
Post3:
Top of Form
Principles for Effective Innovation
In a company, there are numerous uncertainties and variables,
so it’s not possible to control them effectively; thus, the
principle can provide the necessary guidance to effective
innovations. There are several guiding principles for
innovations. Here are some of the principles that will make a
company run smoothly.
Involving the customer experience within a project – If an
organization fails to involve the customers in this process, then
it’s operating in an organization’s perspective rather than for
the customers. Ignoring the input of the customers will
negatively affect the reputation of the organization.
Innovation strategy - Teams should understand what they are
doing. This will help a company to maintain existing customers
and attract new customers or penetrate new markets (Curley,
2016). If the innovation strategy is handled well, the
shareholders will have an opportunity to support the
organization.
Innovation when people convert problems to ideas – New ideas
were brought through some kind of questions, problems and
snags (The Essence of Innovation: 5 Principles, n.d.). To
implement any innovations, it needs an atmosphere which
encourages some problems, inquiries, etc. then the teams will
work effectively.
Have an objective - If all the employees within a company have
a sense of the organization’s objectives and its purpose, this
results in a robust innovation (Curley, 2016). Robust innovation
includes having a view of the future, knowing where to explore,
designing the right portfolio and making the necessary cultural
and structural commitments.
Open processes - An organization should open its processes to
the users; this will encourage diverse and new ideas and thus,
encouraging innovation.

Think Big - If an organization wants to be innovative, it should
have a team of think-tanks. This is an essential step for
revolutionary innovation. Look for all the possibilities,
customer’s requirements, competitors in the market, products
and then narrow the requirements to reach and fit in. For a
better result of the product aim high at the initial stage. Also
think about high-level strategies, collaboration and objectives.
Failure Strategy - Innovations in most cases, is a result of a
failure. Organizations usually improve and learn different
things from failures.
References
CenterforCreativeLeadership. (n.d.). The Essence of Innovation:
5 Principles. Retrieved
from https://www.ccl.org/multimedia/podcast/the-essence-of-
innovation-5-principles/
Curley, M. (2016). Twelve principles for open innovation
2.0. Nature, 533(7603), 314-316.
McKeen, J. D., & Smith, H. A. (2015). IT strategy: Issues and
practices. Pearson Higher Ed.
Bottom of Form
Response 3:
Post4:
Top of Form
Effective innovation should be able to help the organization
come up with new business models that can help it propel to
greater heights (McKeen, Smith & McKeen, 2014). To achieve
this, the organization should clearly know where it wants to go.
In this regard, it is important to define the objectives of
innovation. Customers should be built in the design using the
existing customer experience. This helps in coming up with
innovations that meet the customers’ needs (Kressel &
Winarsky, 2015). Organizations should be patient with the
changes brought about by new innovations especially when

long-term change is anticipated. New innovations require
continuous learning to improve and make them effective.
Organizations have to create innovation teams that ensure there
is innovation acceleration whenever it has been started to avoid
being overtaken by events.
References
McKeen, J. D., Smith, H., & McKeen, J. D. (2014). IT strategy.
Upper Saddle River, N.J: Pearson Education.
Kressel, H., & Winarsky, N. (2015). If you really want to
change the world: A guide to creating, building, and
sustaining breakthrough ventures. Boston, Massachusetts:
Harvard Business Review Press.
Bottom of Form
Response 4
Global
editionGlo
b
a
l
ed
it
io
n
this is a special edition of an established
title widely used by colleges and universities
throughout the world. Pearson published this
exclusive edition for the benefit of students

outside the United States and Canada. if you
purchased this book within the United States
or Canada you should be aware that it has
been imported without the approval of the
Publisher or author.
Pearson Global Edition
Global
edition
For these Global editions, the editorial team at Pearson has
collaborated with educators across the world to address a
wide range of subjects and requirements, equipping students
with the best possible learning tools. this Global edition
preserves the cutting-edge approach and pedagogy of the
original, but also features alterations, customization, and
adaptation from the north american version.
it
Strategy:
Issues and Practices
M
cK
een
Sm
ith
it Strategy
Issues and Practices
tHiRd edition
James D. McKeen • Heather A. Smith

t
H
iR
d
e
d
it
io
n
McKeen_1292080264_mech.indd 1 28/11/14 12:56 PM
IT STraTegy:
ISSueS and PracTIceS
A01_MCKE0260_03_GE_FM.indd 1 26/11/14 9:32 PM
IT STraTegy:
ISSueS and PracTIceS
T h i r d E d i t i o n

G l o b a l E d i t i o n
James D. McKeen
Queen’s University
Heather A. Smith
Queen’s University
Boston Columbus Indianapolis New York San Francisco
Hoboken
Amsterdam Cape Town Dubai London Madrid Milan Munich
Paris Montréal Toronto
Delhi Mexico City São Paulo Sydney Hong Kong Seoul
Singapore Taipei Tokyo
Editor in Chief: Stephanie Wall
Head of Learning Asset Acquisition, Global Edition: Laura Dent
Acquisitions Editor: Nicole Sam
Program Manager Team Lead: Ashley Santora
Program Manager: Denise Vaughn
Editorial Assistant: Kaylee Rotella
Assistant Acquisitions Editor, Global Edition: Debapriya
Mukherjee
Associate Project Editor, Global Edition: Binita Roy
Executive Marketing Manager: Anne K. Fahlgren
Project Manager Team Lead: Judy Leale
Project Manager: Thomas Benfatti
Procurement Specialist: Diane Peirano
Senior Manufacturing Controller, Production, Global Edition:
Trudy Kimber
Cover Image: © Toria/Shutterstock

Cover Designer: Lumina Datamantics
Full Service Project Management: Abinaya Rajendran at Integra
Software Services, Pvt. Ltd.
Credits and acknowledgments borrowed from other sources and
reproduced, with permission, in this
textbook appear on appropriate page within text.
Pearson Education Limited
Edinburgh Gate
Harlow
Essex CM20 2JE
England
and Associated Companies throughout the world
Visit us on the World Wide Web at:
www.pearsonglobaleditions.com
© Pearson Education Limited 2015
The rights of James D. McKeen and Heather A. Smith to be
identified as the authors of this work have been
asserted by them in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and
Patents Act 1988.
Authorized adaptation from the United States edition, entitled
IT Strategy: Issues and Practices, 3rd edition, ISBN
978-0-13-354424-4, by James D. McKeen and Heather A.
Smith, published by Pearson Education © 2015.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be
reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted
in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording or otherwise, without either
the prior written permission of the publisher or a license

permitting restricted copying in the United Kingdom
issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency Ltd, Saffron House,
6–10 Kirby Street, London EC1N 8TS.
All trademarks used herein are the property of their respective
owners. The use of any trademark in this text
does not vest in the author or publisher any trademark
ownership rights in such trademarks, nor does the
use of such trademarks imply any affiliation with or
endorsement of this book by such owners.
ISBN 10: 1-292-08026-4
ISBN 13: 978-1-292-08026-0
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British
Library
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Typeset in 10/12 Palatino LT Std by Integra Software Services,
Pvt. Ltd.
Printed and bound in Great Britain by Clays Ltd, Bungay,
Suffolk.
ConTEnTS
Preface 13
About the Authors 21

Acknowledgments 22
Section I Delivering Value with IT 23
Chapter 1 The IT Value ProPoSITIon 24
Peeling the Onion: Understanding IT Value 25
What Is IT Value? 25
Where Is IT Value? 26
Who Delivers IT Value? 27
When Is IT Value Realized? 27
The Three Components of the IT Value Proposition 28
Identification of Potential Value 29
Effective Conversion 30
Realizing Value 31
Five Principles for Delivering Value 32
Principle 1. Have a Clearly Defined Portfolio Value
Management
Process 33
Principle 2. Aim for Chunks of Value 33
Principle 3. Adopt a Holistic Orientation to Technology Value
33
Principle 4. Aim for Joint Ownership of Technology Initiatives
34
Principle 5. Experiment More Often 34
Conclusion 34 • References 35

Chapter 2 DelIVerIng BuSIneSS Value Through
IT STraTegy 37
Business and IT Strategies: Past, Present, and Future 38
Four Critical Success Factors 40
The Many Dimensions of IT Strategy 42
Toward an IT Strategy-Development Process 44
Challenges for CIOs 45
Chapter 3 MakIng IT CounT 49
Business Measurement: An Overview 50
Key Business Metrics for IT 52
5
6 Contents
Designing Business Metrics for IT 53
Advice to Managers 57
Chapter 4 effeCTIVe BuSIneSS–IT relaTIonShIPS 60
The Nature of the Business–IT Relationship 61
The Foundation of a Strong Business–IT

Relationship 63
Building Block #1: Competence 64
Building Block #2: Credibility 65
Building Block #3: Interpersonal Interaction 66
Building Block #4: Trust 68
Appendix A The Five IT Value Profiles 72
Appendix B Guidelines for Building a Strong Business–IT
Relationship 73
Chapter 5 BuSIneSS–IT CoMMunICaTIon 74
Communication in the Business–IT Relationship 75
What Is “Good” Communication? 76
Obstacles to Effective Communication 78
“T-Level” Communication Skills for IT Staff 80
Improving Business–IT Communication 82
Appendix A IT Communication Competencies 85
Chapter 6 effeCTIVe IT leaDerShIP 86
The Changing Role of the IT Leader 87
What Makes a Good IT Leader? 89
How to Build Better IT Leaders 92

Investing in Leadership Development: Articulating the Value
Proposition 95
MInI CaSeS
Delivering Business Value with IT at Hefty Hardware 98
Investing in TUFS 102
IT Planning at ModMeters 104
Contents 7
Section II IT governance 109
Chapter 7 effeCTIVe IT ShareD SerVICeS 110
IT Shared Services: An Overview 111
IT Shared Services: Pros and Cons 114
IT Shared Services: Key Organizational Success Factors 115
Identifying Candidate Services 116
An Integrated Model of IT Shared Services 117
Recommmendations for Creating Effective IT
Shared Services 118

Chapter 8 SuCCeSSful IT SourCIng: MaTurITy MoDel,
SourCIng oPTIonS, anD DeCISIon CrITerIa 122
A Maturity Model for IT Functions 123
IT Sourcing Options: Theory Versus Practice 127
The “Real” Decision Criteria 131
Decision Criterion #1: Flexibility 131
Decision Criterion #2: Control 131
Decision Criterion #3: Knowledge Enhancement 132
Decision Criterion #4: Business Exigency 132
A Decision Framework for Sourcing IT Functions 133
Identify Your Core IT Functions 133
Create a “Function Sourcing” Profile 133
Evolve Full-Time IT Personnel 135
Encourage Exploration of the Whole Range
of Sourcing Options 136
Combine Sourcing Options Strategically 136
A Management Framework for Successful
Sourcing 137
Develop a Sourcing Strategy 137
Develop a Risk Mitigation Strategy 137

Develop a Governance Strategy 138
Understand the Cost Structures 138
Chapter 9 BuDgeTIng: PlannIng’S eVIl TwIn 140
Key Concepts in IT Budgeting 141
The Importance of Budgets 143
The IT Planning and Budget Process 145
8 Contents
Corporate Processes 145
IT Processes 147
Assess Actual IT Spending 148
IT Budgeting Practices That Deliver Value 149
Chapter 10 rISk ManageMenT In IT 152
A Holistic View of IT-Based Risk 153
Holistic Risk Management: A Portrait 156
Developing a Risk Management Framework 157
Improving Risk Management Capabilities 160

Appendix A A Selection of Risk Classification
Schemes 163
Chapter 11 InforMaTIon ManageMenT:
STageS anD ISSueS 164
Information Management: How Does IT Fit? 165
A Framework For IM 167
Stage One: Develop an IM Policy 167
Stage Two: Articulate the Operational
Components 167
Stage Three: Establish Information Stewardship 168
Stage Four: Build Information Standards 169
Issues In IM 170
Culture and Behavior 170
Information Risk Management 171
Information Value 172
Privacy 172
Knowledge Management 173
The Knowing–Doing Gap 173
Getting Started in IM 173

Appendix A Elements of IM Operations 177
MInI CaSeS
Building Shared Services at RR Communications 178
Enterprise Architecture at Nationstate Insurance 182
IT Investment at North American Financial 187
Contents 9
Section III IT-enabled Innovation 191
Chapter 12 TeChnology-DrIVen InnoVaTIon 192
The Need for Innovation: An Historical
Perspective 193
The Need for Innovation Now 193
Understanding Innovation 194
The Value of Innovation 196
Innovation Essentials: Motivation, Support,
and Direction 197
Challenges for IT leaders 199
Facilitating Innovation 201

Chapter 13 when BIg DaTa anD SoCIal CoMPuTIng MeeT 204
The Social Media/Big Data Opportunity 205
Delivering Business Value with Big Data 207
Innovating with Big Data 211
Pulling in Two Different Directions: The Challenge
for IT Managers 212
First Steps for IT Leaders 214
Chapter 14 effeCTIVe CuSToMer exPerIenCe 217
Customer Experience and Business value 218
Many Dimensions of Customer Experience 219
The Role of Technology in Customer Experience 221
Customer Experience Essentials for IT 222
First Steps to Improving Customer Experience 225
Chapter 15 BuSIneSS InTellIgenCe: an oVerVIew 228
Understanding Business Intelligence 229
The Need for Business Intelligence 230
The Challenge of Business Intelligence 231
The Role of IT in Business Intelligence 233

Improving Business Intelligence 235
10 Contents
Chapter 16 TeChnology-enaBleD CollaBoraTIon 240
Why Collaborate? 241
Characteristics of Collaboration 244
Components of Successful Collaboration 247
The Role of IT in Collaboration 249
First Steps for Facilitating Effective Collaboration 251
MInI CaSeS
Innovation at International Foods 256
Consumerization of Technology at IFG 261
CRM at Minitrex 265
Customer Service at Datatronics 268
Section IV IT Portfolio Development and Management 273
Chapter 17 ManagIng The aPPlICaTIon PorTfolIo 274
The Applications Quagmire 275
The Benefits of a Portfolio Perspective 276

Making APM Happen 278
Capability 1: Strategy and Governance 280
Capability 2: Inventory Management 284
Capability 3: Reporting and Rationalization 285
Key Lessons Learned 286
Appendix A Application Information 288
Chapter 18 IT DeManD ManageMenT: SuPPly ManageMenT
IS noT enough 292
Understanding IT Demand 293
The Economics of Demand Management 295
Three Tools for Demand management 295
Key Organizational Enablers for Effective Demand
Management 296
Strategic Initiative Management 297
Application Portfolio Management 298
Enterprise Architecture 298
Business–IT Partnership 299
Governance and Transparency 301

Contents 11
Chapter 19 TeChnology roaDMaP: BenefITS, eleMenTS, anD
PraCTICal STePS 305
What is a Technology Roadmap? 306
The Benefits of a Technology Roadmap 307
External Benefits (Effectiveness) 307
Internal Benefits (Efficiency) 308
Elements of the Technology Roadmap 308
Activity #1: Guiding Principles 309
Activity #2: Assess Current Technology 310
Activity #3: Analyze Gaps 311
Activity #4: Evaluate Technology
Landscape 312
Activity #5: Describe Future Technology 313
Activity #6: Outline Migration Strategy 314
Activity #7: Establish Governance 314
Practical Steps for Developing a Technology
Roadmap 316

Appendix A Principles to Guide a Migration
Strategy 318
Chapter 20 eMergIng DeVeloPMenT PraCTICeS 319
The Problem with System Development 320
Trends in System Development 321
Obstacles to Improving System Development
Productivity 324
Improving System Development Productivity: What we
know that Works 326
Next Steps to Improving System Development
Productivity 328
Chapter 21 InforMaTIon DelIVery: PaST, PreSenT, anD
fuTure 332
Information and IT: Why Now? 333
Delivering Value Through Information 334
Effective Information Delivery 338
New Information Skills 338
New Information Roles 339
New Information Practices 339

12 Contents
New Information Strategies 340
The Future of Information Delivery 341
MInI CaSeS
Project Management at MM 346
Working Smarter at Continental Furniture International 350
Managing Technology at Genex Fuels 355
Index 358
PrEFACE
Today, with information technology (IT) driving constant
business transformation,
overwhelming organizations with information, enabling 24/7
global operations, and
undermining traditional business models, the challenge for
business leaders is not
simply to manage IT, it is to use IT to deliver business value.
Whereas until fairly recently,
decisions about IT could be safely delegated to technology
specialists after a business
strategy had been developed, IT is now so closely integrated
with business that, as one
CIO explained to us, “We can no longer deliver business

solutions in our company
without using technology so IT and business strategy must
constantly interact with
each other.”
What’s New in This Third Edition?
• Six new chapters focusing on current critical issues in IT
management, including
IT shared services; big data and social computing; business
intelligence; manag-
ing IT demand; improving the customer experience; and
enhancing development
productivity.
• Two significantly revised chapters: on delivering IT functions
through different
resourcing options; and innovating with IT.
•
TwonewminicasesbasedonrealcompaniesandrealITmanagementsi
tuations:
Working Smarter at Continental Furniture and Enterprise
Architecture at Nationstate
Insurance.
•
Arevisedstructurebasedonreaderfeedbackwithsixchaptersandtwo
minicases
from the second edition being moved to the Web site.
All too often, in our efforts to prepare future executives to deal
effectively with
the issues of IT strategy and management, we lead them into a
foreign country where
they encounter a different language, different culture, and

different customs. Acronyms
(e.g., SOA, FTP/IP, SDLC, ITIL, ERP), buzzwords (e.g.,
asymmetric encryption, proxy
servers, agile, enterprise service bus), and the widely adopted
practice of abstraction
(e.g., Is a software monitor a person, place, or thing?) present
formidable “barriers to
entry” to the technologically uninitiated, but more important,
they obscure the impor-
tance of teaching students how to make business decisions about
a key organizational
resource. By taking a critical issues perspective, IT Strategy:
Issues and Practices treats IT
as a tool to be leveraged to save and/or make money or
transform an organization—not
as a study by itself.
As in the first two editions of this book, this third edition
combines the experi-
ences and insights of many senior IT managers from leading-
edge organizations with
thorough academic research to bring important issues in IT
management to life and
demonstrate how IT strategy is put into action in contemporary
businesses. This new
edition has been designed around an enhanced set of critical
real-world issues in IT
management today, such as innovating with IT, working with
big data and social media,
13

14 Preface
enhancing customer experience, and designing for business
intelligence and introduces
students to the challenges of making IT decisions that will have
significant impacts on
how businesses function and deliver value to stakeholders.
IT Strategy: Issues and Practices focuses on how IT is changing
and will continue to
change organizations as we now know them. However, rather
than learning concepts
“free of context,” students are introduced to the complex
decisions facing real organi-
zations by means of a number of mini cases. These provide an
opportunity to apply
the models/theories/frameworks presented and help students
integrate and assimilate
this material. By the end of the book, students will have the
confidence and ability to
tackle the tough issues regarding IT management and strategy
and a clear understand-
ing of their importance in delivering business value.
Key Features of This Book
• AfocusonITmanagement issues as opposed to technology
issues
• CriticalITissuesexploredwithintheirorganizationalcontexts
•
ReadilyapplicablemodelsandframeworksforimplementingITstrat
egies
•
Minicasestoanimateissuesandfocusclassroomdiscussionsonreal-
worlddeci-

sions, enabling problem-based learning
• Provenstrategiesandbestpracticesfromleading-
edgeorganizations
•
UsefulandpracticaladviceandguidelinesfordeliveringvaluewithIT
• Extensiveteachingnotesforallminicases
A Different ApproAch to teAching it StrAtegy
The real world of IT is one of issues—critical issues—such as
the following:
• HowdoweknowifwearegettingvaluefromourITinvestment?
• HowcanweinnovatewithIT?
• WhatspecificITfunctionsshouldweseekfromexternalproviders?
•
HowdowebuildanITleadershipteamthatisatrustedpartnerwiththeb
usiness?
• HowdoweenhanceITcapabilities?
• WhatisIT’sroleincreatinganintelligentbusiness?
•
Howcanwebesttakeadvantageofnewtechnologies,suchasbigdataan
dsocial
media, in our business?
• HowcanwemanageITrisk?
However, the majority of management information systems
(MIS) textbooks are orga-
nized by system category (e.g., supply chain, customer
relationship management, enterprise
resource planning), by system component (e.g., hardware,
software, networks), by system
function (e.g., marketing, financial, human resources), by
system type (e.g., transactional,
decisional, strategic), or by a combination of these.

Unfortunately, such an organization
does not promote an understanding of IT management in
practice.
IT Strategy: Issues and Practices tackles the real-world
challenges of IT manage-
ment. First, it explores a set of the most important issues facing
IT managers today, and
second, it provides a series of mini cases that present these
critical IT issues within the
contextofrealorganizations.Byfocusingthetextaswellastheminica
sesontoday’s
critical issues, the book naturally reinforces problem-based
learning.
Preface 15
IT Strategy: Issues and Practices includes thirteen mini cases—
each based on a real
company presented anonymously.1 Mini cases are not simply
abbreviated versions of
standard, full-length business cases. They differ in two
significant ways:
1. A horizontal perspective. Unlike standard cases that develop
a single issue within
an organizational setting (i.e., a “vertical” slice of
organizational life), mini cases
take a “horizontal” slice through a number of coexistent issues.
Rather than looking
for a solution to a specific problem, as in a standard case,
students analyzing a mini

case must first identify and prioritize the issues embedded
within the case. This mim-
ics real life in organizations where the challenge lies in
“knowing where to start” as
opposed to “solving a predefined problem.”
2. Highly relevant information. Mini cases are densely written.
Unlike standard
cases, which intermix irrelevant information, in a mini case,
each sentence exists for
a reason and reflects relevant information. As a result, students
must analyze each
case very carefully so as not to miss critical aspects of the
situation.
Teaching with mini cases is, thus, very different than teaching
with standard cases.
With mini cases, students must determine what is really going
on within the organiza-
tion. What first appears as a straightforward “technology”
problem may in fact be a
political problem or one of five other “technology” problems.
Detective work is, there-
fore, required. The problem identification and prioritization
skills needed are essential
skills for future managers to learn for the simple reason that it
is not possible for organi-
zations to tackle all of their problems concurrently. Mini cases
help teach these skills to
students and can balance the problem-solving skills learned in
other classes. Best of all,
detective work is fun and promotes lively classroom discussion.
To assist instructors, extensive teaching notes are available for
all mini cases. Developed
by the authors and based on “tried and true” in-class experience,

these notes include case
summaries, identify the key issues within each case, present
ancillary information about the
company/industry represented in the case, and offer guidelines
for organizing the class-
room discussion. Because of the structure of these mini cases
and their embedded issues, it
is common for teaching notes to exceed the length of the actual
mini case!
This book is most appropriate for MIS courses where the goal is
to understand how
IT delivers organizational value. These courses are frequently
labeled “IT Strategy” or
“IT Management” and are offered within undergraduate as well
as MBA programs. For
undergraduate juniors and seniors in business and commerce
programs, this is usually
the “capstone” MIS course. For MBA students, this course may
be the compulsory core
course in MIS, or it may be an elective course.
Each chapter and mini case in this book has been thoroughly
tested in a variety
ofundergraduate,graduate,andexecutiveprogramsatQueen’sSchoo
lofBusiness.2
1 We are unable to identify these leading-edge companies by
agreements established as part of our overall
research program (described later).
2
Queen’sSchoolofBusinessisoneoftheworld’spremierbusinessscho
ols,withafacultyteamrenowned
for its business experience and academic credentials. The
School has earned international recognition for
its innovative approaches to team-based and experiential

learning. In addition to its highly acclaimed MBA
programs,Queen’sSchoolofBusinessisalsohometoCanada’smostp
restigiousundergraduatebusiness
programandseveraloutstandinggraduateprograms.Aswell,theScho
olisoneoftheworld’slargestand
most respected providers of executive education.
16 Preface
These materials have proven highly successful within all
programs because we adapt
how the material is presented according to the level of the
students. Whereas under-
graduate students “learn” about critical business issues from the
book and mini cases
for the first time, graduate students are able to “relate” to these
same critical issues
based on their previous business experience. As a result,
graduate students are able to
introduce personal experiences into the discussion of these
critical IT issues.
orgAnizAtion of thiS Book
One of the advantages of an issues-focused structure is that
chapters can be approached
in any order because they do not build on one another. Chapter
order is immaterial; that
is, one does not need to read the first three chapters to
understand the fourth. This pro-
vides an instructor with maximum flexibility to organize a
course as he or she sees fit.

Thus, within different courses/programs, the order of topics can
be changed to focus on
different IT concepts.
Furthermore, because each mini case includes multiple issues,
they, too, can be
used to serve different purposes. For example, the mini case
“Building Shared Services
at RR Communications” can be used to focus on issues of
governance, organizational
structure, and/or change management just as easily as shared
services. The result is a
rich set of instructional materials that lends itself well to a
variety of pedagogical appli-
cations, particularly problem-based learning, and that clearly
illustrates the reality of IT
strategy in action.
The book is organized into four sections, each emphasizing a
key component of
developing and delivering effective IT strategy:
• Section I: Delivering Value with IT is designed to examine the
complex ways that
IT and business value are related. Over the past twenty years,
researchers and prac-
titioners have come to understand that “business value” can
mean many different
things when applied to IT. Chapter 1 (The IT Value Proposition)
explores these con-
cepts in depth. Unlike the simplistic value propositions often
used when imple-
menting IT in organizations, this chapter presents “value” as a
multilayered busi-
ness construct that must be effectively managed at several
levels if technology is

to achieve the benefits expected. Chapter 2 (Delivering
Business Value through IT
Strategy) examines the dynamic interrelationship between
business and IT strat-
egy and looks at the processes and critical success factors used
by organizations to
ensure that both are well aligned. Chapter 3 (Making IT Count)
discusses new ways
ofmeasuringIT’seffectivenessthatpromotecloserbusiness–
ITalignmentandhelp
drive greater business value. Chapter 4 (Effective Business–IT
Relationships) exam-
ines the nature of the business–IT relationship and the
characteristics of an effec-
tive relationship that delivers real value to the enterprise.
Chapter 5 (Business–IT
Communication) explores the business and interpersonal
competencies that IT staff
will need in order to do their jobs effectively over the next five
to seven years and
what companies should be doing to develop them. Finally,
Chapter 6 (Effective IT
Leadership) tackles the increasing need for improved leadership
skills in all IT staff
and examines the expectations of the business for strategic and
innovative guid-
ance from IT.
Preface 17
In the mini cases associated with this section, the concepts of
delivering

value with IT are explored in a number of different ways. We
see business and
IT executives at Hefty Hardware grappling with conflicting
priorities and per-
spectives and how best to work together to achieve the
company’s strategy. In
“Investing in TUFS,” CIO Martin Drysdale watches as all of the
work his IT depart-
ment has put into a major new system fails to deliver value. And
the “IT Planning
atModMeters”minicasefollowsCIOBrianSmith’seffortstocreateas
trategic
IT plan that will align with business strategy, keep IT running,
and not increase
IT’sbudget.
• Section II: IT Governance explores key concepts in how the IT
organization is
structured and managed to effectively deliver IT products and
services to the orga-
nization. Chapter 7 (Effective IT Shared Services) discusses
how IT shared services
should be selected, organized, managed, and governed to
achieve improved organi-
zational performance. Chapter 8 (Successful IT Sourcing:
Maturity Model, Sourcing
Options, and Decision Criteria) examines how organizations are
choosing to source
and deliver different types of IT functions and presents a
framework to guide sourc-
ingdecisions.Chapter9(Budgeting:Planning’sEvilTwin)describes
the“eviltwin”
of IT strategy, discussing how budgeting mechanisms can
significantly undermine
effective business strategies and suggesting practices for
addressing this problem

while maintaining traditional fiscal accountability. Chapter 10
(Risk Management
in IT) describes how many IT organizations have been given the
responsibility of
not only managing risk in their own activities (i.e., project
development, operations,
and delivering business strategy) but also of managing IT-based
risk in all company
activities (e.g., mobile computing, file sharing, and online
access to information and
software) and the need for a holistic framework to understand
and deal with risk
effectively. Chapter 11 (Information Management: Stages and
Issues) describes how
new organizational needs for more useful and integrated
information are driving
the development of business-oriented functions within IT that
focus specifically on
information and knowledge, as opposed to applications and
data.
The mini cases in this section examine the difficulties of
managing com-
plex IT issues when they intersect substantially with important
business issues.
In “Building Shared Services at RR Communications,” we see
an IT organiza-
tion in transition from a traditional divisional structure and
governance model
to a more centralized enterprise model, and the long-term
challenges experi-
enced by CIO Vince Patton in changing both business and IT
practices, includ-
ing information management and delivery, to support this new
approach. In
“Enterprise Architecture at Nationstate Insurance,” CIO Jane

Denton endeavors
to make IT more flexible and agile, while incorporating new and
emerging tech-
nologies into its strategy. In “IT Investment at North American
Financial,” we
show the opportunities and challenges involved in prioritizing
and resourcing
enterprisewide IT projects and monitoring that anticipated
benefits are being
achieved.
• Section III: IT-Enabled Innovation discusses some of the ways
technology is
being used to transform organizations. Chapter 12 (Technology-
Driven Innovation)
examines the nature and importance of innovation with IT and
describes a typi-
cal innovation life cycle. Chapter 13 (When Big Data and Social
Computing Meet)
discusses how IT leaders are incorporating big data and social
media concepts
18 Preface
and technologies to successfully deliver business value in new
ways. Chapter 14
(Effective Customer Experience) explores the IT function’s role
in creating and
improvinganorganization’scustomerexperiencesandtheroleoftech
nologyin
helping companies to understand and learn from their
customers’ experiences.

Chapter 15 (Business Intelligence: An Overview) looks at the
nature of business
intelligence and its relationship to data, information, and
knowledge and how
IT can be used to build a more intelligent organization. Chapter
16 (Technology-
Enabled Collaboration) identifies the principal forms of
collaboration used in orga-
nizations, the primary business drivers involved in them, how
their business value
is measured, and the roles of IT and the business in enabling
collaboration.
The mini cases in this section focus on the key challenges
companies face in
innovating with IT. “Innovation at International Foods”
contrasts the need for pro-
cess and control in corporate IT with the strong push to
innovate with technology
and the difficulties that ensue from the clash of style and
culture. “Consumerization
of Technology at IFG” looks at issues such as “bring your own
device” (BYOD) to
the workplace. In “CRM at Minitrex,” we see some of the
internal technological and
political conflicts that result from a strategic decision to
become more customercen-
tric. Finally, “Customer Service at Datatronics” explores the
importance of present-
ing unified, customer-facing IT to customers.
• Section IV: IT Portfolio Development and Management looks
at how the IT func-
tion must transform itself to be able to deliver business value
effectively in the
future. Chapter 17 (Managing the Application Portfolio)

describes the ongoing
management process of categorizing, assessing, and
rationalizing the IT applica-
tion portfolio. Chapter 18 (IT Demand Management: Supply
Management is Not
Enough) looks at the often neglected issue of demand
management (as opposed
to supply management), explores the root causes of the demand
for IT services,
and identifies a number of tools and enablers to facilitate more
effective demand
management. Chapter 19 (Technology Roadmap: Benefits,
Elements, and Practical
Steps) examines the challenges IT managers face in
implementing new infrastruc-
ture, technology standards, and types of technology in their
real-world business and
technical environments, which is composed of a huge variety of
hardware, software,
applications, and other technologies, some of which date back
more than thirty
years. Chapter 20 (Emerging Development Practices) explores
how system develop-
ment practices are changing and how managers can create an
environment to pro-
mote improved development productivity. And Chapter 21
(Information Delivery:
Past, Present, and Future) examines the fresh challenges IT
faces in managing the
exponential growth of data and digital assets; privacy and
accountability concerns;
and new demands for access to information on an anywhere,
anytime basis.
The mini cases associated with this section describe many of
these themes

embedded within real organizational contexts. “Project
Management at MM” mini
case shows how a top-priority, strategic project can take a
wrong turn when proj-
ect management skills are ineffective. “Working Smarter at
Continental Furniture”
minicasefollowsaninitiativetoimprovethecompany’sanalyticssoit
canreduce
its environmental impact. And in the mini case “Managing
Technology at Genex
Fuels,” we see CIO Nick Devlin trying to implement
enterprisewide technology for
competitive advantage in an organization that has been limping
along with obscure
and outdated systems.
Preface 19
SupplementAry mAteriAlS
online instructor resource center
The following supplements are available online to adopting
instructors:
• PowerPointLectureNotes
• ImageLibrary(textart)
• ExtensiveTeachingNotesforallMinicases
•
AdditionalchaptersincludingDevelopingITProfessionalism;ITSo
urcing;Master
Data Management; Developing IT Capabilities; The Identity

Management Challenge;
Social Computing; Managing Perceptions of IT; IT in the New
World of Corporate
Governance Reforms; Enhancing Customer Experiences with
Technology; Creating
Digital Dashboards; and Managing Electronic Communications.
•
Additionalminicases,includingITLeadershipatMaxTrade;Creatin
gaProcess-Driven
Organization at Ag-Credit; Information Management at
Homestyle Hotels; Knowledge
Management at Acme Consulting; Desktop Provisioning at
CanCredit; and Leveraging
IT Vendors at SleepSmart.
For detailed descriptions of all of the supplements just listed,
please visit
www.pearsongloableditions.com/McKeen.
courseSmart etextbooks online
CourseSmart* is an exciting new choice for students looking to
save money. As an alter-
native to purchasing the print textbook, students can purchase
an electronic version of
the same content and save up to 50 percent off the suggested list
price of the print text.
With a CourseSmart etextbook, students can search the text,
make notes online, print
out reading assignments that incorporate lecture notes, and
bookmark important pas-
sages for later review. www.coursesmart.co.uk.
* This product may not be available in all markets. For more
details, please visit www.coursesmart.co.uk or
contact your local Pearson representative.

the geneSiS of thiS Book
Since 1990 we have been meeting quarterly with a group of
senior IT managers from a
number of leading-edge organizations (e.g., Eli Lilly, BMO,
Honda, HP, CIBC, IBM, Sears,
Bell Canada, MacDonalds, and Sun Life) to identify and discuss
critical IT manage-
ment issues. This focus group represents a wide variety of
industry sectors (e.g., retail,
manufacturing, pharmaceutical, banking, telecommunications,
insurance, media, food
processing, government, and automotive). Originally, it was
established to meet the com-
panies’ needs for well-balanced, thoughtful, yet practical
information on emerging IT
management topics, about which little or no research was
available. However, we soon
recognized the value of this premise for our own research in the
rapidly evolving field
of IT management. As a result, it quickly became a full-scale
research program in which
we were able to use the focus group as an “early warning
system” to document new IT
management issues, develop case studies around them, and
explore more collaborative
approaches to identifying trends, challenges, and effective
practices in each topic area.3
3 This now includes best practice case studies, field research in
organizations, multidisciplinary qualitative
and quantitative research projects, and participation in
numerous CIO research consortia.

20 Preface
As we shared our materials with our business students, we
realized that this issues-based
approach resonated strongly with them, and we began to
incorporate more of our research
intotheclassroom.Thisbookistheresultofourmanyyears’workwiths
eniorITmanag-
ers, in organizations, and with students in the classroom.
Each issue in this book has been selected collaboratively by the
focus group after
debateanddiscussion.Asfacilitators,ourjobhasbeentokeepthegrou
p’sfocusonIT
management issues, not technology per se. In preparation for
each meeting, focus group
members researched the topic within their own organization,
often involving a number
of members of their senior IT management team as well as
subject matter experts in
the process. To guide them, we provided a series of questions
about the issue, although
members are always free to explore it as they see fit. This
approach provided both struc-
ture for the ensuing discussion and flexibility for those
members whose organizations
are approaching the issue in a different fashion.
The focus group then met in a full-day session, where the
members discussed all
aspects of the issue. Many also shared corporate documents with
the group. We facilitated
the discussion, in particular pushing the group to achieve a

common understanding of
the dimensions of the issue and seeking examples, best
practices, and guidelines for deal-
ing with the challenges involved. Following each session, we
wrote a report based on the
discussion, incorporating relevant academic and practitioner
materials where these were
available. (Because some topics are “bleeding edge,” there is
often little traditional IT
research available on them.)
Each report has three parts:
1. A description of the issue and the challenges it presents for
both business and IT
managers
2. Models and concepts derived from the literature to position
the issue within a con-
textual framework
3. Near-term strategies (i.e., those that can be implemented
immediately) that have
proven successful within organizations for dealing with the
specific issue
Each chapter in this book focuses on one of these critical IT
issues. We have learned
over the years that the issues themselves vary little across
industries and organizations,
even in enterprises with unique IT strategies. However, each
organization tackles the
same issue somewhat differently. It is this diversity that
provides the richness of insight
in these chapters. Our collaborative research approach is based
on our belief that when

dealing with complex and leading-edge issues, “everyone has
part of the solution.”
Every focus group, therefore, provides us an opportunity to
explore a topic from a
variety of perspectives and to integrate different experiences
(both successful and oth-
erwise) so that collectively, a thorough understanding of each
issue can be developed
and strategies for how it can be managed most successfully can
be identified.
AbouT THE AuTHorS
James D.
McKeenisProfessorEmeritusattheQueen’sSchoolofBusiness.Heh
asbeen
working in the IT field for many years as a practitioner,
researcher, and consultant. In
2011, he was named the “IT Educator of the Year” by
ComputerWorld Canada. Jim has
taught at universities in the United Kingdom, France, Germany,
and the United States.
His research is widely published in a number of leading journals
and he is the coau-
thor (with Heather Smith) of five books on IT management.
Their most recent book—IT
Strategy: Issues and Practices (2nd ed.)—was the best-selling
business book in Canada
(Globe and Mail, April 2012).
Heather A. Smith has been named the most-published researcher
on IT management

issuesintwosuccessivestudies(2006,2009).Aseniorresearchassoci
atewithQueen’s
University School of Business, she is the author of five books,
the most recent being IT
Strategy: Issues and Practices (Pearson Prentice Hall, 2012).
She is also a senior research
associatewiththeAmericanSocietyforInformationManagement’sA
dvancedPractices
Council. A former senior IT manager, she is codirector of the IT
Management Forum and
the CIO Brief, which facilitate interorganizational learning
among senior IT executives.
In addition, she consults and collaborates with organizations
worldwide.
21
ACKnowLEDGMEnTS
The work contained in this book is based on numerous meetings
with many senior IT
managers. We would like to acknowledge our indebtedness to
the following individuals
who willingly shared their insights based on their experiences
“earned the hard way”:
Michael Balenzano, Sergei Beliaev, Matthias Benfey, Nastaran
Bisheban, Peter
Borden, Eduardo Cadena, Dale Castle, Marc Collins, Diane
Cope, Dan Di Salvo,
Ken Dschankilic, Michael East, Nada Farah, Mark Gillard, Gary
Goldsmith, Ian

Graham, Keiko Gutierrez, Maureen Hall, Bruce Harding,
Theresa Harrington,
Tom Hopson, Heather Hutchison, Jim Irich, Zeeshan Khan,
Joanne Lafreniere,
Konstantine Liris, Lisa MacKay, Mark O’Gorman, Amin
Panjwani, Troy Pariag,
Brian Patton, Marius Podaru, Helen Restivo, Pat Sadler, A. F.
Salam, Ashish
Saxena, Joanne Scher, Stewart Scott, Andy Secord, Marie Shafi,
Helen Shih, Trudy
Sykes, Bruce Thompson, Raju Uppalapati, Len Van Greuning,
Laurie Schatzberg,
Ted Vincent, and Bond Wetherbe.
WewouldalsoliketorecognizethecontributionofQueen’sSchoolof
Business
to this work. The school has facilitated and supported our vision
of better integrat-
ing academic research and practice and has helped make our
collaborative approach
to the study of IT management and strategy an effective model
for interorganizational
learning.
James D. McKeen
Kingston, Ontario
Heather A. Smith
School of Business
June 2014
22

S e c t i o n i
Delivering Value with IT
Chapter 1 The IT Value Proposition
Chapter 2 Delivering Business Value through IT Strategy
Chapter 3 Making IT Count
Chapter 4 Effective Business–IT Relationships
Chapter 5 Business–IT Communication
Chapter 6 Effective IT Leadership
Mini Cases
■ Delivering Business Value with IT at Hefty Hardware
■ Investing in TUFS
■ IT Planning at ModMeters
M01_MCKE0260_03_GE_C01.indd 23 12/3/14 8:33 PM
24
C h a p t e r
1 the it Value Proposition1
1 This chapter is based on the authors’ previously published
article, Smith, H. A., and J. D. McKeen.
“Developing and Delivering on the IT Value Proposition.”
Communications of the Association for Information
Systems 11 (April 2003): 438–50. Reproduced by permission of
the Association for Information Systems.
It’s déjà vu all over again. For at least twenty years, business

leaders have been trying to figure out exactly how and where
IT can be of value in their organizations. And IT managers have
been trying to learn how to deliver this value. When IT was
used mainly as a productivity improvement tool in small areas
of a business, this was
a relatively straightforward process. Value was measured by
reduced head counts—
usually in clerical areas—and/or the ability to process more
transactions per person.
However, as systems grew in scope and complexity,
unfortunately so did the risks. Very
few companies escaped this period without making at least a
few disastrous invest-
ments in systems that didn’t work or didn’t deliver the bottom-
line benefits executives
thought they would. Naturally, fingers were pointed at IT.
With the advent of the strategic use of IT in business, it became
even more difficult
to isolate and deliver on the IT value proposition. It was often
hard to tell if an invest-
ment had paid off. Who could say how many competitors had
been deterred or how
many customers had been attracted by a particular IT initiative?
Many companies can
tell horror stories of how they have been left with a substantial
investment in new forms
of technology with little to show for it. Although over the years
there have been many
improvements in where and how IT investments are made and
good controls have been
established to limit time and cost overruns, we are still not able
to accurately articulate
and deliver on a value proposition for IT when it comes to
anything other than simple
productivity improvements or cost savings.

Problems in delivering IT value can lie with how a value
proposition is conceived
or in what is done to actually implement an idea—that is,
selecting the right project and
doing the project right (Cooper et al. 2000; McKeen and Smith
2003; Peslak 2012). In
addition, although most firms attempt to calculate the expected
payback of an IT invest-
ment before making it, few actually follow up to ensure that
value has been achieved or
to question what needs to be done to make sure that value will
be delivered.
M01_MCKE0260_03_GE_C01.indd 24 12/3/14 8:33 PM
Chapter1 • TheITValueProposition 25
This chapter first looks at the nature of IT value and “peels the
onion” into its
different layers. Then it examines the three components of
delivering IT value: value
identification, conversion, and value realization. Finally, it
identifies five general
principles for ensuring IT value will be achieved.
Peeling the OniOn: Understanding it ValUe
Thirty years ago the IT value proposition was seen as a simple
equation: Deliver the
right technology to the organization, and financial benefits will
follow (Cronk and
Fitzgerald 1999; Marchand et al. 2000). In the early days of IT,
when computers were

most often used as direct substitutes for people, this equation
was understandable,
even if it rarely worked this simply. It was easy to compute a
bottom-line benefit where
“technology” dollars replaced “salary” dollars.
Problems with this simplistic view quickly arose when
technology came to be
used as a productivity support tool and as a strategic tool.
Under these conditions,
managers had to decide if an IT investment was worth making if
it saved people time,
helped them make better decisions, or improved service. Thus,
other factors, such as
how well technology was used by people or how IT and
business processes worked
together, became important considerations in how much value
was realized from an IT
investment. These issues have long confounded our
understanding of the IT value prop-
osition, leading to a plethora of opinions (many negative) about
how and where technol-
ogy has actually contributed to business value. Stephen Roach
(1989) made headlines
with his macroeconomic analysis showing that IT had had
absolutely no impact on pro-
ductivity in the services sector. More recently, research shows
that companies still have a
mixed record in linking IT to organizational performance, user
satisfaction, productivity,
customer experience, and agility (Peslak 2012).
These perceptions, plus ever-increasing IT expenditures, have
meant business
managers are taking a closer look at how and where IT delivers
value to an organization

(Ginzberg 2001; Luftman and Zadeh 2011). As they do this,
they are beginning to change
their understanding of the IT value proposition. Although,
unfortunately, “silver bullet
thinking” (i.e., plug in technology and deliver bottom-line
impact) still predomi-
nates, IT value is increasingly seen as a multilayered concept,
far more complex than
it first appeared. This suggests that before an IT value
proposition can be identified
and delivered, it is essential that managers first “peel the
onion” and understand more
about the nature of IT value itself (see Figure 1.1).
What is it Value?
Value is defined as the worth or desirability of a thing (Cronk
and Fitzgerald 1999). It is
a subjective assessment. Although many believe this is not so,
the value of IT depends
very much on how a business and its individual managers
choose to view it. Different
companies and even different executives will define it quite
differently. Strategic posi-
tioning, increased productivity, improved decision making, cost
savings, or improved
service are all ways value could be defined. Today most
businesses define value broadly
and loosely, not simply as a financial concept (Chakravarty et
al. 2013). Ideally, it is tied
to the organization’s business model because adding value with
IT should enable a firm
to do its business better. In the focus group (see the Preface),
one company sees value
M01_MCKE0260_03_GE_C01.indd 25 12/3/14 8:33 PM

26 SectionI • DeliveringValuewithIT
resulting from all parts of the organization having the same
processes; another defines
value by return on investment (ROI); still another measures it
by a composite of key
performance indicators. In short, there is no single agreed-on
measure of IT value. As a
result, misunderstandings about the definition of value either
between IT and the busi-
ness or among business managers themselves can lead to
feelings that value has not
been delivered. Therefore, a prerequisite of any IT value
proposition is that everyone
involved in an IT initiative agree on what value they are trying
to deliver and how they
will recognize it.
Where is it Value?
Value may also vary according to where one looks for it
(Davern and Kauffman 2000;
Oliveira and Martins 2011). For example, value to an enterprise
may not be perceived as
value in a work group or by an individual. In fact, delivering
value at one level in an orga-
nization may actually conflict with optimizing value at another
level. Decisions about
IT value are often made to optimize firm or business process
value, even if they cause
difficulties for business units or individuals. As one manager
explained, “At the senior
levels, our bottom-line drivers of value are cost savings, cash

flow, customer satisfaction,
and revenue. These are not always visible at the lower levels of
the organization.” Failure
to consider value implications at all levels can lead to a value
proposition that is coun-
terproductive and may not deliver the value that is anticipated.
Many executives take a
hard line with these value conflicts. However, it is far more
desirable to aim for a value
What Value will be
Delivered?
Where will Value be
Delivered?
Who will
Deliver Value?
When will Value
be Delivered?
How will Value
be Delivered?
FigUre 1.1 IT Value Is a Many-Layered Concept
M01_MCKE0260_03_GE_C01.indd 26 12/3/14 8:33 PM
that is not a win–lose proposition but is a win–win at all levels.
This can leverage overall
value many times over (Chan 2000; Grant and Royle 2011).

Who delivers it Value?
Increasingly, managers are realizing that it is the interaction of
people, information, and
technology that delivers value, not IT alone.2 Studies have
confirmed that strong IT
practices alone do not deliver superior performance. It is only
the combination of these
IT practices with an organization’s skills at managing
information and people’s behav-
iors and beliefs that leads to real value (Birdsall 2011; Ginzberg
2001; Marchand et al.
2000). In the past, IT has borne most of the responsibility for
delivering IT value. Today,
however, business managers exhibit a growing willingness to
share responsibility with
IT to ensure value is realized from the organization’s
investments in technology. Most
companies now expect to have an executive sponsor for any IT
initiative and some busi-
ness participation in the development team. However, many IT
projects still do not
have the degree of support or commitment from the business
that IT managers feel is
necessary to deliver fully on a value proposition (Peslak 2012).
When is it Value realized?
Value also has a time dimension. It has long been known that
the benefits of technol-
ogy take time to be realized (Chan 2000; Segars and Chatterjee
2010). People must be
trained, organizations and processes must adapt to new ways of
working, information
must be compiled, and customers must realize what new

products and services are
being offered. Companies are often unprepared for the time it
takes an investment to
pay off. Typically, full payback can take between three and five
years and can have at
least two spikes as a business adapts to the deployment of
technology. Figure 1.2 shows
this “W” effect, named for the way the chart looks, for a single
IT project.
Initially, companies spend a considerable amount in deploying a
new technology.
During this twelve-to-sixteen-month period, no benefits occur.
Following implementa-
tion, some value is realized as companies achieve initial
efficiencies. This period lasts
for about six months. However, as use increases, complexities
also grow. Information
overload can occur and costs increase. At this stage, many can
lose faith in the initia-
tive. This is a dangerous period. The final set of benefits can
occur only by making the
business simpler and applying technology, information, and
people more effectively. If
a business can manage to do this, it can achieve sustainable,
long-term value from its IT
investment (Segars and Chatterjee 2010). If it can’t, value from
technology can be offset
by increased complexity.
Time also changes perceptions of value. Many IT managers can
tell stories of
how an initiative is vilified as having little or no value when
first implemented, only
to have people say they couldn’t imagine running the business
without it a few years

later. Similarly, most managers can identify projects where time
has led to a clearer
2 These interactions in a structured form are known as
processes. Processes are often the focus of much orga-
nizational effort in the belief that streamlining and
reengineering them will deliver value. In fact, research
shows that without attention to information and people, very
little value is delivered (Segars and Chatterjee
2010). In addition, attention to processes in organizations often
ignores the informal processes that contribute
to value.
M01_MCKE0260_03_GE_C01.indd 27 12/3/14 8:33 PM
understanding of the potential value of a project. Unfortunately,
in cases where antici-
pated value declines or disappears, projects don’t always get
killed (Cooper et al. 2000).
Clarifying and agreeing on these different layers of IT value is
the first step involved
in developing and delivering on the IT value proposition. All
too often, this work is for-
gotten or given short shrift in the organization’s haste to answer
this question: How will
IT value be delivered? (See next section.) As a result,
misunderstandings arise and tech-
nology projects do not fulfill their expected promises. It will be
next to impossible to do a
good job developing and delivering IT value unless and until
the concepts involved in IT

value are clearly understood and agreed on by both business and
IT managers.
the three COmPOnents OF the it ValUe PrOPOsitiOn
Developing and delivering an IT value proposition involves
addressing three compo-
nents. First, potential opportunities for adding value must be
identified. Second, these
opportunities must be converted into effective applications of
technology. Finally, value
12–16 Months
EVA
Time
Get the House
in Order
Harvest Low-
Hanging Fruit
Make the
Business
Complex
Make Business
Simpler
16–22 Months 22–38 Months 3–5 Years
FigUre 1.2 The ‘W’ Effect in Delivering IT Value (Segars &
Chatterjee, 2010)

Best Practices in Understanding IT Value
• LinkITvaluedirectlytoyourbusinessmodel.
•
Recognizevalueissubjective,andmanageperceptionsaccordingly.
• Aimforavalue“win–
win”acrossprocesses,workunits,andindividuals.
• SeekbusinesscommitmenttoallITprojects.
• Managevalueovertime.
M01_MCKE0260_03_GE_C01.indd 28 12/3/14 8:33 PM
must be realized by the organization. Together, these
components comprise the funda-
mentals of any value proposition (see Figure 1.3).
identification of Potential Value
Identifying opportunities for making IT investments has
typically been a fairly
informal activity in most organizations. Very few companies
have a well-organized
means of doing research into new technologies or strategizing
about where these tech-
nologies can be used (McKeen and Smith 2010). More
companies have mechanisms
for identifying opportunities within business units. Sometimes a
senior IT manager
will be designated as a “relationship manager” for a particular
unit with responsi-
bility for working with business management to identify
opportunities where IT

could add value (Agarwal and Sambamurthy 2002; Peslak
2012). Many other com-
panies, however, still leave it up to business managers to
identify where they want
to use IT. There is growing evidence that relegating the IT
organization to a passive
role in developing systems according to business instructions is
unlikely to lead to
high IT value. Research shows that involving IT in business
planning can have a direct
and positive influence on the development of successful
business strategies using IT
(Ginzberg 2001; Marchand et al. 2000). This suggests that
organizations should estab-
lish joint business–IT mechanisms to identify and evaluate both
business and technical
opportunities where IT can add value.
Once opportunities have been identified, companies must then
make decisions
about where they want to focus their dollars to achieve optimal
value. Selecting the
right projects for an organization always involves balancing
three fundamental factors:
cash, timing, and risk (Luehrman 1997). In principle, every
company wants to under-
take only high-return projects. In reality, project selection is
based on many different
factors. For example, pet or political projects or those mandated
by the government or
competitors are often part of a company’s IT portfolio (Carte et
al. 2001). Disagreement
at senior levels about which projects to undertake can arise
because of a lack of a coher-
ent and consistent mechanism for assessing project value. All
organizations need some

formal mechanism for prioritizing projects. Without one, it is
very likely that project
selection will become highly politicized and, hence, ineffective
at delivering value.
There are a variety of means to do this, ranging from using
strictly bottom-line metrics,
to comparing balanced scorecards, to adopting a formal value-
assessment methodology.
However, although these methods help to weed out higher cost–
lower return projects,
they do not constitute a foolproof means of selecting the right
projects for an organiza-
tion. Using strict financial selection criteria, for example, can
exclude potentially high-
value strategic projects that have less well-defined returns,
longer payback periods,
and more risk (Cooper et al. 2000; DeSouza 2011). Similarly, it
can be difficult getting
Identification Conversion Realization
IT
Value
FigUre 1.3 The Three Components of the IT Value Proposition
M01_MCKE0260_03_GE_C01.indd 29 12/3/14 8:33 PM
important infrastructure initiatives funded even though these
may be fundamental to
improving organizational capabilities (Byrd 2001).

Therefore, organizations are increasingly taking a portfolio
approach to project
selection. This approach allocates resources and funding to
different types of projects,
enabling each type of opportunity to be evaluated according to
different criteria (McKeen
and Smith 2003; Smith and McKeen 2010). One company has
identified three different
classes of IT—infrastructure, common systems, and business
unit applications—and
funds them in different proportions. In other companies,
funding for strategic initia-
tives is allocated in stages so their potential value can be
reassessed as more information
about them becomes known. Almost all companies have found it
necessary to justify
infrastructure initiatives differently than more business-oriented
projects. In fact, some
remove these types of projects from the selection process
altogether and fund them with
a “tax” on all other development (McKeen and Smith 2003).
Other companies allocate a
fixed percentage of their IT budgets to a technology renewal
fund.
Organizations have come a long way in formalizing where and
how they choose to
invest their IT dollars. Nevertheless, there is still considerable
room for judgment based
on solid business and technical knowledge. It is, therefore,
essential that all executives
involved have the ability to think strategically and
systematically as well as financially
about project identification and selection.
effective Conversion

“Conversion” from idea/opportunity to reality has been what IT
organizations have
been all about since their inception. A huge amount of effort
has gone into this central
component of the IT value proposition. As a result, many IT
organizations have become
very good at developing and delivering projects on time and on
budget. Excellent
project management, effective execution, and reliable
operations are a critical part of
IT value. However, they are not, in and of themselves,
sufficient to convert a good idea
into value or to deliver value to an organization.
Today managers and researchers are both recognizing that more
is involved in
effective conversion than good IT practices. Organizations can
set themselves up for
failure by not providing adequate and qualified resources. Many
companies start more
projects than they can effectively deliver with the resources
they have available. Not
having enough time or resources to do the job means that people
are spread too thin
and end up taking shortcuts that are potentially damaging to
value (Cooper et al. 2000).
Resource limitations on the business side of a project team can
be as damaging to con-
version as a lack of technical resources. “[Value is about] far
more than just sophisticated
managerial visions. . . . Training and other efforts . . . to obtain
value from IT investments
Best Practices in Identifying Potential Value

• Jointbusiness–
ITstructurestorecognizeandevaluateopportunities
• Ameansofcomparingvalueacrossprojects
• Aportfolioapproachtoprojectselection
• Afundingmechanismforinfrastructure
M01_MCKE0260_03_GE_C01.indd 30 12/3/14 8:33 PM
are often hamstrung by insufficient resources” (Chircu and
Kauffman 2000). Inadequate
business resources can lead to poor communication and
ineffective problem solving on
a project (Ginzberg 2001). Companies are beginning to
recognize that the number and
quality of the staff assigned to an IT project can make a
difference to its eventual out-
come. They are insisting that the organization’s best IT and
businesspeople be assigned
to critical projects.
Other significant barriers to conversion that are becoming more
apparent now
that IT has improved its own internal practices include the
following:
• Organizational barriers. The effective implementation of IT
frequently requires
the extensive redesign of current business processes (Chircu and
Kauffman 2000).
However, organizations are often reluctant to make the difficult
complementary
business changes and investments that are required (Carte et al.

2001). “When
new IT is implemented, everyone expects to see costs come
down,” explained one
manager. “However, most projects involve both business and IT
deliverables. We,
therefore, need to take a multifunctional approach to driving
business value.” In
recognition of this fact, some companies are beginning to put
formal change man-
agement programs in place to help businesses prepare for the
changes involved
with IT projects and to adapt and simplify as they learn how to
take advantage of
new technology.
• Knowledge barriers. Most often new technology and processes
require employ-
ees to work differently, learn new skills, and have new
understanding of how and
where information, people, and technologies fit together (Chircu
and Kauffman
2000; Perez-Lopez and Alegre 2012). Although training has
long been part of new
IT implementations, more recently businesses are recognizing
that delivering value
from technology requires a broader and more coordinated
learning effort (Smith
and McKeen 2002). Lasting value comes from people and
technology working
together as a system rather than as discrete entities. Research
confirms that high-
performing organizations not only have strong IT practices but
also have people
who have good information management practices and who are
able to effectively
use the information they receive (Beath et al. 2012; Marchand et

al. 2000).
realizing Value
The final component of the IT value proposition has been the
most frequently ignored.
This is the work involved in actually realizing value after
technology has been imple-
mented. Value realization is a proactive and long-term process
for any major initiative.
All too often, after an intense implementation period, a
development team is disbanded
to work on other projects, and the business areas affected by
new technology are left to
Best Practices in Conversion
• AvailabilityofadequateandqualifiedITandbusinessresources
• Traininginbusinessgoalsandprocesses
• Multifunctionalchangemanagement
• Emphasisonhigher-levellearningandknowledgemanagement
M01_MCKE0260_03_GE_C01.indd 31 12/3/14 8:33 PM
sink or swim. As a result, a project’s benefits can be
imperfectly realized. Technology
must be used extensively if it is to deliver value. Poorly
designed technology can lead
to high levels of frustration, resistance to change, and low
levels of use (Chircu and
Kauffman 2000; Sun et al., 2012).

Resistance to change can have its root cause in an assumption or
an action that
doesn’t make sense in the everyday work people do. Sometimes
this means challeng-
ing workers’ understanding of work expectations or information
flows. At other times
it means doing better analysis of where and how a new process
is causing bottlenecks,
overwork, or overload. As one manager put it, “If value is not
being delivered, we
need to understand the root causes and do something about it.”
His company takes
the unusual position that it is important to keep a team working
on a project until the
expected benefits have been realized. This approach is ideal but
can also be very costly
and, therefore, must be carefully managed. Some companies try
to short-circuit the
value management process by simply taking anticipated cost
savings out of a business
unit’s budget once technology has been implemented, thereby
forcing it to do more
with less whether or not the technology has been as beneficial
as anticipated. However,
most often organizations do little or no follow-up to determine
whether or not benefits
have been achieved.
Measurement is a key component of value realization (Thorp
1999). After imple-
mentation, it is essential that all stakeholders systematically
compare outcomes against
expected value and take appropriate actions to achieve benefits.
In addition to monitor-
ing metrics, a thorough and ongoing assessment of value and
information flows must

also be undertaken at all levels of analysis: individual, team,
work unit, and enterprise.
Efforts must be taken to understand and improve aspects of
process, information, and
technology that are acting as barriers to achieving value.
A significant problem with not paying attention to value
recognition is that areas
of unexpected value or opportunity are also ignored. This is
unfortunate because it is
only after technology has been installed that many
businesspeople can see how it could
be leveraged in other parts of their work. Realizing value
should, therefore, also include
provisions to evaluate new opportunities arising through
serendipity.
FiVe PrinCiPles FOr deliVering ValUe
In addition to clearly understanding what value means in a
particular organization and
ensuring that the three components of the IT value proposition
are addressed by every
project, five principles have been identified that are central to
developing and deliver-
ing value in every organization.
Best Practices in Realizing Value
• Planavalue-realizationphaseforallITprojects.
• Measureoutcomesagainstexpectedresults.
• Lookforandeliminaterootcausesofproblems.
• Assessvaluerealizationatalllevelsintheorganization.
• Haveprovisionsforactingonnewopportunitiestoleveragevalue.
M01_MCKE0260_03_GE_C01.indd 32 12/3/14 8:33 PM

Principle 1. have a Clearly defined Portfolio
Value management Process
Every organization should have a common process for managing
the overall value
being delivered to the organization from its IT portfolio. This
would begin as a means of
identifying and prioritizing IT opportunities by potential value
relative to each other. It
would also include mechanisms to optimize enterprise value
(e.g., through tactical, stra-
tegic, and infrastructure projects) according to a rubric of how
the organization wants
to allocate its resources.
A portfolio value management process should continue to track
projects as they
are being developed. It should ensure not only that projects are
meeting schedule and
budget milestones but also that other elements of conversion
effectiveness are being
addressed (e.g., business process redesign, training, change
management, informa-
tion management, and usability). A key barrier to achieving
value can be an organiza-
tion’s unwillingness to revisit the decisions made about its
portfolio (Carte et al. 2001).
Yet this is critically important for strategic and infrastructure
initiatives in particular.
Companies may have to approve investments in these types of
projects based on imper-

fect information in an uncertain environment. As they develop,
improved information
can lead to better decision making about an investment. In some
cases this might lead to
a decision to kill a project; in others, to speed it up or to
reshape it as a value proposition
becomes clearer.
Finally, a portfolio value management process should include an
ongoing means
of ensuring that value is realized from an investment.
Management must monitor
expected outcomes at appropriate times following
implementation and hold someone
in the organization accountable for delivering benefits (Smith
and McKeen 2010).
Principle 2. aim for Chunks of Value
Much value can be frittered away by dissipating IT investments
on too many projects
(Cho et al. 2013; Marchand et al. 2000). Focusing on a few key
areas and designing a set
of complementary projects that will really make a difference is
one way companies are
trying to address this concern. Many companies are undertaking
larger and larger tech-
nology initiatives that will have a significant transformational
and/or strategic impact
on the organization. However, unlike earlier efforts, which
often took years to complete
and ended up having questionable value, these initiatives are
aiming to deliver major
value through a series of small, focused projects that, linked
together, will result in both
immediate short-term impact and long-term strategic value. For

example, one company
has about three hundred to four hundred projects underway
linked to one of a dozen
major initiatives.
Principle 3. adopt a holistic Orientation to technology Value
Because value comes from the effective interaction of people,
information, and tech-
nology, it is critical that organizations aim to optimize their
ability to manage and use
them together (Marchand et al. 2000). Adopting a systemic
approach to value, where
technology is not viewed in isolation and interactions and
impacts are anticipated and
planned, has been demonstrated to contribute to perceived
business value (Ginzberg
2001). Managers should aim to incorporate technology as an
integral part of an overall
M01_MCKE0260_03_GE_C01.indd 33 12/3/14 8:33 PM
program of business change rather than dealing with people and
information manage-
ment as afterthoughts to technology (Beath et al. 2012). One
company has done this by
taking a single business objective (e.g., “increase market
penetration by 15 percent over
five years”) and designing a program around it that includes a
number of bundled tech-
nology projects.

Principle 4. aim for Joint Ownership of technology initiatives
This principle covers a lot of territory. It includes the necessity
for strong executive
sponsorship of all IT projects. “Without an executive sponsor
for a project, we simply
won’t start it,” explained one manager. It also emphasizes that
all people involved in
a project must feel they are responsible for the results. Said
another manager, “These
days it is very hard to isolate the impact of technology,
therefore there must be a ‘we’
mentality.” This perspective is reinforced by research that has
found that the quality of
the IT–business relationship is central to the delivery of IT
value. Mutual trust, visible
business support for IT and its staff, and IT staff who consider
themselves to be part of
a business problem-solving team all make a significant
difference in how much value
technology is perceived to deliver (Ginzberg 2001).
Principle 5. experiment more Often
The growing complexity of technology, the range of options
available, and the
uncertainty of the business environment have each made it
considerably more difficult
to determine where and how technology investments can most
effectively be made.
Executives naturally object to the risks involved in investing
heavily in possible business
scenarios or technical gambles that may or may not realize
value. As a result, many
companies are looking for ways to firm up their understanding
of the value proposition

for a particular opportunity without incurring too much risk.
Undertaking pilot studies
is one way of doing this (DeSouza 2011). Such experiments can
prove the value of an
idea, uncover new opportunities, and identify more about what
will be needed to make
an idea successful. They provide senior managers with a greater
number of options
in managing a project and an overall technology portfolio. They
also enable poten-
tial value to be reassessed and investments in a particular
project to be reevaluated
and rebalanced against other opportunities more frequently. In
short, experimentation
enables technology investments to be made in chunks and makes
“go/no go” decisions
at key milestones much easier to make.
This chapter has explored the concepts
and activities involved in developing and
delivering IT value to an organization. In
their efforts to use technology to deliver
business value, IT managers should keep
clearly in mind the maxim “Value is in the
eye of the beholder.” Because there is no
single agreed-on notion of business value, it
is important to make sure that both business
and IT managers are working to a common
goal. This could be traditional cost reduction,
process efficiencies, new business capabili-
ties, improved communication, or a host of
other objectives. Although each organization
Conclusion

M01_MCKE0260_03_GE_C01.indd 34 12/3/14 8:33 PM
References
or business unit approaches value differ-
ently, increasingly this goal includes much
more than the simple delivery of technology
to a business unit. Today technology is being
used as a catalyst to drive many different
types of organizational transformation and
strategy. Therefore, IT value can no longer
be viewed in isolation from other parts of
the business, namely people and informa-
tion. Thus, it is no longer adequate to focus
simply on the development and delivery of
IT projects in order to deliver value. Today
delivering IT value means managing the
entire process from conception to cash.
Agarwal, R., and V. Sambamurthy. “Organizing
the IT Function for Business Innovation
Leadership.” Society for Information
Management Advanced Practices Council
Report, Chicago, September 2002.
Beath, C., I. Becerra-Fernandez, J. Ross, and J.
Short. “Finding Value in the Information
Explosion.” MIT Sloan Management Review 53,
no. 4 (2012): 18–20.
Birdsall, W. “Human Capabilities and

Information and Communication Technology:
The Communicative Connection.” Ethics and
Information Technology 13, no. 2 (2011): 93–106.
Byrd, T. A. “Information Technology, Core
Com petencies, and Sustained Competitive
Advantage.” Information Resources Management
Journal 14, no. 2 (April–June 2001): 27–36.
Carte, T., D. Ghosh, and R. Zmud. “The Influence
of IT Budgeting Practices on the Return
Derived from IT Investments.” CMISS White
Paper, November 2001.
Chakravarty, A., R. Grewal, and V. Sambamurthy.
“Information Technology Competencies,
Organizational Agility, and Firm Performance:
Enabling and Facilitating Roles.” Information
Systems Research 24, no. 4 (2013): 976–97, 1162–63,
1166.
Chan, Y. “IT Value: The Great Divide Between
Qualitative and Quantitative and Individual
and Organizational Measures.” Journal of
Management Information Systems 16, no. 4
(Spring 2000): 225–61.
Cho, W., M. Shaw, and H. Kwan. “The Effect
of Synergy Enhancement on Information
Technology Portfolio Selection.” Information
Technology and Management 14, no. 2 (2013):
125–42.
Chircu, A., and R. J. Kauffman. “Limits to Value in
Electronic Commerce-Related IT Investments.”
Journal of Management Information Systems 17,

no. 2 (Fall 2000): 59–80.
Cooper, R., S. Edgett, and E. Kleinschmidt. “New
Problems, New
Solution
s: Making Portfolio
Management More Effective.” Research
Technology Management 43, no. 2 (March/April
2000): 18–33.
Cronk, M., and E. Fitzgerald. “Understanding ‘IS
Business Value’: Derivation of Dimensions.”
Logistics Information Management 12, no. 1–2
(1999): 40–49.
Davern, M., and R. Kauffman. “Discovering
Potential and Realizing Value from
Information Technology Investments.” Journal
of Management Information Systems 16, no. 4
(Spring 2000): 121–43.
DeSouza, K. Intrapreneurship: Managing Ideas
in Your Organization. Toronto: University of

Toronto Press, 2011.
Ginzberg, M. “Achieving Business Value Through
Information Technology: The Nature of High
Business Value IT Organizations.” Society for
Information Management Advanced Practices
Council Report, Chicago, November 2001.
Grant, G. L., and M. T. Royle. “Information
Technology and Its Role in Creating Sustainable
Competitive Advantage.” Journal of International
Management Studies 6, no. 1 (2011): 1–7.
Luehrman, T. A. “What’s It Worth? A General
Manager’s Guide to Valuation.” Harvard
Business Review (May–June 1997): 131–41.
Luftman, J., and H. S. Zadeh. “Key Information
Technology and Management Issues 2010–
2011: An International Study.” Journal of
M01_MCKE0260_03_GE_C01.indd 35 12/3/14 8:33 PM

Marchand, D., W. Kettinger, and J. Rollins.
“Information Orientation: People, Technology
and the Bottom Line.” Sloan Management
Review (Summer 2000): 69–80.
McKeen, J. D., and H. A. Smith. Making IT
Happen. Chichester, England: John Wiley &
Sons, 2003.
McKeen, J. D., and H. A. Smith. “Application
Portfolio Management.” Communications for the
Association of Information Systems 26, Article 9
(March 2010), 157–70.
Oliveira, T., and M. F. Martins. “Literature Review
of Information Technology Adoption Models
at Firm Level.” Electronic Journal of Information
Systems Evaluation 14, no.1 (2011): 110–21.
Perez-Lopez, S., and J. Alegre. “Information
Technology Competency, Knowledge Processes
and Firm Performance.” Industrial Management

and Data Systems 112, no. 4 (2012): 644–62.
Peslak, A. R. “An Analysis of Critical Information
Technology Issues Facing Organizations.”
Industrial Management and Data Systems 112, no.
5 (2012): 808–27.
Roach, S. “The Case of the Missing Technology
Payback.” Presentation at the Tenth
International Conference on Information
Systems, Boston, December 1989.
Segars, A. H., and D. Chatterjee. “Diets That Don’t
Work: Where Enterprise Resource Planning
Goes Wrong.” Wall Street Journal, August 23,
2010. online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240527
48703514404574588060852535906.html.
Smith, H., and J. McKeen. “Instilling a Knowledge
Sharing Culture.” Presentation at the KM
Forum, Queen’s School of Business, Kingston,
Ontario, Canada, 2002.
Smith, H., and J. McKeen. “Investment Spend
Optimization at BMO Financial Group.” MISQ

Executive 9, no. 2 (June 2010): 65–81.
Sun, Y., Y. Fang, K. Lim, and D. Straub. “User
Satisfaction with Information Technology
Service Delivery: A Social Capital Perspective.”
Information Systems Research 23, no. 4 (2012):
1195–211.
Thorp, J. “Computing the Payoff from IT.” Journal of
Business Strategy 20, no. 3 (May/June 1999): 35–39.
M01_MCKE0260_03_GE_C01.indd 36 12/3/14 8:33 PM
37
C h a p t e r
2 Delivering Business Value through IT Strategy1
article, Smith, H. A., J. D. McKeen, and S. Singh.
“Developing IT Strategy for Business Value.” Journal of
Information Technology Management XVIII, no. 1 (June

2007): 49–58. Reproduced by permission of the Association of
Management.
Suddenly, it seems, executives are “getting” the strategic
potential of IT. Instead of being relegated to the back rooms of
the enterprise, IT is now being invited to the boardrooms and is
being expected to play a leading role in delivering top-
line value and business transformation (Korsten 2011; Luftman
and Zadeh 2011; Peslak
2012). Thus, it can no longer be assumed that business strategy
will naturally drive IT
strategy, as has traditionally been the case. Instead, different
approaches to strategy
development are now possible and sometimes desirable. For
example, the capabilities
of new technologies could shape the strategic direction of a firm
(e.g., mobile, social
media, big data). IT could enable new competencies that would
then make new busi-
ness strategies possible (e.g., location-based advertising). New
options for governance
using IT could also change how a company works with other
firms (think Wal-Mart
or Netflix). Today new technologies coevolve with new
business strategies and new

behaviors and structures (see Figure 2.1). However, whichever
way it is developed, if
IT is to deliver business value, IT strategy must always be
closely linked with sound
business strategy.
Ideally, therefore, business and IT strategies should complement
and support each
other relative to the business environment. Strategy
development should be a two-way
process between the business and IT. Yet unfortunately, poor
alignment between them
remains a perennial problem (Frohman 1982; Luftman and
Zadeh 2011; McKeen and
Smith 1996; Rivard et al. 2004). Research has already identified
many organizational
challenges to effective strategic alignment. For example, if their
strategy-development
processes are not compatible (e.g., if they take place at different
times or involve differ-
ent levels of the business), it is unlikely that the business and
IT will be working toward
the same goals at the same time (Frohman 1982). Aligning with
individual business
units can lead to initiatives that suboptimize the effectiveness

of corporate strategies
(McKeen and Smith 1996). Strategy implementation must also
be carefully aligned to
M02_MCKE0260_03_GE_C02.indd 37 12/3/14 8:34 PM
ensure the integration of business and IT efforts (Smith and
McKeen 2010). Finally, com-
panies often try to address too many priorities, leading to an
inadequate focus on key
strategic goals (Weiss and Thorogood 2011).
However, strategic alignment is only one problem facing IT
managers when they
develop IT strategy. With IT becoming so much more central to
the development and
delivery of business strategy, much more attention is now being
paid to strategy devel-
opment than in the past. What businesses want to accomplish
with their IT and how IT
shapes its own delivery strategy are increasingly vital to the

success of an enterprise.
This chapter explores how organizations are working to improve
IT strategy develop-
ment and its relationship with business strategy. It looks first at
how our understanding
of business and IT strategies has changed over time and at the
forces that will drive
even further changes in the future. Then it discusses some
critical success factors for IT
strategy development about which there is general consensus.
Next it looks at the dif-
ferent dimensions of the strategic use of IT that IT management
must address. Finally,
it examines how some organizations are beginning to evolve a
more formal IT strategy-
development process and some of the challenges they are facing
in doing so.
Business and iT sTraTegies: PasT, PresenT, and FuTure
At the highest level, a strategy is an approach to doing business
(Gebauer 1997).
Traditionally, a competitive business strategy has involved
performing different activi-
ties from competitors or performing similar activities in

different ways (Porter 1996).
Ideally, these activities were difficult or expensive for others to
copy and, therefore,
resulted in a long-term competitive advantage (Gebauer 1997).
They enabled firms to
charge a premium for their products and services.
Until recently, the job of an IT function was to understand the
business’s strategy
and figure out a plan to support it. However, all too often IT’s
strategic contribution
was inhibited by IT managers’ limited understanding of
business strategy and by busi-
ness managers’ poor understanding of IT’s potential. Therefore,
most formal IT plans
were focused on the more tactical and tangible line of business
needs or opportunities
New
Capabilities
New Behaviors & S
tructu
re

s
N
e
w
T
e
ch
no
lo
gy
New Strate
gie
s
Figure 2.1 Business and IT Strategies Co-evolve to Create New
Capabilities
M02_MCKE0260_03_GE_C02.indd 38 12/3/14 8:34 PM

Chapter2 • DeliveringBusinessValuethroughITStrategy 39
for operational integration rather than on supporting enterprise
strategy (Burgelman
and Doz 2001). And projects were selected largely on their
abilities to affect the short-
term bottom line rather than on delivering top-line business
value. “In the past IT had
to be a strategic incubator because businesspeople simply didn’t
recognize the potential
of technology,” said a member of the focus group.
As a result, instead of looking for ways to be different, in the
past much business
strategy became a relentless race to compete on efficiencies
with IT as the primary means
of doing so (Hitt et al. 1998; Porter 1996). In many industries,
companies’ improved
information-processing capabilities have been used to drive
down transaction costs to
near zero, threatening traditional value propositions and shaving
profit margins. This
is leading to considerable disruption as business models (i.e.,

the way companies add
value) are under attack by new, technology-enabled approaches
to delivering products
and services (e.g., the music industry, bookselling). Therefore:
Strategists [have to] honestly face the many weaknesses
inherent in [the]
industrial-age ways of doing things. They [must] redesign,
build upon and reconfig-
ure their components to radically transform the value
proposition. (Tapscott 1996)
Such new business strategies are inconceivable without the use
of IT. Other factors,
also facilitated by IT, are further influencing the relationship
between the business
and IT strategy. Increasingly, globalization is altering the
economic playing field. As
countries and companies become more deeply interrelated,
instability is amplified.
Instead of being generals plotting out a structured campaign,
business leaders are now
more likely to be participating in guerilla warfare (Eisenhardt
2002; Friedman 2005).
Flexibility, speed, and innovation are, therefore, becoming the

watchwords of competi-
tion and must be incorporated into any business or IT strategy–
development process.
These conditions have dramatically elevated the business’s
attention to the
value of IT strategy (Korsten 2011; Weiss and Thorogood
2011). As a result, business
executives recognize that it was a mistake to consider
technology projects to be solely
the responsibility of IT. There is, thus, a much greater
understanding that business
executives have to take leadership in making technology
investments in ways that will
shape and/or complement business strategy. There is also
recognition at the top of most
organizations that problems with IT strategy implementation are
largely the fault of
leaders who “failed to realize that adopting … systems posed a
business—not just a
technological—challenge” and didn’t take responsibility for the
organizational and
process changes that would deliver business value (Ross and
Beath 2002).

Changing value models and the development of integrated,
cross-functional
systems have elevated the importance of both a corporate
strategy and a technology
strategy that crosses traditional lines of business. Many
participants remarked that their
executive teams at last understand the potential of IT to affect
the top line. “IT recently
added some new distribution channels, and our business has just
exploded,” stated
one manager. Others are finding that there is a much greater
emphasis on IT’s ability to
grow revenues, and this is being reflected in how IT budgets are
allocated and projects
prioritized. “Our executives have finally recognized that
business strategy is not only
enabled by IT, but that it can provide new business
opportunities as well,” said another
manager. This is reflected in the changing position of the CIO
in many organizations
over the past decade. “Today our CIO sits on the executive team
and takes part in all
M02_MCKE0260_03_GE_C02.indd 39 12/3/14 8:34 PM

business strategy discussions because IT has credibility,” said a
group member. “Our
executives now want to work closely with IT and understand the
implications of tech-
nology decisions,” said another. “It’s not the same as it was
even five years ago.” Now
CIOs are valued for their insight into business opportunities,
their perspective across
the entire organization, and their ability to take the long view
(Korsten 2011).
However, this does not mean that organizations have become
good at developing
strategy or at effectively integrating business and IT strategies.
“There are many incon-
sistencies and problems with strategy development,” said a
participant. Organizations
have to develop new strategy-making capabilities to cope in the
future competitive
environment. This will mean changing their current top–down
method of developing

and implementing strategy. If there’s one thing leading
academics agree on, it’s that
future strategy development will have to become a more
dynamic and continuous pro-
cess (Casadesus and Ricart 2011; Eisenhardt 2002; Kanter 2002;
Prahalad and Krishnan
2002; Quinn 2002; Weill et al. 2002). Instead of business
strategy being a well-crafted
plan of action for the next three to five years, from which IT
can devise an appropri-
ate and supportive technology strategy, business strategy must
become more and more
evolutionary and interactive with IT. IT strategy development
must, therefore, become
more dynamic itself and focused on developing strategic
capabilities that will support a
variety of changing business objectives. In the future, managers
will not align business
strategy and IT at particular points in time but will participate
in an organic process
that will address the need to continually evolve IT and business
plans in concert with
each other (Casadesus and Ricart 2011).
Four CriTiCal suCCess FaCTors

Each focus group member had a different approach to
developing IT strategy, but there
was general agreement that four factors had to be in place for
strategy development to
be effective.
1. Revisit your business model. The worlds of business and IT
have traditionally
been isolated from each other, leading to misaligned and
sometimes conflicting
strategies. Although there is now a greater willingness among
business manag-
ers to understand the implications of technology in their world,
it is still IT that
must translate their ideas and concepts into business language.
“IT must absolutely
understand and focus on the business,” said a participant.
Similarly, it is essential that all managers thoroughly
understand how their
business as a whole works. Although this sounds like a truism,
almost any IT man-
ager can tell “war stories” of business managers who have very
different visions

of what they think their enterprise should look like. Business
models and strate-
gies are often confused with each other (Osterwalder and
Pigneur 2010). A business
model explains how the different pieces of a business fit
together. It ensures that
everyone in an organization is focused on the kind of value a
company wants to
create. Only when the business model is clear can strategies be
developed to articu-
late how a company will deliver that value in a unique way that
others cannot easily
duplicate (Osterwalder and Pigneur 2010).
2. Have strategic themes. IT strategy used to be about
individual projects. Now
it is about carefully crafted programs that focus on developing
specific business
M02_MCKE0260_03_GE_C02.indd 40 12/3/14 8:34 PM

capabilities. Each program consists of many smaller,
interrelated business and IT
initiatives cutting across several functional areas. These are
designed to be adapted,
reconfigured, accelerated, or canceled as the strategic program
evolves. Themes
give both business and IT leaders a broad yet focused topic of
interest that chal-
lenges them to move beyond current operations (Kanter 2002).
For example, one
retail company decided it wanted to be “a great place to work.”
A bank selected
mobile banking as a critical differentiator. Both firms used a
theme to engage the
imaginations of their employees and mobilize a variety of ideas
and actions around
a broad strategic direction. By grouping IT and business
programs around a few
key themes, managers find it easier to track and direct important
strategic threads
in an organization’s development and to visualize the synergies
and interdepen-
dencies involved across a variety of projects spread out across
the organization and
over time.

3. Get the right people involved. One of the most important
distinguishing factors
between companies that get high business value from their IT
investment and those
that don’t is that senior managers in high-performing companies
take a leadership
role in IT decision making. Abdication of this responsibility is a
recipe for disas-
ter (Ross and Beath 2002). “In the past it was very hard to get
the right people
involved,” said a focus group member. “Now it’s easier.”
Another noted, “You don’t
send a minion to an IT strategy meeting anymore; it’s just not
done.” In this type of
organization, the CIO typically meets regularly with the
president and senior busi-
ness leaders to discuss both business and IT strategies.
Getting the right people involved also means getting business
managers
and other key stakeholders involved in strategy as well. To do
this, many com-
panies have established “relationship manager” positions in IT
to work with and

learn about the business and bring opportunities for using
technology to the table.
Research shows that the best strategies often stem from
grassroots innovations, and
it is, therefore, critical that organizations take steps to ensure
that good ideas are
nurtured and not filtered out by different layers of management
(DeSouza 2011).
“We have two levels of strategy development in our
organization,” said a focus
group participant. “Our relationship managers work with
functional managers and
our CIO with our business unit presidents on the IT steering
committee.” This com-
pany also looks for cross-functional synergies and strategic
dependencies by hold-
ing regular meetings of IT account managers and between
account managers and
infrastructure managers.
4. Work in partnership with the business. Successful strategy
demands a true
partnership between IT and the business, not just use of the
term. Strategy decisions
are best made with input from both business and IT executives

(Ross and Beath
2002). The focus group agreed. “Our partnerships are key to our
success,” stated
a manager. “It’s not the same as it was a few years ago. People
now work very
closely together.” Partnership is not just a matter of “involving”
business lead-
ers in IT strategy or vice versa or “aligning” business and IT
strategies. Effective
strategizing is about continuous and dynamic synchronization of
capabilities
(Smith and McKeen 2010). “Our IT programs need
synchronizing with business
strategy—not only at a high level, but right down to the
individual projects and
the business changes that are necessary to implement them
properly,” explained
another participant.
M02_MCKE0260_03_GE_C02.indd 41 12/3/14 8:34 PM

The Many diMensions oF iT sTraTegy
One of the many challenges of developing effective IT strategy
is the fact that
technology can be used in so many different ways. The
opportunities are practically
limitless. Unfortunately, the available resources are not. Thus, a
key element of IT
strategy is determining how best to allocate the IT budget. This
issue is complicated
by the fact that most businesses today require significant IT
services just to operate.
Utility and basic support costs eat up between 30 and 70 percent
of the focus group
members’ budgets. That’s just the cost of “keeping the lights
on”—running existing
applications, fixing problems, and dealing with mandatory
changes (e.g., new legisla-
tion). IT strategy, therefore, has two components: how to do
more with less (i.e., driving
down fixed costs) and how to allocate the remaining budget
toward those projects that
will support and further the organization’s business strategy.
With occasional exceptions, CIOs and their teams are mostly

left alone to deter-
mine the most cost-effective way of providing the IT utility.
This has led to a variety of
IT-led initiatives to save money, including outsourcing, shared
services, use of software-
as-a-service (SaaS), global sourcing, and partnerships.
However, it is the way that IT
spends the rest of its budget that has captured the attention of
business strategists. “It
used to be that every line of business had an IT budget and that
we would work with
each one to determine the most effective way to spend it,” said
a manager. “Now there
is much more recognition that the big opportunities are at the
enterprise level and cut
across lines of business.”
Focus group members explained that implementing a strategic
program in IT will
usually involve five types of initiatives. Determining what the
balance among them will
be is a significant component of how IT strategy delivers
business value. Too much or
too little emphasis on one type of project can mean a failure to
derive maximum value

from a particular strategic business theme:
1. Business improvement. These projects are probably the
easiest to agree on because
they stress relatively low-risk investments with a tangible short-
to-medium-term
payback. These are often reengineering initiatives to help
organizations streamline
their processes and save substantial amounts of money by
eliminating unnecessary
or duplicate activities or empowering customers/suppliers to
self-manage transac-
tions with a company. Easy to justify with a business case, these
types of projects
have traditionally formed the bulk of IT’s discretionary
spending. “Cost-reduction
projects have and always will be important to our company,”
stated one member.
“However, it is important to balance what we do in this area
with other types of
equally important projects that have often been given short
shrift.”
2. Business enabling. These projects extend or transform how a
company does

business. As a result, they are more focused on the top-line or
revenue-growing
aspects of an enterprise. For example, a data warehouse could
enable different
parts of a company to “mine” transaction information to
improve customer ser-
vice, assist target marketing, better understand buying patterns,
or identify new
business opportunities. Adding a new mobile channel could
make it easier for
customers to buy more or attract new customers. A customer
information file
could make it more enjoyable for a customer to do business with
a company
(e.g., only one address change) and also facilitate new ways of
doing business.
M02_MCKE0260_03_GE_C02.indd 42 12/3/14 8:34 PM
Often the return on these types of projects is less clear, and as a
result it has been

harder to get them on the IT priority list. Yet many of these
initiatives represent
the foundations on which future business strategy will be built.
For example, one
CIO described the creation of a customer information file as “a
key enabler for
many different business units. . . . It has helped us build bench
strength and move
to a new level of service that other companies cannot match”
(Smith 2003).
3. Business opportunities. These are small-scale, experimental
initiatives designed
to test the viability of new concepts or technologies. In the past
these types of proj-
ects have not received funding by traditional methods because
of their high-risk
nature. Often it has been left up to the CIO to scrounge money
for such “skunk-
works.” There is a growing recognition of the potential value of
strategic innovation
projects in helping companies to learn about and prepare for the
future. In some
companies the CEO and CFO have freed up seed money to
finance a number of

these initiatives. However, although there is considerably more
acceptance for such
projects, there is still significant organizational resistance to
financing projects for
which the end results are unpredictable (Quinn 2002; Weiss and
Thorogood 2011).
In fact, it typically requires discipline to support and encourage
innovation exper-
iments, which, by definition, will have a high number of false
starts and wrong
moves (DeSouza 2011). The group agreed that the key to
benefiting from them is to
design them for learning, incorporate feedback from a variety of
sources, and make
quick corrections of direction.
4. Opportunity leverage. A neglected but important type of IT
project is one that oper-
ationalizes, scales up, or leverages successful strategic
experiments or prototypes.
“We are having a great deal of success taking advantage of what
we have learned
earlier,” said one manager. Coming up with a new strategic or
technological idea
needs a different set of skills than is required to take full

advantage of it in the mar-
ketplace (Charitou and Markides 2003; DeSouza 2011). Some
companies actually use
their ability to leverage others’ ideas to their strategic
advantage. “We can’t compete
in coming up with new ideas,” said the manager of a medium-
sized company, “but
we can copy other peoples’ ideas and do them better.”
5. Infrastructure. This final type of IT initiative is one that
often falls between the
cracks when business and IT strategies are developed. However,
it is clear that
the hardware, software, middleware, communications, and data
available will
affect an organization’s capacity to build new capabilities and
respond to change.
Studies have found that most companies feel their legacy
infrastructure can be
an impediment to what they want to do (Peslak 2012; Prahalad
and Krishnan
2002). Research also shows that leading companies have a
framework for making
targeted investments in their IT infrastructure that will further
their overall strate-

gic direction (Weill et al. 2002). Unfortunately, investing in
infrastructure is rarely
seen as strategic. As a result, many companies struggle with
how to justify and
appropriately fund it.
Although each type of project delivers a different type of
business value, typi-
cally IT strategy has stressed only those initiatives with strong
business cases. Others
are shelved or must struggle for a very small piece of the pie.
However, there was a
general recognition in the group that this approach to
investment leads to an IT strategy
M02_MCKE0260_03_GE_C02.indd 43 12/3/14 8:34 PM
with a heavy emphasis on the bottom line. As a result, all
participating companies
were looking at new ways to build a strategy-development
process that reflects a more

appropriate balance of all dimensions of IT strategy.
Toward an iT sTraTegy-develoPMenT ProCess
Strategy is still very much an art, not a science, explained the
focus group. And it is likely
to remain so, according to strategy experts. Strategy will never
again be a coherent,
long-term plan with predictable outcomes—if it ever was.
“Leaders can’t predict which
combinations [of strategic elements] will succeed [and] they
can’t drive their organiza-
tions towards predetermined positions” (Quinn 2002). This
situation only exacerbates
the problem that has long faced IT strategists—that is, it is
difficult to build systems,
information, and infrastructure when a business’s direction is
continually changing. Yet
this degree of flexibility is exactly what businesses are
demanding (Chakravarty et al.
2013; Luftman and Zadeh 2011; Korsten 2011). Traditional IT
planning and budgeting
mechanisms done once a year simply don’t work in today’s fast-
paced business envi-
ronment. “We always seem to lag behind the business, no matter

how hard we try,” said
a manager.
Clearly, organizations need to be developing strategy
differently. How to do this
is not always apparent, but several companies are trying ways to
more dynamically
link IT strategy with that of the business. Although no one
company in the focus group
claimed to have the answer, they did identify several practices
that are moving them
closer to this goal:
• “Rolling” planning and budget cycles. All participants agreed
that IT plans and
budgets need attention more frequently than once a year. One
company has cre-
ated an eighteen-month rolling plan that is reviewed and
updated quarterly with the
business to maintain currency.
• An enterprise architecture. This is an integrated blueprint for
the development
of the enterprise—both the business and IT. “Our enterprise
architecture includes

business processes, applications, infrastructure, and data,” said
a member. “Our
EA function has to approve all business and IT projects and is
helpful in identify-
ing duplicate solutions.” In some companies this architecture is
IT initiated and
business validated; in others it is a joint initiative. However,
participants warned
that an architecture has the potential to be a corporate
bottleneck if it becomes too
bureaucratic.
• Different funding “buckets.” Balancing short-term returns
with the company’s
longer-term interests is a continual challenge. As noted earlier,
all five types of
IT projects are necessary for an effective IT strategy (i.e.,
business improvement,
business enabling, business opportunities, opportunity
leverage, and infrastruc-
ture). In order to ensure that each different type of IT is
appropriately funded,
many companies are allocating predetermined percentages of
their IT budget to
different types of projects (Smith and McKeen 2010). This helps

keep continual
pressure on IT to reduce its “utility costs” to free up more
resources for other
types of projects. “Since we implemented this method of
budgeting, we’ve gone
from spending 70 percent of our revenues on mandatory and
support projects to
spending 70 percent on discretionary and strategic ones,” said a
manager. This
M02_MCKE0260_03_GE_C02.indd 44 12/3/14 8:34 PM
is also an effective way to ensure that IT infrastructure is
continually enhanced.
Leading companies build their infrastructures not through a few
large investments
but gradually through incremental, modular investments that
build IT capabilities
(Weill et al. 2002).
• Relationship managers. There is no substitute for a deep and

rich understand-
ing of the business. This is why many companies have
appointed IT relationship
managers to work closely with key lines of business. These
managers help business
leaders to observe their environments systematically and
identify new opportunities
for which IT could be effective. Furthermore, together
relationship managers can
identify synergies and interdependencies among lines of
business. One organization
holds both intra- and interfunctional strategy sessions on a
regular basis with busi-
ness managers to understand future needs, develop programs,
and design specific
roadmaps for reaching business goals. “Our relationship
managers have been a sig-
nificant factor in synchronizing IT and business strategies,”
said its manager.
• A prioritization rubric. “We don’t do prioritization well,” said
one participant.
IT managers have long complained that it is extremely difficult
to justify certain
types of initiatives using the traditional business case method of

prioritization.
This has led to an overrepresentation of business improvement
projects in the IT
portfolio and has inhibited more strategic investments in
general capabilities and
business opportunities. This problem is leading some companies
to adopt multiple
approaches to justifying IT projects (Chakravarty et al. 2013;
Ross and Beath 2002).
For example, business-enabling projects must be sponsored at a
cross-functional
level on the basis of the capabilities they will provide the
enterprise as a whole.
Senior management must then take responsibility to ensure that
these capabili-
ties are fully leveraged over time. Infrastructure priorities are
often left up to IT to
determine once a budget is set. One IT department does this by
holding strategy
sessions with its relationship and utility managers to align
infrastructure spending
with the organization’s strategic needs. Unfortunately, no one
has yet figured out a
way to prioritize business opportunity experiments. At present
this is typically left

to the “enthusiasms and intuitions” of the sponsoring managers,
either in IT or in
the business (DeSouza 2011). “Overall,” said a manager, “we
need to do a better job
of thinking through the key performance indicators we’d like to
use for each type
of project.”
Although it is unlikely that strategy development will ever
become a completely
formalized process, there is a clear need to add more structure
to how it is done. A
greater understanding of how strategy is developed will ensure
that all stakeholders
are involved and a broader range of IT investments are
considered. The outcomes of
strategy will always be uncertain, but the process of identifying
new opportunities and
how they should be funded must become more systematic if a
business is going to real-
ize optimum value from its IT resources.
Challenges For Cios
As often happens in organizations, recognition of a need

precedes the ability to put it
into place. IT leaders are now making significant strides in
articulating IT strategy and
linking it more effectively with business strategy. Business
leaders are also more open
M02_MCKE0260_03_GE_C02.indd 45 12/3/14 8:34 PM
to a more integrated process. Nevertheless, some important
organizational barriers that
inhibit strategy development still remain.
A supportive governance structure is frequently lacking. “Now
that so many
s trategies are enterprisewide, we need a better way to manage
them,” explained one
manager. Often there are no formal structures to identify and
manage interdepen-
dencies between business functions and processes. “It used to
be that everything
was aligned around organizational boundaries, but strategy is

now more complex
since we’re working on programs with broader organizational
scope,” said another.
Similarly, current managerial control systems and incentives are
often designed
to reward thinking that is aligned to a line of business, not to
the greater organiza-
tional good. Enterprisewide funding models are also lacking.
“Everything we do
now requires negotiation for funding between the lines of
business who control the
resources,” a third stated. Even within IT, the group suggested
it is not always clear
who in the organization is responsible for taking IT strategies
and turning them into
detailed IT plans.
Traditional planning and budgetary practices are a further
challenge. This is an
often-neglected element of IT strategy. “Our business and IT
strategies are not always
done in parallel or even around the same time,” said a
participant. As a result, it is not
easy to stay aligned or to integrate the two sets of plans.
Another commented, “Our

business plans change constantly. It is, therefore, common for
IT strategies to grow far-
ther and farther apart over time.” Similarly, an annual budgeting
process tends to lock
an organization into fixed expenditures that may not be
practical in a rapidly changing
environment. IT organizations, therefore, need both a longer-
term view of their resourc-
ing practices and the opportunity to make changes to it more
frequently. Even though
rolling budgets are becoming more acceptable, they are by no
means common in either
IT or the business world today.
Both business and IT leaders need to develop better skills in
strategizing. “We’ve
gotten really good at implementing projects,” said an IT
manager. “Strategy and inno-
vation are our least developed capabilities.” IT is pushing the
business toward better
articulation of its goals. “Right now, in many areas of our
business, strategy is not well
thought through,” said another manager. “IT is having to play
the devil’s advocate and
get them to think beyond generalities such as ‘We are going to

grow the business by 20
percent this year.’” With more attention to the process, it is
almost certain to get better,
but managers’ rudimentary skills in this area limit the quality of
strategy development.
Over and over, the group stressed that IT strategy is mainly
about getting the
balance right between conflicting strategic imperatives. “It’s
always a balancing act
Barriers to Effective IT Strategy Development
• Lackofagovernancestructureforenterprisewideprojects
• Inadequateenterprisewidefundingmodels
•
PoorlyintegratedprocessesfordevelopingITandbusinessstrategies
• Traditionalbudgetcycles
• Unbalancedstrategicandtacticalinitiatives
• Weakstrategizingskills
M02_MCKE0260_03_GE_C02.indd 46 12/3/14 8:34 PM

Conclusion
Effective strategy development is becoming
vital for organizations. As the impact of IT
has grown in companies, IT strategy is finally
getting the attention it deserves in business.
Nevertheless, most organizations are still at
the earliest stages of learning how to develop
an effective IT strategy and synchronize it
with an overall business strategy. Getting
the balance right between the many differ-
ent ways IT can be used to affect a business
is a constant challenge for leaders and one on
which they do not always agree. Although
there is, as yet, no well-developed IT strat-
egy–development process, there appears to
be general agreement on certain critical suc-
cess factors and the key elements involved.
Over time, these will likely be refined and bet-
ter integrated with overall business strategy
development. Those who learn to do this well
without locking the enterprise into inflexible

technical solutions are likely to win big in our
rapidly evolving business environment.
References
Burgelman, R., and Y. Doz. “The Power of
Strategic Integration.” MIT Sloan Management
Review 42, no. 3 (Spring 2001): 28–38.
Casadesus-Masanell, R., and J. Ricart. “How to
Design a Winning Business Model.” Harvard
Business Review 89, nos. 1–2 (January–February
2011): 100–107.
Chakravarty, A., R. Grewal, and V. Sambamurthy.
“Information Technology Competencies,
Organizational Agility, and Firm Performance:
Enabling and Facilitating Roles.” Information
Systems Research 24, no. 4 (December 2013): 976–97.
Charitou, C., and C. Markides. “Responses to
Disruptive Strategic Innovation.” MIT Sloan
Management Review (Winter 2003): 55–63.
DeSouza, K. Intrapreneurship: Managing Ideas

in Your Organization. Toronto: University of
Toronto Press, 2011.
Eisenhardt, K. “Has Strategy Changed?” MIT
Sloan Management Review 43, no. 2 (Winter
2002): 88–91.
Friedman, T. The World is Flat: A Brief History of the
Twenty-First Century. New York: Farrar, Strauss
and Giroux, 2005.
Frohman, A. “Technology as a Competitive
Weapon.” Harvard Business Review (January–
February 1982): 80–94.
Gebauer, J. “Virtual Organizations from an
Economic Perspective.” Communications of the
ACM 40 (September 1997): 91–103.
Hitt, M., B. Keats, and S. DeMarire. “Navigating
in the New Competitive Landscape: Building
Strategic Flexibility.” Academy of Management
Executive 12, no. 4 (1998): 22–42.
Kanter, R. “Strategy as Improvisational Theater.” MIT

Sloan Management Review (Winter 2002): 76–81.
between our tactical and operational commitments and the work
that builds our long-
term capabilities,” said a participant. Deciding how to make the
trade-offs between
the different types of IT work is the essence of effective
strategy. Unfortunately, few
businesses do this very well (Burgelman and Doz 2001;
Luftman and Zadeh 2011).
According to the focus group, traditional business thinking
tends to favor short-term
profitability, while IT leaders tend to take a longer-term view.
Making sure some types
of IT work (e.g., infrastructure, new business opportunities) are
not underfunded while
others (e.g., utility, business improvement) are not overfunded
is a continual challenge
for all IT and business leaders.
M02_MCKE0260_03_GE_C02.indd 47 12/3/14 8:34 PM

Korsten, P. “The Essential CIO.” IBM Institute
for Business Value. Somers, NY: IBM Global
Business Services, 2011.
Luftman, J., and H. S. Zadeh. “Key Information
Technology and Management Issues 2010–
2011: An International Study.” Journal of
McKeen, J., and H. Smith. Management Challenges
in IS: Successful Strategies and Appropriate Action.
Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons, 1996.
Osterwalder, A., and Y. Pigneur. Business Model
Generation. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2010.
5 (2012): 808–27.
Porter, M. “What Is Strategy?” Harvard Business
Review (November–December 1996): 61–78.

Prahalad, C., and M. Krishnan. “The Dynamic
Synchronization of Strategy and Information
Technology.” MIT Sloan Management Review
(Summer 2002): 24–33.
Quinn, J. “Strategy, Science, and Management.” MIT
Sloan Management Review (Summer 2002): 96.
Rivard, S., B. Aubert, M. Patry, G. Pare,
and H. Smith. Information Technology and
Organizational Transformation: Solving the
Management Puzzle. New York: Butterworth
Heinemann, 2004.
Ross, J., and C. Beath. “Beyond the Business Case:
New Approaches to IT Investment.” MIT Sloan
Management Review (Winter 2002): 51–59.
Smith, H. A. “The Best of the Best: Part II.” CIO
Canada, October 1 (2003).

Tapscott, D. The Digital Economy: Promise and Peril
in the Age of Networked Intelligence. New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1996.
Weill, P., M. Subramani, and M. Broadbent.
“Building IT Infrastructure for Strategic Agility.”
MIT Sloan Management Review (Fall 2002): 57–65.
Weiss, J., and A. Thorogood. “Information
Technology (IT)/Business Alignment as
a Strategic Weapon: A Diagnostic Tool.”
Engineering Management Journal 23, no. 2 (June
2011): 30–41.
M02_MCKE0260_03_GE_C02.indd 48 12/3/14 8:34 PM
49
C h a p t e r
3 Making IT Count1

article, Smith, H. A., J. D. McKeen, and C. Street.
“Linking IT to Business Metrics.” Journal of Information
Science and Technology 1, no. 1 (2004): 13–26. Reproduced
by permission of the Information Institute.
From the first time IT started making a significant dent in
corporate balance sheets, the holy grail of academics,
consultants, and business and IT managers has been to show
that what a company spends on IT has a direct impact on its
performance. Early efforts to do this, such as those trying to
link various measures
of IT input (e.g., budget dollars, number of PCs, number of
projects) with various
measures of business performance (e.g., profit, productivity,
stock value) all failed to
show any relationship at all (Marchand et al. 2000). Since then,
everyone has prop-
erly concluded that the relationship between what is done in IT
and what happens in
the business is considerably more complex than these studies
first supposed. In fact,
many researchers would suggest that the relationship is so
filtered through a variety
of “conversion effects” (Cronk and Fitzgerald 1999) as to be
practically impossible to

demonstrate. Most IT managers would agree. They have long
argued that technology
is not the major stumbling block to achieving business
performance; it is the business
itself—the processes, the managers, the culture, and the skills—
that makes the differ-
ence. Therefore, it is simply not realistic to expect to see a clear
correlation between
IT and business performance at any level. When technology is
successful, it is a team
effort, and the contributions of the IT and business components
of an initiative cannot
and should not be separated.
Nevertheless, IT expenditures must be justified. Thus, most
companies have
concentrated on determining the “business value” that specific
IT projects deliver. By
focusing on a goal that matters to business (e.g., better
information, faster transaction
processing, reduced staff), then breaking this goal down into
smaller projects that IT
can affect directly, they have tried to “peel the onion” and show
specifically how IT
delivers value in a piecemeal fashion. Thus, a series of

surrogate measures are usually
used to demonstrate IT’s impact in an organization. (See
Chapter 1 for more details.)
More recently, companies are taking another look at business
performance met-
rics and IT. They believe it is time to “put the onion back
together” and focus on what
M03_MCKE0260_03_GE_C03.indd 49 12/3/14 8:35 PM
really matters to the enterprise. This perspective argues that
employees who truly
understand what their business is trying to achieve can sense the
right ways to per-
sonally improve performance that will show up at a business
unit and organizational
level. “People who understand the business and are informed
will be proactive and …
have a disposition to create business value every day in many
small and not-so-small

ways” (Marchand et al. 2000). Although the connection may not
be obvious, they say,
it is there nevertheless and can be demonstrated in tangible
ways. The key to linking
what IT does to business performance is, therefore, to create an
environment within
which everyone thoroughly understands what measures are
important to the business
and is held accountable for them. This point of view does not
suggest that all the work
done to date to learn how IT delivers value to an organization
(e.g., business cases,
productivity measures) has been unnecessary, only that it is
incomplete. Without close
attention to business metrics in addition, it is easy for IT
initiatives and staff to lose their
focus and become less effective.
This chapter looks at how these controversial yet compelling
ideas are being
pursued in organizations to better understand how companies
are attempting to link
IT work and firm performance through business metrics. The
first section describes
how business metrics themselves are evolving and looks at how

new management
philosophies are changing how these measures are
communicated and applied. Next
it discusses the types of metrics that are important for a well-
rounded program of
business measurement and how IT can influence them. Then it
presents three differ-
ent ways companies are specifically linking their IT
departments with business met-
rics and the benefits and challenges they have experienced in
doing this. This section
concludes with some general principles for establishing a
business measurement pro-
gram in IT. Finally, it offers some advice to managers about
how to succeed with such
a program in IT.
Business MeasureMent: an Overview
Almost everyone agrees that the primary goal of a business is to
make money for its
shareholders (Goldratt and Cox 1984; Haspeslagh et al. 2001;
Kaplan and Norton 1996).
Unfortunately, in large businesses this objective frequently gets
lost in the midst of

people’s day-to-day activities because profit cannot be
measured directly at the level
at which most employees in a company work (Haspeslagh et al.
2001). This “missing
link” between work and business performance leads companies
to look for ways to
bridge this gap. They believe that if a firm’s strategies for
achieving its goal can be tied
much more closely to everyday processes and decision making,
frontline employees
will be better able to create business value. Proponents of this
value-based manage-
ment(VBM)approachhavedemonstratedthatanexplicit,firmwideco
mmitmentto
shareholder value, clear communication about how value is
created or destroyed, and
incentive systems that are linked to key business measures will
increase the odds of a
positive increase in share price (Haspeslagh et al. 2001).
Measurement counts. What a company measures and the way it
measures
influence both the mindsets of managers and the way people
behave. The best
measures are tied to business performance and are linked to the

strategies and
business capabilities of the company. (Marchand et al. 2000)
M03_MCKE0260_03_GE_C03.indd 50 12/3/14 8:35 PM
Chapter3 • MakingITCount 51
Although companies ascribe to this notion in theory, they do not
always act
in ways that are consistent with this belief. All too often,
therefore, because they
lack clarity about the links between business performance and
their own work,
individuals and even business units have to take leaps of faith
in what they do
(Marchand et al. 2000).
Nowhere has this been more of a problem than in IT. As has
been noted often,
IT investments have not always delivered the benefits expected
(Bensaou and Earl
1998; Holland and Sharke 2001; Peslak 2012). “Efforts to
measure the link between

IT investment and business performance from an economics
perspective have…
failed to establish a consistent causal linkage with sustained
business profitability”
(Marchand et al. 2000). Value-based management suggests that
if IT staff do not
understand the business, they cannot sense how and where to
change it effectively
with technology. Many IT and business managers have
implicitly known this for
some time. VBM simply gives them a better framework for
implementing their
beliefs more systematically.
One of the most significant efforts to integrate an organization’s
mission and
strategy with a measurement system has been Kaplan and
Norton’s (1996) balanced
scorecard. They explain that competing in the information age
is much less about
managing physical, tangible assets and much more about the
ability of a company to
mobilize its intangible assets, such as customer relationships,
innovation, employee
skills, and information technology. Thus, they suggest that not

only should business
measures look at how well a company has done in the past (i.e.,
financial performance),
but they also need to look at metrics related to customers,
internal business processes,
and learning and growth that position the firm to achieve future
performance. Although
it is difficult putting a reliable monetary value on these items,
Kaplan and Norton sug-
gest that such nonfinancial measures are critical success factors
for superior financial
performance in the future. Research shows that this is, in fact,
the case. Companies that
use a balanced scorecard tend to have a better return on
investment (ROI) than those
that rely on traditional financial measures alone (Alexander
2000).
Today many companies use some sort of scorecard or
“dashboard” to track a vari-
ety of different metrics of organizational health. However, IT
traditionally has not paid
much attention to business results, focusing instead on its own
internal measures of
performance (e.g., IT operations efficiency, projects delivered

on time). This has per-
petuated the serious disconnect between the business and IT that
often manifests itself
in perceptions of poor alignment between the two groups,
inadequate payoffs from IT
investments, poor relationships, and finger-pointing (Holland
and Sharke 2001; Peslak
2012; Potter 2013). All too often IT initiatives are conceived
with little reference to major
business results, relying instead on lower-level business value
surrogates that are not
always related to these measures. IT organizations are getting
much better at this bot-
tom-up approach to IT investment (Smith and McKeen 2010),
but undelivered IT value
remains a serious concern in many organizations. One survey of
CFOs found that only
49 percent felt that their ROI expectations for technology had
been met (Holland and
Sharke 2001). “Despite considerable effort, no practical model
has been developed to
measure whether a company’s IT investments will definitely
contribute to sustainable
competitive advantage” (Marchand et al. 2000). Clearly, in spite
of significant efforts

over many years, traditional IT measurement programs have
been inadequate at
M03_MCKE0260_03_GE_C03.indd 51 12/3/14 8:35 PM
assessing business value. Many IT organizations believe,
therefore, that it is time for
a different approach to delivering IT value, one that holds IT
accountable to the same
measures and goals as the rest of the business.
Key Business Metrics fOr it
No one seriously argues that IT has no impact on an
organization’s overall financial
performance anymore. There may be disagreement about
whether it has a positive or
a negative impact, but technology is too pervasive and
significant an expense in most
firms for it not to have some influence on the corporate bottom
line. However, as has

been argued earlier, we now recognize that neither technology
nor business alone is
responsible for IT’s financial impact. It is instead a joint
responsibility of IT and the busi-
ness. This suggests that they need to be held accountable
together for its impact. Some
companies have accepted this principle for individual IT
projects (i.e., holding business
and IT managers jointly responsible for achieving their
anticipated benefits), yet few
haveextendedittoanenterpriselevel.VBMsuggeststhatthislackofat
tentiontoenter-
prise performance by IT is one reason it has been so hard to
fully deliver business value
for technology investments. Holding IT accountable for a firm’s
performance according
to key financial metrics is, therefore, an important step toward
improving its contribu-
tion to the corporate bottom line.
However, although financial results are clearly an important
part of any mea-
surement of a business’s success today, they are not enough.
Effective business metrics
programs should also include nonfinancial measures, such as

customer and employee
satisfaction. As already noted, because such nonfinancial
measures are predictive of
future performance, they offer an organization the opportunity
to make changes that
will ultimately affect their financial success.
Kaplan and Norton (1996) state “the importance of customer
satisfaction probably
cannot be overemphasized.” Companies that do not understand
their customers’ needs
will likely lose customers and profitability. Research shows that
merely adequate satis-
faction is insufficient to lead to customer loyalty and ultimately
profit. Only firms where
customers are completely or extremely satisfied can achieve this
result (Heskett et al.
1994). As a result, many companies now undertake systematic
customer satisfaction
surveys. However, in IT it is rare to find external customer
satisfaction as one of the
metrics on which IT is evaluated. While IT’s “customers” are
usually considered to be
internal, these days technology makes a significant difference in
how external custom-

ers experience a firm and whether or not they want to do
business with it. Systems that
are not reliable or available when needed, cannot provide
customers with the informa-
tion they need, or cannot give customers the flexibility they
require are all too common.
And with the advent of online business, systems and apps are
being designed to inter-
face directly with external customers. It is, therefore,
appropriate to include external
customer satisfaction as a business metric for IT.
Another important nonfinancial business measure is employee
satisfaction. This
is a “leading indicator” of customer satisfaction. That is,
employee satisfaction in one
year is strongly linked to customer satisfaction and profitability
in the next (Koys
2001). Employees’ positive attitudes toward their company and
their jobs lead to posi-
tive behaviors toward customers and, therefore, to improved
financial performance
M03_MCKE0260_03_GE_C03.indd 52 12/3/14 8:35 PM

(Rucci et al. 1998; Ulrich et al. 1991). IT managers have always
watched their own
employee satisfaction rate intently because of its close links to
employee turnover.
However, they often miss the link between IT employee
satisfaction and customer
satisfaction—both internal customer satisfaction, which leads to
improved general
employee satisfaction, and external customer satisfaction. Thus,
only a few companies
hold IT managers accountable for general employee satisfaction.
Both customer and employee satisfaction should be part of a
business metrics
program for IT. With its ever-growing influence in
organizations, technology is just
as likely to affect external customer and general employee
satisfaction as many other
areas of a business. This suggests that IT has three different
levels of measurement and
accountability:

1. Enterprise measures. These tie the work of IT directly to the
performance of the
organization (e.g., external customer satisfaction, corporate
financial performance).
2. Functional measures. These assess the internal work of the
IT organization as a
whole (e.g., IT employee satisfaction, internal customer
satisfaction, operational
performance, development productivity).
3. Project measures. These assess the performance of a
particular project team in
delivering specific value to the organization (e.g., business case
benefits, delivery
on time).
Functional and project measures are usually well addressed by
IT measurement
programs today. It is the enterprise level that is usually missing.
Designing Business Metrics fOr it
The firms that hold IT accountable for enterprise business

metrics believe this approach
fosters a common sense of purpose, enables everyone to make
better decisions, and
helps IT staff understand the implications of their work for the
success of the organi-
zation (Haspeslagh et al. 2001; Marchand et al. 2000; Potter
2013; Roberts 2013). The
implementation of business metrics programs varies widely
among companies, but
three approaches taken to linking IT with business metrics are
distinguishable.
1. Balanced scorecard. This approach uses a classic balanced
scorecard with mea-
sures in all four scorecard dimensions (see the “Sample
Balanced Scorecard Business
Metrics” feature). Each metric is selected to measure progress
against the entire
enterprise’s business plan. These are then broken down into
business unit plans
and appropriate submetrics identified. Individual scorecards are
then developed
with metrics that will link into their business unit scorecards.
With this approach,
IT is treated as a separate business unit and has its own

scorecard linked to the
business plan. “Our management finally realized that we need to
have everyone
thinking in the same way,” explained one manager. “With
enterprise systems, we
can’t have people working in silos anymore.” The scorecards
are very visible in the
organization with company and business unit scorecards and
those of senior execu-
tives posted on the company’s intranet. “People are extremely
interested in seeing
how we’re doing. Scorecards have provided a common
framework for our entire
company.” They also provide clarity for employees about their
roles in how they
affect key business metrics.
M03_MCKE0260_03_GE_C03.indd 53 12/3/14 8:35 PM
Although scorecards have meant that there is better
understanding of the

business’s drivers and plans at senior management levels,
considerable resistance
to them is still found at the lower levels in IT. “While
developers see how they can
affect our customers, they don’t see how they can affect
shareholder value, profit,
or revenue, and they don’t want to be held accountable for these
things,” stated
the same manager. She noted that implementing an effective
scorecard program
relies on three things: good data to provide better metrics,
simplicity of metrics,
and enforcement. “Now if someone’s scorecard is not complete,
they cannot get a
bonus. This is a huge incentive to follow the program.”
2. Modified scorecard. A somewhat different approach to a
scorecard is taken by
one company in the focus group. This firm has selected five key
measures (see the
“Modified Scorecard Business Metrics” feature) that are closely
linked to the com-
pany’s overall vision statement. Results are communicated to all
staff on a quarterly
basis in a short performance report. This includes a clear

explanation of each mea-
sure, quarterly progress, a comparison with the previous year’s
quarterly results,
and a “stretch” goal for the organization to achieve. The benefit
of this approach is
that it orients all employees in the company to the same mission
and values. With
everyone using the same metrics, alignment is much clearer all
the way through the
firm, according to the focus group manager.
In IT these key enterprise metrics are complemented by an
additional set
of business measures established by the business units. Each
line of business
identifies one or two key business unit metrics on which they
and their IT team
Sample Balanced Scorecard Business Metrics
• Shareholdervalue(financial)
• Expensemanagement(financial)
• Customer/clientfocus(customer)
• Loyalty(customer)
• Customercentricorganization(customer)

• Effectivenessandefficiencyofbusinessoperations(operations)
• Riskmanagement(operations)
•
Contributiontofirmwideprioritiesandbusinessinitiatives(growth)
Modified Scorecard Business Metrics
• Customer loyalty index. Percentage of customers who said
they were very satisfied with
the company and would recommend it to others.
• Associate loyalty index. Employees’ perception of the
company as a great place to work.
• Revenue growth. This year’s total revenues as a percentage of
last year’s total revenues.
• Operating margin. Operating income earned before interest
and taxes for every dollar of
revenue.
• Return on capital employed. Earnings before interest and tax
divided by the capital used
to generate the earnings.
M03_MCKE0260_03_GE_C03.indd 54 12/3/14 8:35 PM

will be measured. Functional groups within IT are evaluated
according to the
same metrics as their business partners as well as on company
and internal IT
team performance. For example, the credit group in IT might be
evaluated on
the number of new credit accounts the company acquires.
Shared IT services
(e.g., infrastructure) are evaluated according to an average of
all of the IT func-
tional groups’ metrics.
The importance the company places on these metrics is reflected
in the
firm’s generous bonus program (i.e., bonuses can reach up to
230 percent of an
individual’s salary) in which all IT staff participate. Bonuses
are separate from
an individual’s salary, which is linked to personal performance.
The percentage

influence of each set of business measures (i.e., enterprise,
business unit, and
individual/team) varies according to the level of the individual
in the firm.
However, all staff have at least 25 percent of their bonus linked
to enterprise
performance metrics. No bonuses are paid to anyone if the firm
does not reach its
earnings-per-share target (which is driven by the five enterprise
measures out-
lined in the “Modified Scorecard Business Metrics” feature).
This incentive sys-
tem makes it clear that everyone’s job is connected to business
results and helps
ensure that attention is focused on the things that are important
to the company.
As a result, interest is much stronger among IT staff about how
the business is
doing. “Everyone now speaks the same language,” said the
manager. “Project
alignment is much easier.”
3. Strategic imperatives. A somewhat different approach is
taken by a third focus
group company. Here the executive team annually evaluates the

key environmen-
tal factors affecting the company, then identifies a number of
strategic imperatives
for the firm (e.g., achieve industry-leading e-business
capability, achieve 10–15
percent growth in earnings per share). These can vary according
to the needs of
the firm in any particular year. Each area of the business is then
asked to identify
initiatives that will affect these imperatives and to determine
how they will be
measured (e.g., retaining customers of a recent acquisition,
increased net sales, a
new product). In the same way, IT is asked to identify the key
projects and mea-
sures that will help the business to achieve these imperatives.
Each part of the
company, including IT, then integrates these measures into its
variable pay pro-
gram(VPP).
The company’s VPP links a percentage of an individual’s pay to
business
results and overall business unit performance. This percentage
could vary from a

small portion of one’s salary for a new employee to a
considerable proportion for
senior management. Within IT, the weight that different
measures are accorded in
theVPPportionoftheirpayisdeterminedbyameasurementteamanda
pproved
by the CIO and the president. Figure 3.1 illustrates the different
percentages allo-
cated to IT’s variable pay component for a typical year. Metrics
can change from
year to year depending on where management wants to focus
everyone’s attention.
“Performance tends to improve if you measure it,” explained the
manager. “Over
the years, we have ratcheted up our targets in different areas.
Once a certain level
of performance is achieved, we may change the measure or
change the emphasis on
this measure.”
M03_MCKE0260_03_GE_C03.indd 55 12/3/14 8:35 PM

An important difference from the scorecard approach is the
identification of key
IT projects. “These are not all IT projects, but a small number
that are closely aligned
with the strategic business imperatives,” stated the manager.
“Having the success of
these projects associated with their variable pay drives
everyone’s behavior. People
tend to jump in and help if there’s a problem with one of them.”
The goal in this process
isforeveryonetounderstandtheVPPmeasuresandtomakethemvisibl
ewithinIT.
Targets and results are posted quarterly, and small groups of
employees meet to discuss
ideas about how they can influence business and IT goals.
“Some amazing ideas have
come out of these meetings,” said the manager. “Everyone
knows what’s important,
and these measures get attention. People use these metrics to
make choices all the time
in their work.”
Each of these business measurement programs has been
implemented somewhat

differently, but they all share several key features that could be
considered principles of
a good business metrics program for IT:
1. Focus on overall business performance. These programs all
focus employees on
both financial and nonfinancial enterprise performance and have
an explicit expecta-
tion that everyone in the organization can influence these
results in some way.
2. Understanding is a critical success factor. If people are
going to be held
accountable for certain business results, it is important that they
understand
them. Similarly, if the organization is worried about certain
results, this must be
communicated as well. Holding regular staff meetings where
people can ask ques-
tions and discuss results is effective, as is providing results on a
quarterly basis.
Understanding is the goal. “If you can ask … a person
programming code and
they can tell you three to four of their objectives and how those
tie into the compa-

ny’s performance and what the measures of achieving those
objectives are, you’ve
got it” (Alexander 2000).
3. Simplicity. Successful companies tend to keep their
measures very simple and
easy to use (Haspeslagh et al. 2001). In each approach already
outlined, a limited
number of measures are used. This makes it very easy for
employees to calculate
Business Results
40%
Report Card Goals
30%
Partner
Satisfaction
10%
Application Delivery
Effectiveness

5%
Production
Availability
5%
Member
Retention
5%
Product
Recovery
5%
Key Projects
30%
IT Performance
60%
IT Variable Pay
100%

figure 3.1 Percentage Weightings Assigned to IT Variable Pay
Components for a Particular Year
M03_MCKE0260_03_GE_C03.indd 56 12/3/14 8:35 PM
their bonuses (or variable pay) based on the metrics provided,
which further
strengthens the linkage between company performance and
individual effort.
4. Visibility. In each of the programs already discussed,
metrics were made widely
available to all staff on a quarterly basis. In one case they are
posted on the com-
pany’s intranet; in another they are distributed in a printed
report; in a third they
arepostedinpublicareasoftheoffice.Visibilityencouragesemploye
ebuy-inand
accountability and stimulates discussion about how to do better
or what is working

well.
5. Links to incentive systems. Successful companies tend to
include a much
larger number of employees in bonus programs than
unsuccessful ones
(Haspeslagh et al. 2001). Extending incentive schemes to all IT
staff, not just
management, is important to a measurement program’s
effectiveness. The
most effective programs appear to distinguish between fair
compensation for
individual work and competencies and a reward for successfully
achieving
corporate objectives.
aDvice tO Managers
The focus group had some final advice for other IT managers
who are thinking of
implementing a business metrics program:
• Results will take time. It takes time to change attitudes and
behavior in IT, but it
is worth making the effort. Positive results may take from six

months to a year to
appear. “We had some initial pushback from our staff at the
beginning,” said one
manager, “but now the metrics program has become ingrained in
our attitudes and
behaviors.” Another manager noted, “We had a few bumps
during our first year,
but everyone, especially our executives, is getting better at the
program now [that]
we’re in our third year. It really gets our staff engaged with the
business.” If there
has been no dramatic difference within three years, management
should recognize
that it is either using the wrong measures or hasn’t got
employee buy-in to the pro-
gram (Alexander 2000).
• Have common goals. Having everyone measured on the same
business goals
helps build a strong team at all levels in the organization. It
makes it easier to set
priorities as a group and collaborate and share resources, as
needed.
• Follow up on problem areas. Companies must be prepared to

take action about
poor results and involve staff in their plans. In particular, if
companies are going to
ask customers and employees what they think, they must be
prepared to act on the
results. All metrics must be taken seriously and acted on if they
are to be used to
drive behavior and lead to continuous improvement.
• Be careful what you measure. Measuring something makes
people pay attention
to it, particularly if it is linked to compensation. Metrics must,
therefore, be selected
with care because they will be a major driver of behavior. For
example, if incen-
tives are solely based on financial results, it is probable that
some people may be so
driven that they will trample on the needs and interests of
others. Similarly, if only
costs are measured, the needs of customers could be ignored.
Conversely, if a metric
indicates a problem area, organizations can expect to see a lot
of ingenuity and sup-
port devoted to addressing it.

M03_MCKE0260_03_GE_C03.indd 57 12/3/14 8:35 PM
• Don’t use measurement as a method of control. A business
metrics program
should be designed to foster an environment in which people
look beyond their
own jobs and become proactive about the needs of the
organization (Marchand
et al. 2000). It should aim to communicate strategy and help
align individual and
organizational initiatives (Kaplan and Norton 1996). All
managers should clearly
understand that a program of this type should not be used for
controlling behavior,
but rather as a motivational tool.
Conclusion
Getting the most value out of IT has been a
serious concern of business for many years.
In spite of considerable effort, measurement

initiatives in IT that use surrogates of busi-
ness value or focus on improving internal
IT behavior have not been fully successful in
delivering results. Expecting IT to participate
in achieving specific enterprise objectives—
the same goals as the rest of the organiza-
tion—has been shown to deliver significant
benefits. Not only are there demonstrable
financial returns, but there is also consider-
able long-term value in aligning everyone’s
behavior with the same goals; people become
more supportive of each other and more
sensitive to the greater corporate good, and
decisions are easier to make. A good business
metrics program, therefore, appears to be a
powerful component of effective measure-
ment in IT. IT employees may initially resist
accountability for business results, but the
experiences of the focus group demonstrate
that their objections are usually short lived. If
a business measurement program is carefully
designed, properly linked to an incentive pro-
gram, widely implemented, and effectively
monitored by management, it is highly likely

that business performance will become an
integral part of the mind-set of all IT staff and
ultimately pay off in a wide variety of ways.
References
Alexander, S. “Business Metrics.” Computerworld
34, no. 24 (2000): 64.
Bensaou, M., and M. Earl. “The Right Mind-Set for
Managing Information Technology.” Harvard
Business Review 76, no. 5 (September–October
1998): 110–28.
Cronk, M., and E. Fitzgerald. “Understanding ‘IS
Business Value’: Derivation of Dimensions.”
Logistics Information Management 12, no. 1–2
(1999): 40–49.
Goldratt, E., and J. Cox. The Goal: Excellence in
Manufacturing. Croton-on-Hudson, NY: North
River Press, 1984.
Haspeslagh, P., T. Noda, and F. Boulos. “Managing
for Value: It’s Not JustAbout the Numbers.”

Harvard Business Review (July–August 2001):
65–73.
Heskett, J., T. Jones, G. Loveman, E. Sasser, and L.
Schlesinger. “Putting the Service Profit Chain
to Work.” Harvard Business Review (March–
April 1994): 164–74.
Holland, W., and G. Sharke. “Is Your IT System
VESTed?”Strategic Finance 83, no. 6 (December
2001): 34–37.
Kaplan, R., and D. Norton. The Balanced
Scorecard. Boston: Harvard Business School
Press, 1996.
Koys, D. “The Effects of Employee Satisfaction,
Organizational Citizenship Behavior, and
Turnover on Organizational Effectiveness: A
Unit-Level, Longitudinal Study.” Personnel
Psychology 54, no. 1 (Spring 2001): 101–14.
Marchand, D., W. Kettinger, and J. Rollins.
“Information Orientation: People, Technology

M03_MCKE0260_03_GE_C03.indd 58 12/3/14 8:35 PM
and the Bottom Line.” Sloan Management
Review (Summer 2000): 69–89.
5 (2012): 808–27.
Potter, K. “Business Key Metrics Data: Accelerate
the IT Value Journey.” Gartner Group, ID:
G00256958, October 16, 2013.
Roberts, J. P. “Define Strategic IT Metrics as
Part of Your IT Strategy.” Gartner Group, ID:
G0025861, November 5, 2013.
Rucci, A., S. Kirn, and R. Quinn. “The Employee-
Customer-Profit Chain at Sears.” Harvard
Business Review 76 (January/February 1998):

82–97.
Ulrich, D., R. Halbrook, D. Meder, M. Stuchlik,
and S. Thorpe. “Employee and Customer
Attachment: Synergies for Competitive
Advantage.” Human Resource Planning 14
(1991): 89–103.
M03_MCKE0260_03_GE_C03.indd 59 12/3/14 8:35 PM
60
C h a p t e r
4 Effective Business– IT Relationships1
article, Smith, H. A., and J. D. McKeen. “Building
a Strong Relationship with the Business.” Communications of

the Association for Information Systems 26, Article
19 (April 2010): 429–40. Reproduced by permission of the
Association for Information Systems.
There is no doubt that a strong business–IT relationship is now
critical to the success of an organization’s successful and
effective use of IT (Bassellier and Benbasat 2004; Kitzis and
Gomolski 2006). With the rapid evolution of IT in busi-
ness, simply “keeping the lights on” and delivering systems on
time and on budget are
not enough. Today, IT’s ability to deliver value is closely
linked with the nature of its
relationship with a large number of business stakeholders.
Recognizing this, many IT
functions have tried to become “partners” with the business at
the most senior strategic
levels, but with limited success (Gordon and Gordon 2002). It
has become clear from
these initiatives that business–IT interactions are more complex
and highly resistant
to change than first assumed and that building a strong
relationship with business is a
major challenge for most IT leaders.
We know that the nature and quality of the business–IT

relationship are affected
by many factors such as the subfunction of IT involved (e.g.,
operations, application
development), the business unit involved, the management
levels involved, changing
expectations, and general perceptions of IT (McKeen and Smith
2008). However,
research suggests that IT managers are still somewhat naïve
about how relationships
work in business and that interpersonal interaction and clear
communication are often
missing between the groups. We have also learned that
perceptions of the value IT
delivers are correlated with how well IT is perceived to
understand and identify with
the business (Anonymous 2002; Gold 2006; Tallon et al. 2000).
Nevertheless, we still know very little about the elements that
contribute to a
“strong relationship” between IT and business, nor even about
how to characterize
such a relationship (Day 2007). This chapter first looks at the
nature of the business–IT
relationship and how an effective relationship could be
characterized. Then it examines

in turn each of the four foundational elements of a strong,
positive relationship, making
suggestions for how IT managers could strengthen them.
M04_MCKE0260_03_GE_C04.indd 60 12/3/14 8:36 PM
Chapter4 • EffectiveBusiness–ITRelationships 61
The NaTure of The BusiNess–iT relaTioNship
“The IT-business relationship is a set of beliefs that one party
holds about the other and
how these beliefs are formed from the interactions of . . .
individuals as they engage in
tasks associated with an IT service” (Day 2007). The business–
IT relationship in orga-
nizations tends to span the full range of relationship
possibilities. Some members of
the focus group felt they had generally healthy and positive
relationships, and others
labeled them negative or ineffective. Overall, “there’s still a
general perception that IT is
slow,expensive,andgetsintheway,”saidonemanager.Eventhefocus

groupmember
with the most positive business–IT relationship admitted it was
“not easy,” and one set
of researchers has described it as typically “arduous”
(Pawlowski and Robey 2004).
Although “you can’t have a one-sided relationship,” as one
focus group manager
remarked, agreement is almost universal that IT needs to change
if it is to improve.
Literally dozens of articles have been written about what IT
should be doing to make it
better. For example, IT should better understand the
fundamentals of business and aim
to satisfy the “right” customers (Kitzis and Gomolski 2006); act
as a knowledge broker
(Pawlowski and Robey 2004); get involved in the business and
be skilled marketers
(Schindler 2007); manage expectations (Ross 2006); convince
the business that it under-
stands its goals and concerns and communicate in business
language (Bassellier and
Benbasat 2004); and demonstrate its competencies (Day 2007).
In short, “IT has to keep
proving itself” to the business to demonstrate its value (Kaarst-

Brown 2005). Thus, prac-
titioners and researchers both consistently stress that cultivating
a strong business–IT
relationship is “a continuous effort” (a focus group member);
“ongoing” (Luftman and
Brier 1999); a “core IT skill” (Feeny and Willcocks 1998); and
“ emergent” (Day 2007).
On the business side of the relationship, two features stand out.
First, business
managers are often disengaged from IT work, according to both
the focus group and
researchers (Ross and Weill 2002). For example, in some cases
in the focus group, IT
staff have taken on business roles in projects in order to get
them done. Second, it is
clear that what business wants from this relationship is
continually changing. “The
business–IT relationship is cyclical,” explained one manager.
“The business goes back
andforthaboutwhetheritwantsITtobeanordertakeroraninnovator.E
verytimethe
business changes what it wants, the relationship goes sour.”
So what do we know about the business–IT relationship in

organizations? First, we
know it is a multifaceted interaction of people and processes. It
is unfortunately true that
the existence of positive relationships between individual
business and IT professionals
does not necessarily mean that interactions will be positive on a
particular develop-
ment project, with the IT help desk, with an individual business
unit, or between IT
and the business as a whole (McKeen and Smith 2008). Because
relationships manifest
themselves in so many ways—formal and informal, tacit and
explicit, procedural and
cultural—we must recognize that their complexity means that
they don’t lend them-
selves to simplistic solutions (Day 2007; Guillemette et al.
2008; Ross 2006).
Second, we know difficult, complex relationships often exhibit
lack of clarity
around expectations and accountabilities and difficulty
communicating (Galford and
Drapeau 2003; Pawlowski and Robey 2004). This, in turn, leads
to lack of trust. In the
business–IT relationship, “complexity often arises when

expectations differ in vari-
ous parts of an organization, leaving a CIO with the difficult
task of reconciling them
and elucidating exactly what the IT function’s mission and
strategic role should be”
M04_MCKE0260_03_GE_C04.indd 61 12/3/14 8:36 PM
(Guillemette et al. 2008). Several focus group members
complained that different parts
of their business expected different things from IT. “In some
parts of our business, they
want IT to be an order-taker; in others, they want us to be
thought leaders and innova-
tors,” stated one manager. Another noted, “We live in an age of
unmet expectations.
There’s never enough resources to do everything the business
wants us to do.”
Third, assumptions by the business about IT tend to cluster into
patterns. One

researcher has identified five sets of assumptions: (1) IT is a
necessary evil, (2) IT is a
support, not a partner, (3) IT rules, (4) business can do IT
better, and (5) business and IT
are equal partners. Business leaders who espouse one of these
sets will tend to have sim-
ilar ideas about who should control IT’s direction, how central
IT is to business strategy,
the value of IT skills and knowledge, how to justify IT
investments, and who benefits
from IT (Kaarst-Brown 2005). Building on this idea, another
study has also shown that
business–IT relationships tend to vary along similar patterns.
Different organizations
tend to adopt one of five IT value profiles and expect IT to
behave in accordance with
the profile selected (see Appendix A). Problems arise when the
assumptions and value
profiles espoused by IT conflict with those of the organization
or a specific part of the
organization. As a result, many “disconnects” are often present
in the relationship. For
example, although IT organizations often seek to be a business
partner, their participa-
tion in this way is not always welcomed by the business

(Pawlowski and Robey 2004).
Focus group members defined a strong business–IT relationship
in ways that
recognize each of these factors. To them, it should include the
following:
•
Clearlydefinedexpectations,governancemodels,andaccountabiliti
es.
• Trustbetweenthetwogroups.
•
Articulationandincorporationofcorporateandclientvaluesandprior
itiesinall
IT work.
• AblurredlinebetweenbusinessandIT(i.e.,no“usvs.them”).
• ITdedicatedtobusinesssuccess.
• ITservingasatrustedadvisortothebusiness.
• MutualrecognitionofITvalue.
In short, a strong business–IT relationship is one where
realistic, mutual
expectations are clearly articulated and communicated through
individual and

procedural interactions and where both groups recognize that
all facets of this
relationship are important to the successful delivery of IT
value.
Characteristics of the Business–IT Relationship
• IThastokeepprovingitself.
• ThebusinessisoftendisengagedfromITwork.
• BusinessexpectationsofITchangecontinually.
•
Therelationshipisaffectedbytheinteractionofmanypeopleandproc
essesatmultiple
levels.
• Clarityisoftenlackingaroundexpectationsandaccountabilities.
• BusinessassumptionsofITtendtocluster.
• Therearemany“disconnects”betweenthetwogroups.
M04_MCKE0260_03_GE_C04.indd 62 12/3/14 8:36 PM

The fouNdaTioN of a sTroNg BusiNess–iT relaTioNship
Strong relationships do not simply happen. They are built over
time and, if they are to
deliver value for the organization, they must be built to endure
(Day 2007). The focus
group told several stories of how the business–IT relationship in
their organization had
deteriorated when a business or IT leader changed or when a
project wasn’t delivered
on time. Because it can so easily become dysfunctional,
constant attention and nurturing
are needed at all levels, said the focus group. However, building
a strong relationship
is not easy to do. Although there is no shortage of prescriptions,
the sustained nature
of problems in this relationship suggests that some underlying
root causes need to be
addressed (Appendix B provides one organization’s view of
what is needed in this
relationship).
We have suggested previously that four components must be in
place in order
to deliver real business value with IT: competence, credibility,

interpersonal inter-
action, and trust. The focus group reviewed these components
and agreed that they
also form the foundation of a successful and effective business–
IT relationship. The
focus group saw that developing, sustaining, and growing a
strong business–IT rela-
tionship in each of these areas is closely intertwined with IT’s
ability to deliver value
with technology. Therefore, a consistent and structured
initiative to strengthen the
business–IT relationship in these dimensions will also lead to an
improved ability to
deliver value successfully (see Figure 4.1). In the remainder of
this chapter, we look
at these four components in turn, discussing in detail how each
acts as an important
building block of a strong business–IT relationship and
suggesting how each could
be strengthened.
Value
Trust

Interpersonal Interaction
Credibility
Competence
figure 4.1 Strong Relationships are Built on a Strong
Foundation
M04_MCKE0260_03_GE_C04.indd 63 12/3/14 8:36 PM
Building Block #1: Competence
Although a competent IT organization that consistently delivers
cost-efficient and reli-
able services is the bare minimum for an IT function, businesses
today expect a great
deal more of both their IT organizations and their IT
professionals. Although many
IT organizations have adopted an internal service model in
order to “operate IT like a

business” and have demonstrated that they can provide services
as effectively as exter-
nal service providers, these competencies fall short of what
business now expects of IT
(Kitzis and Gomolski 2006). Over the last decade, researchers
and practitioners have
identified a number of new competencies that are now
required—to a greater or lesser
extent—from all IT professionals.
First and foremost, IT staff need business knowledge. This goes
beyond basic know-
ledge of a single business unit to include the “big picture” of
the whole organization.
IT personnel need to understand the business context in which
their technologies are
deployed, including organizational goals and objectives,
capabilities, critical success
factors, environment, and constraints. At all levels, they need to
be able to “think about
and understand the development of the business as [any other
business] member would
and participate in making [it] successful in the same way”
(Bassellier and Benbasat
2004). Furthermore, they need to be able to apply their business

understanding to help
the organization visualize the ways in which “IT can contribute
to organizational per-
formance and look for synergies between IT and business
activities” (Bassellier and
Benbasat 2004). In this regard, an important competence an IT
department and its staff
can bring to an organization is cross-domain and cross-
functional business knowledge
(Kitzis and Gomolski 2006; Wailgum 2008a).
Developing business knowledge does not mean that IT staff
should become busi-
nesspeople but that they should be able to demonstrate they
understand the business’s
goals, concerns, language, and processes and are working to
help achieve them (Feeny
and Willcocks 1998). One focus group organization surveyed its
senior managers about
IT and found that these managers felt IT staff had a poor
understanding of the business;
as a result, they didn’t trust IT’s ideas.
Other key competencies that IT must cultivate include the
following:

• Expertise. This includes having up-to-date knowledge, being
able to support a
technical recommendation, applying expertise to a particular
business situation,
and offering wise advice on risks, options, and trade-offs, as
well as the ability
to bring useful new ideas and external information (e.g., about
new technolo-
gies or what the competition is doing with technology) to the
business (Joni 2004;
Pawlowski and Robey 2004).
• Financial Awareness. Awareness of how IT delivers value and
the ability to act in
accordance with this value is a rare and prized skill (Mahoney
and Gerrard 2007).
All the focus group members felt pressure to continually
demonstrate the business
value of IT and recognized a strong need to make all IT staff
more aware of such
concepts as ROI, total cost of ownership, and how IT affects the
bottom line and/or
business strategy.

• Execution. It is not enough to understand the business and
develop a vision;
IT must also operationalize them. Since much of the business–
IT relationship is
dynamic—that is, continually being re-created—every IT action
speaks about its
competence. It is well known that the inability to deliver an
individual project on
M04_MCKE0260_03_GE_C04.indd 64 12/3/14 8:36 PM
time and within budget will undermine the business’s view of
IT’s overall compe-
tence. However, it is also the case that the actions of IT
operations, the help desk,
and other IT subfunctions will also be held up to similar
scrutiny. As one focus
group manager stated, “Poor delivery of any type can break a
relationship.”
In short, if the IT function is not seen to be competent at

executing basic IT services
or able to communicate in business terms, it will simply not be
given an opportunity to
participate in higher-order business activities, such as planning
and strategy develop-
ment (Gerrard 2006).
sTreNgTheNiNg CompeTeNCe
• Find ways to develop business knowledge in all IT staff.
Focus group members
use “lunch and learn” sessions, job shadowing, and short-term
assignments in
the business to accomplish this, but they recognize that more
needs to be done to
develop this competence.
• Link IT’s success criteria to business metrics. This not only
lifts IT’s perspective
to larger business concerns, but it also introduces all IT staff to
the key financial and
other measures that drive the rest of the organization.
• Make business value an explicit criteria in all IT decisions.
Asking why the busi-

ness should care about a particular IT decision, and how it will
affect the business
in both the long and short terms, changes the focus of IT
professionals in a subtle
but very effective way, enabling them to communicate even
technical decisions in
business terms.
• Ensure effective execution in all IT activities. This ensures
that IT sends a consis-
tent message of competence to all parts and levels of the
organization.
Building Block #2: Credibility
Credibility is the belief that others can be counted on to do what
they say they will
do. It is built in many ways. Keeping agreements and acting
with integrity, honesty,
and openness are essential behaviors, whereas lack of timely
and substantive responses
and failure to observe deadlines can undermine it (Feeny et al.
1992; Greenberg et al.
2007). Focus group managers concurred that credibility is very
important to the busi-

ness–IT relationship. Although in earlier days, credibility was
largely about the ability
to deliver systems on time and budget, now earning and
maintaining credibility with
the business has become more complex. Today’s IT projects
often involve many more
elements (e.g., multiple platforms, risk management, adherence
to laws and standards)
and stakeholders than in the past, and the methods and tools of
delivery are constantly
changing. Furthermore, research shows that it is often the “little
things” that can be
most significant in undermining credibility and that people
often make decisions based
on IT’s attention or inattention to such details (Buchanan 2005).
One study concluded
that “each and every IT service incident and event must be
considered for its long-term
influence” (Day 2007).
IT staff often assume that because they are competent they will
be credible, but this
is an invalid assumption. Thus, for example, a survey of CIOs
found that they wished
their developers “didn’t appear so clueless to the rest of the

organization” (Wailgum
2008b). It is essential, therefore, that competence be
demonstrated for others to feel
M04_MCKE0260_03_GE_C04.indd 65 12/3/14 8:36 PM
someone is credible (Ross 2006). This is especially important in
relationships where
there is little face-to-face interaction. In these cases in
particular, work must be visible
and communication constant in order to demonstrate credibility
(Hurley 2006).
sTreNgTheNiNg CrediBiliTy
• Communicate frequently and explicitly. Make progress and
accomplishments
visible in clear and nontechnical ways. Focus group members
found that when
difficult decisions are planned together and clearly articulated
in advance, much

less tension develops in the relationship.
• Pay attention to the “little things.” Wherever possible, take
steps to provide
prompt feedback and responses to queries and to ensure
consistently high- quality
service encounters.
• Utilize external cues to credibility.
Examplesincludeawards,endorsementsfrom
third parties, and the experience and background of IT staff.
These specifics can be
very useful when starting a new relationship with the business.
• Assess all business touch points. All focus group members
stressed the need to
really listen to what the business says about its expectations and
the problems it
feels exist in the relationship. Just the effort alone sends a
strong and positive mes-
sage about the importance of this relationship, said a manager.
However, he also
stressed that undertaking such a review creates expectations that
changes will be
made, so regular reports back to the business about what is

being done to improve
things are especially important.
Building Block #3: interpersonal interaction
The business–IT relationship is shaped by the development of
mutual understand-
ing, interests, and expectations, which are formed and shaped
during a wide variety
of interpersonal interactions (Gold 2006). Business–IT
interactions must be developed
and nurtured at many different levels in the business–IT
relationship, said focus group
managers,andalthoughCEO–
CIOinteractionscansetthetonefortherelationship,the
connections at multiple touch points contribute to its overall
quality (Flint 2004; Prewitt
2005). The following are the four significant dimensions of
interpersonal interaction:
• Professionalism. This is the unarticulated set of working
behaviors, attitudes,
and expectations that serves as the glue that keeps teams of
diverse individuals
working together toward the same goal. These behaviors are not

only carefully
watched by the business, they are also just as important within
IT, said the focus
group. Members noted that difficult internal IT relationships
can lead to problems
delivering effective IT services. Five sets of attitudes and
behaviors contribute to
developing IT professionalism: (1) comportment (i.e.,
appearance and manners on
the job), (2) preparation (i.e., displaying competence and good
organization), (3)
communication skill (i.e., both clarity and etiquette), (4)
judgment (i.e., the abil-
ity to make right choices for the organization), and (5) attitude
(i.e., caring about
doing a job well and about doing the right thing for the
company) (McKeen and
Smith 2008).
• Nontechnical communication. Over and over, research has
found that the inabil-
ity to communicate clearly with the business in its own terms
can undermine the
M04_MCKE0260_03_GE_C04.indd 66 12/3/14 8:36 PM

business–IT relationship (Bassellier and Benbasat 2004; Kitzis
and Gomolski 2006).
Today, because IT staff work across many organizational
boundaries, they must
also be effective at translating and interpreting needs, not only
from business to
technology and vice versa, but also between business units, in
order to enable
members of different communities to understand each other
(Wailgum 2008a).
Increasingly, as IT programs and services are delivered
collaboratively by external
partners and to external partners, clarity in communication is
becoming mission
critical.
• Social skills. The social dimension of the business–IT
relationship is often
ignored by both sides, leading to misunderstandings and lack of
trust (Day 2007).

Social bonds help diverse groups build trust and develop a
common language,
both of which are essential to a strong relationship.
Socialization also helps build
mutual understanding, enabling all parties to get comfortable
with one another
and uncovering hidden assumptions, which may become
obstacles to success
(Kaarst-Brown 2005). Socialization also develops empathy and
facilitates problem
solving (Feeny and Willcocks 1998).
Unfortunately, many IT organizations are structured in ways
that create barri-
ers between business and IT. For example, the use of
“relationship managers” to act as
interfaces between IT and the business is a mixed blessing.
Although individually, these
managers may be skilled and viewed positively by the business,
focus group members
noted that their position often leads them to act as gatekeepers
to the business. One
manager mentioned being hauled on the carpet to explain his
lunch with a business
manager (a personal friend), which hadn’t been approved by the

relationship manager!
“We need a broad range of social interactions with the
business,” said another manager.
“We use account managers, but we also encourage interactions
through such things
as lunches and social events.” Ongoing, face-to-face interaction
is the ideal, but with
today’s virtual teams and global organizations, other forms of
social interaction, such
as networking and collaboration tools, are being introduced to
help bridge gaps in this
area. Social bonds can be created in a virtual environment, but
these take longer and are
harder to develop although they are, if anything, more important
than in a more tradi-
tional workplace (Greenberg et al. 2007).
• Management of politics and conflict. The business–IT
relationship can be
turbulent, and IT personnel are not noted for their skills in
dealing with the
conflicts and challenges involved. Furthermore, conflict and
politics tend to
be exacerbated by the types of projects most commonly
undertaken by IT—that

is, those that cross internal and external organizational
boundaries (Weiss and
Hughes 2005). As a result, IT functions and personnel need
ways to effectively
address conflict and use it to deliver creative solutions. All too
often, conflict is
avoided or treated as a “hot potato” to be tossed up the
management hierarchy
(Weiss and Hughes 2005). Straight talk and the development of
a healthy give-
and-
takeattitudearefundamentaltodealingwithconflictatitssource.Exp
erts
also recommend the development of transparent processes for
managing
disagreements and frank discussions of the trade-offs involved
in dealing with
problems (Pascale et al. 1997). These not only help stop
damaging escalation
and growing uncertainty but also help to model conflict-
resolution skills for the
staff involved.
M04_MCKE0260_03_GE_C04.indd 67 12/3/14 8:36 PM

As well, failure to understand the role of politics in a particular
organization
makes IT personnel less effective in their business interactions
because they cannot craft
“win–win” solutions. Thus, all IT staff need to understand
something about politics and
how they can affect their work. At more senior levels, it is
imperative that IT profes-
sionals learn how to act “wisely and shrewdly in a political
environment” (Kitzis and
Gomolski 2006). Since politics are part of every business
relationship and cannot be
avoided, IT personnel must learn how to work with them, said
focus group members,
even if they are trying to avoid them as much as possible.
sTreNgTheNiNg iNTerpersoNal iNTeraCTioNs
• Expect professionalism. IT managers must not only articulate
professional values
and behaviors, they must also live them and measure and reward

them in their
staff.
• Promote a wide variety of social interactions at all levels.
Whether face-to-face
or virtual, sharing information about each other ’s background
and interests is
an important way to bolster working relationships at all levels.
Therefore, even
where formal relationship managers are in place, IT leaders
should encourage all
IT staff to connect informally with their business colleagues.
“Social interaction
facilitates quick problem ownership and resolution and helps to
develop a com-
mon language,” said a focus group participant. Although the
need for socializa-
tion increases as one moves up the organizational hierarchy,
even at the lowest
levels staff should be expected to spend about 10 percent of
their time in this type
of interaction (Kitzis and Gomolski 2006).
• Develop “soft skills” in IT staff. Although the need for
interpersonal skills in IT

has never been greater, many companies still give their
development short shrift,
preferring instead to stress technical competencies. In
developing interpersonal
skills, formal training should be only one component. It is even
more important
that IT managers take time to develop such skills in their staff
through mentor-
ing and coaching. Many focus group members have
implemented “soft” skills
development initiatives informally, but they have also admitted
that the pressure
to be instantly productive often detracts from both business and
IT participation
in them.
Building Block #4: Trust
Effectiveinterpersonalinteractions,abeliefthatthejobathandwillge
tdoneandget
done right, and demonstrated business and technical competence
are all required to
facilitate trust that IT can be a successful partner with the
business. But even if these
are in place, proactive measures are still needed to actually

build trust between the two
groups. In many firms, an underlying sense of distrust of IT as a
whole remains:
IT’s processes are notoriously convoluted and bureaucratic,
leaving the business
unsure of how to accomplish their business strategies with IT.
From strategy
alignment to prioritization to budgeting and resourcing to
delivering value to
managing costs, it must be clear that what IT is doing is for the
benefit of the
enterprise, not itself. (McKeen and Smith 2008)
M04_MCKE0260_03_GE_C04.indd 68 12/3/14 8:36 PM
The most important way to build trust at this level is through
effective gover-
nance. The story of how one CIO managed to transform the
business–IT relationship at
Farm Credit Canada illustrates its importance:

[At FCC, when Paul MacDonald became CIO], IT was
considered a necessary
evil. Business people were afraid of it and wished it would just
go away. . . .
[Transforming this relationship] was a very difficult and
complex job—especially
for cross-functional processes. Clear responsibilities and
accountabilities had to be
defined. . . . “It’s all about clarity of roles and responsibilities,”
MacDonald said.
The new IT governance model was validated and refined
through sessions with
key business stakeholders. “These sessions were important to
demonstrate that we
weren’t just shuffling the boxes around in IT,” [MacDonald]
said. . . . MacDonald
also made sure that the new model actually worked the way it
was supposed to.
“There were cases where it didn’t . . . and with these, we made
changes in our pro-
cesses.” He attributes his willingness to make changes where
needed to his ability
to make the new model actually function the way it was
supposed to. . . .

“Today, at FCC user satisfaction is very high and IT is seen as
being indis-
pensable. . . . [MacDonald] stressed that it is important to
review and refine the
new governance model continually.” “There were some things
that just didn’t
work,” he said. “We are still constantly learning.” (Smith and
McKeen 2008)
Effective governance should be designed to build common
business goals and
establish a good decision-making process (Gerrard 2006).
Mature processes in IT and
transparency about costs develop trust (Levinson and Pastore
2005; Overby 2005).
A focus group manager stated succinctly, “[M]ore transparency
equals fewer sur-
prises and you get transparency through governance.” Aspects
of governance that
have enhanced trust in focus group organizations include
integrated planning, defined
accountabilities, a clear picture of mandates and authorities, and
clarity around how
work gets done.

Another focus group manager explained the importance of
governance in this way:
In the past, we couldn’t break the trust barrier. Now, [with an
effective governance
structure] we are more proactive and are fighting fewer fires.
Our processes ensure proper
escalation and a new focus on value. In short, governance
captures the value of a good
relationship and good fences make good neighbours.
Trust is essential for both superior performance and for
developing the collabora-
tive relationships that lead to success (Greenberg et al. 2007). It
is developed through
consistency, clear communication, willingness to tackle
challenges, and owning up to
and learning from mistakes (Upton and Staats 2008). Both
inconsistent messages to
stakeholders and inconsistent processes and standards can
seriously undermine trust
(Galford and Drapeau 2003).
Nevertheless, it must be stressed that there is no optimal form

of governance
(Gordon and Gordon 2002). The key is to develop a model of IT
governance that
addresses the business’s expectations of its IT function. Thus,
an IT organization can best
build trust if it clearly understands the organization’s priorities
for IT and designs its
governance model to match (Guillemette et al. 2008).
M04_MCKE0260_03_GE_C04.indd 69 12/3/14 8:36 PM
sTreNgTheNiNg TrusT
• Design governance for clarity and transparency. IT leaders
should assess how the
business views IT processes—from the help desk on up. It is
important to recognize
that all processes play a very visible role in how IT is viewed in
the organization
and that clear, effective, and fair processes are needed to break
the “trust barrier”

between business and IT at all levels.
• Mandate the relationship. Although it may seem
counterintuitive, companies
have had success from strictly enforcing relationship basics
such as formal roles and
responsibilities, joint scorecards, and the use of common
metrics. Such structural
measures can ensure that common expectations, language, and
goals are developed
and met.
• Design IT for business expectations. Clearly understanding the
primary value the
business wants IT to deliver can help IT understand how to
focus its process and
governance models (see Appendix A).
Conclusion
There is clearly no panacea for a strong busi-
ness–IT relationship. Yet, the correlation
between a good relationship and the ability
to deliver value with IT makes it impera-
tive that leaders do all they can to develop

effective interpersonal and interfunctional
business–IT relations. It is unfortunately still
incumbent on IT leadership to take on the
bulk of this task, if only because it will make
IT organizations more effective. Business–IT
relationships are complex, with interactions
of many types, at many levels, and between
both individuals and across functional and
organizational entities. This chapter has not
only identified and explored what a strong
business–IT relationship should look like in
its many dimensions but also has described
the four major components needed to build
it: competence, credibility, interpersonal
skills, and trust. Unfortunately, business–IT
relationships still leave a lot to be desired in
most organizations. Recognizing that what it
takes to build a strong business–IT partner-
ship is also closely related to what is needed
to deliver IT value may help to focus more
attention on these mission-critical activities.
References

Anonymous. “Senior IT People Excluded from
IT Decision-Making.” Career Development
International 7, no. 6/7 (2002).
Bassellier, G., and I. Benbasat. “Business
Competence of Information Technology
Professionals: Conceptual Development and
Influence on IT-Business Partnerships.” MIS
Quarterly 28, no. 4 (December 2004).
Buchanan, L. “Sweat the Small Stuff.” Harvard Business
Review (April 2005). hbr.org/2005/04/sweat-the-
small-stuff/ar/1 (accessed March 10, 2011).
Day, J. “Strangers on the Train: The Relationship
of the IT Department with the Rest of the
Business.” Information Technology and People 20,
no. 1 (2007).
Feeny, D., B. Edwards, and K. Simpson.
“Understanding the CEO/CIO Relationship.”
MIS Quarterly 16, no. 4 (1992).
Feeny, D., and L. Willcocks. “Core IS Capabilities
for Exploiting Information Technology.”

Sloan Management Review 39, no. 3 (Spring
1998).
M04_MCKE0260_03_GE_C04.indd 70 12/3/14 8:36 PM
Flint,D.“SeniorExecutivesDon’tAlwaysRealize
theTrueValueofIT.”GartnerInc.,IDNumber:
COM-22-5499, June 21, 2004.
Galford, R., and A. Drapeau. “The Enemies of
Trust.” Harvard Business Review #R0302G
(February 2003).
Gerrard, M. “Three Critical Success Factors in the
Business/IT Relationship.” Gartner Inc., ID
Number: G00143352, October 18, 2006.
Gold, R. “Perception Is Reality: Why Subjective
Measures Matter and How to Maximize Their
Impact.” Harvard Business School Publishing
Balanced Scorecard Report (July–August 2006).

Gordon, S., and J. Gordon. “Organizational
Options for Resolving the Tension Between
IT Departments and Business Units in the
Delivery of IT services.” Information Technology
and People 15, no. 4 (2002).
Greenberg, P., R. Greenberg, and Y. Antonucci.
“Creating and Sustaining Trust in Virtual
Teams.” Business Horizons 50 (2007).
Guillemette, M., G. Paré, and H. Smith. “What’s
YourITValueProfile?”Cahier du GReSI #08-04.
Montréal, Canada: HEC Montréal, November
2008.
Hurley, R. “The Decision to Trust.” Harvard
Business Review #R0609B (September 2006).
Joni, S. “The Geography of Trust.” Harvard
Business Review #R0403F (March 2004).
Kaarst-Brown, M. “Understanding an
Organization’s View of the CIO: The Role
of Assumptions About IT.” MIS Quarterly

Executive 4, no. 2 (June 2005).
Kitzis, E., and B. Gomolski. “IT Leaders Must
Think Like Business Leaders.” Gartner Inc., ID
Number: G00143430, October 26, 2006.
Levinson, M., and R. Pastore. “Transparency
Helps Align IT with Business.” CIO Magazine
(June 1, 2005).
Luftman, J., and T. Brier. “Achieving and
Sustaining Business–IT Alignment.” California
Management Review 41, no. 1 (Fall 1999).
Mahoney, J., and M. Gerrard. “IT Value
Performance Tools Link to Business–IT
Alignment.” Gartner Inc., ID Number:
G00152551, November 2, 2007.
McKeen, J., and H. Smith. IT Strategy in Action.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson-Prentice Hall,
2008.
Overby, S. “Turning IT Doubters into True
Believers: Executive Summary.” CIO Research

Reports (June 1, 2005).
Pascale, R., M. Millemann, and L. Gioja.
“Changing the Way We Change.” Harvard
Business Review (November–December 2007).
Pawlowski, S., and D. Robey. “Bridging User
Organizations: Knowledge Brokering
and the Work of Information Technology
Professionals.” MIS Quarterly 28, no. 4 (2004).
Prewitt, E. “The Communication Gap.” CIO
Magazine (June 1, 2005).
Ross, J. “Trust Makes the Team Go ‘Round.’”
Harvard Management Update 11, no. 6 (June
2006): 3–6.
Ross, J., and P. Weill. “Six IT Decisions Your IT
People Shouldn’t Make.” Harvard Business
Review #R0211F (November 2002).
Schindler, E. “What IT Can Learn from the
Marketing Department.” CIO Web 2.0 Advisor,
September 21, 2007. advice.cio.com/esther_

schindler/what_it_can_learn_from_the_mar-
keting_department (accessed March 10, 2011).
Smith, H., and J. McKeen. “Creating a Process-
Centric Organization at FCC: SOA from the
Top Down.” MIS Quarterly Executive 7, no. 2
(June 2008): 71–84.
Tallon, P., K. Kramer, and V. Gurbaxani.
“Executives’PerceptionsoftheBusinessValue
of Information Technology: A Process-Oriented
Approach.” Journal of Management Information
Systems 16, no. 4 (Spring 2000).
Upton, D., and B. Staats. “Radically Simple IT.”
Harvard Business Review R0803 (March 2008).
Wailgum, T. “Why Business Analysts Are So
Important for IT and CIOs.” CIO Magazine
(April 16, 2008a).
Wailgum, T. “Eight Reasons Why CIOs Think
Their Application Developers Are Clueless.”
CIO Magazine (September 3, 2008b).

Weiss, J., and J. Hughes. “Want collaboration?
Accept—and Actively Manage—Conflict.”
Harvard Business Review #R0503F (March 2005).
M04_MCKE0260_03_GE_C04.indd 71 12/3/14 8:36 PM
Appendix A
The Five IT Value Profiles
EachofthefollowingprofilesisauniquewayforITtocontributetoanor
ganization.
One is not “better” than the other, nor is one profile more or
less mature than any other.
Eachrepresentsadifferent,consistentwayoforganizingITtodeliver
value.Eachis
different in five ways: main activities, dominant skills and
knowledge, the business–IT
relationship, governance and decision-making, and
accountabilities.

Profile A: Project Coordinator
This type of IT function coordinates IT activities between the
business and outsourc-
ers. Therefore, the primary value it delivers is organizational
flexibility through the
IT outsourcing strategy it establishes and through promoting
informed IT decision
making in the business units. The Project Coordinator function
works with the busi-
ness units, helping them formalize their requirements, and then
finds an outsourcer
to develop and implement what is needed. The Project
Coordinator also manages
the relationships between vendors and business units, not only
with the organiza-
tion’s current activities but also in planning for the future by
developing strategic
partnerships.
Profile B: Systems Provider
The primary mission of the Systems Provider is to provide the
organization with qual-
ity information systems at the lowest possible cost.
Strategically, the Systems Provider
uses the organization’s business plans to set IT’s goals, prepare

budgets, and determine
the resources needed to implement the organization’s strategy
for the required systems
development projects.
Profile C: Architecture Builder
The primary mission of this type of IT function is to link the
firm’s various business
units by integrating computerized systems, data, and
technological platforms. The
Architecture Builder seeks to design a flexible architecture and
infrastructure that will
meet the company’s needs. The architecture builder typically
receives broad strategic
direction from the organization and designs an architecture and
infrastructure with
which the organization can implement its strategy.
Profile D: Partner
The main objective of the Partner IT function is to create IT-
enabled business capabili-
ties to support current business strategies. IT and the business
collaborate to achieve a
two-way strategic alignment that is developed iteratively and
reciprocally over time.

The Partner is a catalyst for change in business processes and
seeks to improve organi-
zational efficiency. As guardian of the organization’s business
processes, the Partner’s
mission therefore extends far beyond its technological tools.
M04_MCKE0260_03_GE_C04.indd 72 12/3/14 8:36 PM
Profile E: Technological Leader
The Technological Leader tries above all to use innovation to
transform the organiza-
tion’s strategy. IT’s main objective is therefore to identify
opportunities, find innovative
organizational applications for technology that will enable the
organization to secure a
significant competitive advantage, and then implement such
applications.
Source: Guillemette et al. 2008.
Appendix B

Guidelines for Building a Strong Business–IT Relationship
The following was provided by a focus group member and is an
excerpt from a com-
pany memo on improving the business–IT relationship.
Now more than ever, we must truly understand the business
transformation
agenda. This will require us to potentially interact differently
than in the past or in a
mode beyond what our executives may be looking for. We must
• Stop acting as and being viewed as order takers once IT
projects have been
identified.
•
Developanunderstandingofbusinessimprovementideasbeforethey
becomeini-
tiatives or projects.
• Bepreparedtoofferalternativeperspectivesonbusinesssolutions.
• Bepartofthestrategicequationandhave“feetonthestreet.”
• Engageearlybeforeideasandissuesturnintoprojects.

• Continuetoshapethesolutionduringpre-
conceptandconceptphases.
To develop a relationship with the business units where we are
viewed as a trusted
advisor and as adding value, we need to truly be part of their
decision-making process
and team. We must ask ourselves the following questions:
•
Areweconsideredamemberofthebusiness’sseniorleadershipteam?
• Are we consulted before decisions are made or just asked to
execute what has
already been decided?
•
Areweinvolvedinshapingthecontentofthestrategicagendanotjustit
sschedule?
Creating a consistent forum for one-on-one strategic interaction
should allow us
to rise above the normal churn of issues, projects, or other
regularly scheduled meet-
ings and be positioned to truly start understanding where our
help is needed. Potential

short-term next steps include the following:
• Getinvitedtoeachbusinessunit’sleadershipteammeetings.
• Scheduleamonthlyonetoonestrategymeetingwithnosetagenda.
M04_MCKE0260_03_GE_C04.indd 73 12/3/14 8:36 PM
74
C h a p t e r
5 Business–IT Communication1
article, Smith, H. A., and J. D. McKeen. “How
to Talk so Business Will Listen . . . and Listen so Business Can
Talk.” Communications of the Association for
Information Systems 27, Article 13 (August 2010): 207–16.
Reproduced by permission of the Association for
Information Systems.
At an IT governance meeting, attended by all our business
executives,

our IT architect was asked to discuss IT security and what steps
needed to be taken to improve it. The architect proceeded to
bombard
the executives with extremely low-level details—an
oversaturation of
information, which they did not understand—and he lost their
attention
in very short order. What he did not do was deliver information
in a
positive manner geared to his audience. As a result, there was
diminished
business interest and understanding about this topic and a
slowed-down
budget for needed upgrades, which also affected other projects.
—(Senior IT manager in a global retail organization)
As this true story illustrates, the ability to communicate with
the business in busi-ness terms does not appear to be a current
IT strength. This is a serious problem for IT managers because
as IT and business grow more entwined, IT staff are
going to need to be increasingly organization savvy and possess
greater business and
interpersonal competencies (Basselier and Benbasat 2004;
Karlsen et al.; 2008; Mingay

2005). Yet, despite consistent complaints from both business
and IT leaders about how
IT staff lack business and communication skills, it seems that
many IT departments still
hire largely for technical competencies and have little budget
available for “soft skills”
development (Cukier 2007). Problems communicating with
business continue to play a
significant part in today’s poor perceptions of IT in
organizations and inhibit what IT is
able to do for the organization (McKeen and Smith 2009). IT
managers often bemoan the
fact that IT-based initiatives—for example, to implement new
technologies or establish
M05_MCKE0260_03_GE_C05.indd 74 12/3/14 8:37 PM
Chapter5 • Business–ITCommunication 75
a standard infrastructure—which they believe could have
significant benefits for their
organizations are not funded. Many of the reasons for this lie in
IT’s inability to explain

the value of such investments in terms the business will
understand.
In short, one of the most important skills all IT staff need to
develop today is how
to communicate effectively with business. “Effective
communication between IT . . . and
its stakeholders has never been so important . . . so complex or
so difficult to get right.”
(Mingay 2005). Over and over, research has shown that if IT
and business cannot speak
the same language, focus on the same issues, and communicate
constructively, they
cannot build a trusting relationship (Karlsen et al. 2008). And
business is consistently
more negative than IT about IT’s abilities in communicating
effectively. In fact, even
while IT collaboration is improving, business’s assessment of
IT’s communication skills
is declining (Willcoxson and Chatham 2004).
Much attention has been paid to organizational alignment
between IT and
business (e.g., governance, structure), while very little has
been paid to the nature

and impact of the social dimension of alignment, a big element
of which involves
communication (Reich and Benbasat 2000). This chapter
explores the business and
interpersonal competencies that IT staff will need in order to do
their jobs effectively
over the next five to seven years and what companies should be
doing to help develop
them. It begins by characterizing the state of communication in
the business–IT rela-
tionship and why “good communication” is becoming
increasingly important. Then,
it explores what is meant by “good communication” in this
relationship and looks at
some of the inhibitors of effective communication between
these groups. Finally, it dis-
cusses the key communication skills that need to be developed
by IT staff and makes
recommendations for how organizations can improve or develop
communication in the
business–IT relationship.
CommuniCation in the Business–it Relationship
“Poor communication is a constant source of irritation,

confusion, and animosity,”
said one focus group manager. Another agreed: “So many of our
IT staff don’t under-
stand organizational dynamics. They say and do things that
would be completely
inappropriate anywhere else in our company.” There is general
agreement between
practitioners and researchers that poor business–IT
communication is the source
of poor relationships and alignment between these groups
(Bittler 2008; Reich and
Benbasat 2000). One study noted:
Many IT people have “turned off” their business peers with too
much techni-
cal jargon. This is one reason why the number of IT people that
are “allowed” to
speak with business people has been deliberately limited in
many organizations.
(Bittler 2008)
Communication is both an enabler and an inhibitor of a good
business–IT
relationship. On one hand, poor communication tends to be
persistent and of lasting

concern to practitioners (Coughlan et al. 2005). Often, IT
personnel are perceived to
live in an “ivory tower,” disengaged from the needs of the
business (Burton et al.
2008). Typically, these problems are described as a
communication or a cultural “gap”
M05_MCKE0260_03_GE_C05.indd 75 12/3/14 8:37 PM
between the two groups and are considered a major cause of
systems development fail-
ures (Coughlan et al. 2005; Reich and Benbasat 2000). “We
struggle with communica-
tion gaps and challenges,” said a manager. “There’s a lot of IT
arrogance we need to
deal with.” Another commented, “IT doesn’t listen and doesn’t
talk the talk.”
On the other hand, there is broad recognition that good
communication is essential
for many reasons. First, it is fundamental to building a strong,

positive business–IT rela-
tionship. “When business people believe IT people ‘get it,’ the
relationships are always
improved” (Bittler 2008). Second, it helps set sensible
expectations of IT and helps IT to
manage how it is perceived in business (Day 2007). Third, it is
an essential element of
building trust and partnership, which in turn help drive the
delivery of business value
(McKeen and Smith 2012). Fourth, it is essential to conveying
the business value of IT
(Hunter 2007). And finally, it is critical to understanding the
priorities and pressures of
the business. Focus group managers spoke of the need for staff
who would listen and look
for new opportunities to deliver business value. In short, good
communication is widely
seen as being critical for IT to deliver successful projects,
effective performance, and value
( Karlsen et al. 2008; Reich and Benbasat 2000; Willcoxson and
Chatham 2004).
As a result, improving communication is increasingly
recommended as a top pri-
ority for IT managers (Burton et al. 2008; Mingay 2005).

Several managers stated that
they are working on building communication into their annual
goals and into their
expectations of staff. What is missing, however, is a better
understanding of the nature
of good business–IT communication and some of the obstacles
IT managers face in
improving it (Coughlan et al. 2005). Thus, poor communication
continues to be the
norm in most organizations (Pawlowski and Robey 2004).
What is “Good” CommuniCation?
Unfortunately, there is no magic formula for defining and
teaching “good” communica-
tion since it is a complex concept that has many dimensions.
There are, however, some
principles that are recognized as important elements of effective
communication which
can be used as guidelines for those who wish to assess their
communication performance.
• Principle 1: The effectiveness of communication is measured
by its outcomes.
Communication is successful when it achieves the outcomes we

desire (Gilberg 2006).
However, all too often we measure communication by our
intentions rather than its out-
comes. The problem with that is this: “Communication is in the
ear of the beholder,”
and even the most direct, clear, understandable, and consistent
message can there-
fore get distorted through such filters as politics, culture, and
personal points of
view. As messages get passed along to others, they get further
distorted, much like
in the children’s game of “Telephone.” One study showed that
although 97 percent of
managers believed their own communication was clear, only 25
percent of the same
people believed that the communication they received from their
direct superior was
clear and effective (Martin 2006). Another study showed that IT
managers feel their
communication is more effective than business managers feel it
is (Willcoxson and
Chatham 2004).
• Principle 2: Communication is social behavior.
Communication not only trans-

mits ideas but also negotiates relationships. Thus, how you say
what you mean is
M05_MCKE0260_03_GE_C05.indd 76 12/3/14 8:37 PM
just as important as what you say (Tannen 1995). This is an
especially important
principle for IT staff to learn because, as teams become
increasingly diverse and
virtual, many of the traditional nonverbal signals that we
instinctively rely on to
provide meaning are lost. A host of factors act as a social
subtext to our commu-
nication: tone of voice, rate of speed, degree of loudness, and
pacing and pausing.
These are all culturally learned signals that affect how we
evaluate each other as
people (Tannen 1995). Gender and culture are key social filters
that all of us use.
For example, the degree of directness and indirectness in
communication has often

been a source of significant misunderstandings. Women learn to
be more indirect
when telling others what to do so as not to be perceived as
“bossy”; men are indi-
rect when admitting to fault or weakness. In short, there is no
one “right” way to
speak, but speakers and listeners need to become more aware of
the power of dif-
ferent linguistic styles, and managers must learn to use and take
advantage of these
styles in different communication situations (Tannen 1995).
• Principle 3: Shared knowledge improves communication. It is
all too well known
that many IT people don’t “speak the language of the business.”
As one manager
stated, “Many IT staff think they’ve ‘communicated’ by
explaining a technology need
or a technology decision, instead of ensuring that everyone
understands the business
implications of what’s involved.” Studies show that the more IT
staff learns about
the business, the better communication becomes (Reich and
Benbasat 2000). This is
true not only because IT people understand business better but

also because shared
knowledge leads to increased frequency of communication and
greater mutual under-
standing, both of which lead to more success in implementation,
which in turn leads
to more communication and improved relationships (Reich and
Benbasat 2000). Thus,
the creation of shared knowledge can be the beginning of a
“virtuous circle” of con-
tinuously improving communication (see Figure 5.1).
• Principle 4: Mature organizations have better communication.
Although commu-
nication is a social process, it is also embedded within and
fundamental to organiza-
tional processes (Coughlan et al. 2005). Organizational maturity
plays a significant
part in the effectiveness of business–IT communication because
strong practices
support and reinforce good interpersonal communication. “You
can’t be a part-
ner unless you’re a mature IT organization,” explained one
manager. The research
supports this contention, showing that high-performing IT
functions have a strong

foundation of communication (Peppard and Ward 1999; Reich
and Benbasat 2000).
Thus, successful IT organizations embed appropriate
communication in their pro-
cesses and consider this to be a significant component of IT’s
work (Mingay 2005).
This work is even more important in times of organization
transformation. “We are
quite good about communicating operationally,” said a manager,
“but we need to
improve when talking with our business executives about
strategy.” Another com-
mented, “we need better skills to move up the ‘run, change,
innovate’ curve, and
we need the organizational maturity to do this.” The focus
group identified some
of the areas where improved maturity could help
communication: developing busi-
ness cases; assessing risk; integrating with the “big picture”;
and communicating
across business silos. In short, although communication is often
seen as an individ-
ual competency, it should be viewed and managed as an IT
functional competency
at all levels.

M05_MCKE0260_03_GE_C05.indd 77 12/3/14 8:37 PM
oBstaCles to effeCtive CommuniCation
Why is it so difficult to achieve effective business–IT
communication? The principles
haven’t changed much over time, but they have often not been
applied, or they have
been forgotten or ignored as busy IT managers focus on tight
timelines and major
deliverables (Mingay 2005). However, in addition to these
considerations, some other
obstacles to effective communication can hinder or prevent
communication from
occurring. These include the following:
• The changing nature of IT work. There is no question that IT
work has become
more complex over time. Increasingly, IT staff are
intermediaries between third-party

contract staff, global staff, or external stakeholders and vendors
as well as tradi-
tional business users. When multiple cultures, different political
contexts, diverse
time zones, and virtual relationships are added into the mix,
communication simply
becomes more multifaceted and challenging. Furthermore,
organizations are expect-
ing IT to do more for them. Transformation, innovation, or
simply bigger and more
visible projects all require more communication than the norm
and therefore more
management attention (Mingay 2005). “We must take a broader
view of communi-
cation,” stated an IT manager. “And we need conversations at
many levels.” Thus,
although IT may have adopted communication solutions that
meet the needs of the
past, these are inadequate for present and future needs.
Shared Knowledge
Increased
Communication

Mutual Understanding
and “Common Sense”
THE VIRTUOUS
COMMUNICATION
CYCLE
Implementation
Success
fiGuRe 5.1 Shared Knowledge Leads to Improved
Communication
M05_MCKE0260_03_GE_C05.indd 78 12/3/14 8:37 PM
• Hiring practices. “IT organizations can no longer support
smart, super-talented,
but socially disruptive people who cannot work well with a team
or with the
business,” said one manager. The group concurred that IT skills

are changing to
become more consultative and collaborative. Yet, frequently
their organizations still
hire for technology skills, rather than the “softer” skills, such as
communication,
which are essential for success these days. One study found that
there is seri-
ous misalignment in hiring between “the skills needed for a job
(which heavily
emphasize communication and general business skills . . . )
[and] the job require-
ments that are . . . advertised (which tend to emphasize formal
technical training)”
(Cukier 2007).
• IT and business organization structures. A few years ago,
many IT functions
attempted to deal with their communication problems by
creating relationship
managers. These were skilled IT individuals whose job was to
bridge the busi-
ness and IT organizations and thus act as a communication
conduit between the
two groups. Unfortunately, relationship managers have become
a mixed blessing

at best and an obstacle at worst, restricting contact between the
two groups and
thereby limiting the development of shared knowledge and
mutual understand-
ing. “Relationship managers appear to do more to exacerbate
rather than amelio-
rate,” found one study (Coughlan et al. 2005). A focus group
manager agreed, “You
can’t partner if your only contact is through a relationship
manager.” Furthermore,
business silos can make communication about enterprise issues
extremely chal-
lenging for IT staff, who can be expected to play a “knowledge
broker” role, not
only between IT and business but also between business units
(Pawlowski and
Robey 2004).
• Nature and frequency of communication. It’s a bit of a
chicken-and-egg situa-
tion: More frequent contact with business leads to improved
communication, but
IT’s communication is often so full of jargon, technocentric,
and inappropriate that
many organizations have sought ways to limit the amount and

nature of commu-
nication between the two groups. One study found that about
one-third of IT staff
simply did not speak to the business at all (Basselier and
Benbasat 2004). However,
some of the focus group stated that, even when they are not
restricted, IT staff often
have trouble getting business to take the time to sit with them.
Researchers have
pointed out that it is the sharing of tacit and unstructured
knowledge, which takes
place in low-risk and informal settings, that contributes most to
effective communi-
cation and mutual understanding (Basselier and Benbasat 2004;
Dunne 2002; Kitzis
and Gomolski 2006). Limiting one’s focus to formal
interactions (e.g., through IT
governance processes) has been shown to be the least effective
way of communicat-
ing successfully (Dunne 2002).
• Attitude. Finally, IT’s attitude can be a huge obstacle to good
communication. It
was surprising to hear this complaint from so many in the focus
group. “Our IT

staff think their work is about IT. They don’t understand that
we’re here to deliver
business value with technology,” one manager stated. One
manager described IT
staff as “crotchety”; another as “obtuse”; and several stated IT
staff are “defen-
sive.” It is not surprising that if this is the case, a negative
attitude on the part of an
IT worker toward his or her work, business, or employer ends
up being reflected
in communication and how it is perceived (McKeen and Smith
2012). In turn, this
can color how the communication is received (Anonymous
2005; Martin 2006).
M05_MCKE0260_03_GE_C05.indd 79 12/3/14 8:37 PM
Unfortunately as well, many IT staff are motivated by the desire
to be right rather
than the desire to communicate effectively (Gilberg 2006). “We
definitely need a

‘we’ attitude in IT,” said a manager, “not an ‘us–them’
attitude.”
Overcoming these obstacles will require a combination of
management attention
to all dimensions of business–IT communication and the
development of critical com-
munication skills in IT staff. The next two sections of this
chapter address these issues.
“t-level” CommuniCation skills foR it staff
Although IT workers’ communication skills need upgrading,
there is no one-size-fits-all
strategy for doing this (Kalin 2006). Nor do lists of
communication competencies move
us much further forward in clarifying exactly what IT workers
are doing wrong and what
needs to change in their communication style (see Appendix A
for a sample list). It has
been suggested that as business becomes more complex, it really
needs more T-shaped
professionals who are not only deep problem solvers in their
home discipline but also
capable of interacting with and understanding others from a

wide range of disciplines and
functional areas (Ding 2008). People possessing these skills are
able to shape their knowl-
edge to fit problems and apply synergistic thinking (Leonard-
Barton 1995). Unfortunately,
most IT organizations encourage I-shaped skills—that is, deep
functional expertise. As a
result, the individual is driven ever deeper into his or her
specialized set of skills (Leonard-
Barton 1995).
Developing T-shaped IT staff addresses the concern some in the
focus group
expressed that emphasizing the development of “soft skills”
could come at the expense
of the excellent technology skills still needed by the
organization. “You don’t want
your staff becoming disconnected from their technological
capabilities,” said one.
“Connecting the dots” between the group’s comments and the
research on communica-
tion shows that four communication skills form the horizontal
bar of the “T” for IT pro-
fessionals (the vertical one being the professionals’ technology
skills and knowledge):

1. Translation. IT staff typically fail miserably at translating IT
issues and con-
cerns into business impacts—as illustrated by the story at the
beginning of this
chapter. Eliminating jargon is the first step. “Too often our IT
population speaks
in nano-words and gigabits, instead of using the English
language,” said a man-
ager. However, translation requires more than this because it
requires the ability to
understand how IT initiatives will affect the business or deliver
value to it. To com-
municate effectively about IT’s value, IT managers “must
translate IT’s operational
performance into business performance . . . and drive home the
message that all IT
initiatives are business initiatives” (Hunter 2007). It is not often
recognized that IT
staff are effectively knowledge brokers and that translation is a
critical part of their
work (Pawlowski and Robey 2004). As a result, bridging and
translation skills are
still rare in IT, agreed the focus group.

The work involved in translation can be characterized as a four-
step process
where IT staff move from the world of technology into the
world of business to dis-
cuss problems in terms of business impact and possible business
solutions and then
back into IT to translate these solutions into technological
reality (see Figure 5.2). “In
the end,” said a manager, “we must be able to translate what the
business knows
and wants into actionable IT proposals.”
M05_MCKE0260_03_GE_C05.indd 80 12/3/14 8:37 PM
2. Tailoring. IT staff also need to adapt their communication to
the needs of their
audience. This involves two skills. First, IT workers need to
know their audience—
understanding their needs, their agendas, and their politics—so
that they communicate
in ways the business needs and wants to hear (Burton et al.

2008). Second, all IT per-
sonnel need to know how to choose communication methods
appropriately. For
example, bad news is best delivered in face-to-face meetings,
not in reports or e-mails
(as some in the focus group reported); and presentations to
executives are not the
place to expound on one’s technology expertise (Martin 2006).
3. Transparency. Transparency is a cornerstone of trust in the
business–IT relation-
ship (Smith and McKeen 2007), and IT managers should not
assume that success
speaks for itself. The business needs to see what is being done
in IT and what it costs.
In fact, it has been suggested that transparency is the key to
changing the business’s
perception of IT’s value (Levinson and Pastore 2005). At an
individual level, one
member of the focus group defined transparency as
communication that is “honest,
accurate, ethical, and respectful.” “We need honesty and
openness,” stated another.
Transparency also means involving the right people in making
decisions and recog-

nizing that the goal is to get the communication process flowing
both ways (Burton
et al. 2008; Dunne 2002). Other ways to promote transparent
communication include
checking assumptions, clarifying goals, stating intentions up
front, and asking for
feedback on understanding (Dunne 2002; Gilberg 2006).
4. Thinking, talking, and listening. An important
communication skill that is
increasingly valued by business is the ability to “think outside
the box” and to
challenge the status quo, albeit diplomatically and responsibly.
Focus group man-
agers suggested that IT staff need to think “horizontally” across
the enterprise in
order to do what is best for the business. Communicating
innovative ideas effec-
tively involves “getting inside the head of the business,” they
explained. In the
future, the ideal IT manager will “think and talk like a business
person with a
strong background in technology” (Kitzis and Gomolski 2006).
Thinking, how-
ever, does not mean simply blurting out ideas; it means

understanding how and
where to speak and how to listen to others. Learning to listen
can be a challenge
Translation
Translation
BUSINESS IT
Business
Impact of
Technology
Issues
Business

Discussion 1Post 1Top of FormToday, data quality and privac.docx

More Related Content

Similar to Discussion 1Post 1Top of FormToday, data quality and privac.docx (20)

More from cuddietheresa (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Discussion 1Post 1Top of FormToday, data quality and privac.docx