Furthermore, IT governance institutionalizes best practices for planning, acquiring, implementing, and monitoring IT performance, to ensure that the enterprise's IT assets support its business objectives. In recent years, IT governance has become integral to the effective governance of the modern enterprise. Businesses are increasingly dependent on IT to support critical business functions and processes; and to successfully gain competitive advantage, businesses need to manage effectively the complex technology that is pervasive throughout the organization, in order to respond quickly and safely to business needs.
In addition, regulatory environments around the world are increasingly mandating stricter enterprise control over information, driven by increasing reports of information system disasters and electronic fraud. The management of IT-related risk is now widely accepted as a key part of enterprise governance. It follows that an IT governance strategy, and an appropriate organization for implementing the strategy, must be established with the backing of top management, clarifying who owns the enterprise's IT resources, and, in particular, who has ultimate responsibility for their enterprise-wide integration.
COBIT controls may provide useful aides to running a compliance strategy. It includes the following:. As mentioned above, IT governance has recently become a board responsibility as part of overall business governance. This section aims to provide the impetus for opening up IT and architecture governance so that the business responsibilities associated with architecture activities and artifacts can be elucidated and managed.
Phase G: Implementation Governance is dedicated to implementation governance, which concerns itself with the realization of the architecture through change projects. Implementation governance is just one aspect of architecture governance, which covers the management and control of all aspects of the development and evolution of enterprise architectures and other architectures within the enterprise.
Architecture governance needs to be supported by an Architecture Governance Framework described in Architecture governance needs to be supported by an Architecture Governance Framework, described below. The governance framework described is a generic framework that can be adapted to the existing governance environment of an enterprise. It is intended to assist in identifying effective processes and organizational structures, so that the business responsibilities associated with architecture governance can be elucidated, communicated, and managed effectively.
Conceptually, architecture governance is an approach, a series of processes, a cultural orientation, and set of owned responsibilities that ensure the integrity and effectiveness of the organization's architectures. The split of process, content, and context are key to the support of the architecture governance initiative, by allowing the introduction of new governance material legal, regulatory, standards-based, or legislative without unduly impacting the processes.
This content-agnostic approach ensures that the framework is flexible. The processes are typically independent of the content and implement a proven best practice approach to active governance. The Architecture Governance Framework is integral to the Enterprise Continuum, and manages all content relevant both to the architecture itself and to architecture governance processes. Governance processes are required to identify, manage, audit, and disseminate all information related to architecture management, contracts, and implementation. These governance processes will be used to ensure that all architecture artifacts and contracts, principles, and operational-level agreements are monitored on an ongoing basis with clear auditability of all decisions made.
All architecture amendments, contracts, and supporting information must come under governance through a formal process in order to register, validate, ratify, manage, and publish new or updated content. These processes will ensure the orderly integration with existing governance content such that all relevant parties, documents, contracts, and supporting information are managed and audited.
Compliance assessments against Service Level Agreements SLAs , Operational Level Agreements OLAs , standards, and regulatory requirements will be implemented on an ongoing basis to ensure stability, conformance, and performance monitoring. These assessments will be reviewed and either accepted or rejected depending on the criteria defined within the governance framework. A Compliance Assessment can be rejected where the subject area design, operational, service level, or technology are not compliant.
In this case the subject area can:. Where a Compliance Assessment is rejected, an alternate route to meeting interim conformance is provided through dispensations. These are granted for a given time period and set of identified service and operational criteria that must be enforced during the lifespan of the dispensation. Dispensations are not granted indefinitely, but are used as a mechanism to ensure that service levels and operational levels are met while providing a level of flexibility in their implementation and timing. The time-bound nature of dispensations ensures that they are a major trigger in the compliance cycle.
Performance management is required to ensure that both the operational and service elements are managed against an agreed set of criteria. This will include monitoring against service and operational-level agreements, feedback for adjustment, and reporting. Internal management information will be considered in Environment Management. Business Control relates to the processes invoked to ensure compliance with the organization's business policies.
This identifies all the services required to ensure that the repository-based environment underpinning the governance framework is effective and efficient. This includes the physical and logical repository management, access, communication, training, and accreditation of all users. All architecture artifacts, service agreements, contracts, and supporting information must come under governance through a formal process in order to register, validate, ratify, manage, and publish new or updated content.
The governance environment will have a number of administrative processes defined in order to effect a managed service and process environment. These processes will include user management, internal SLAs defined in order to control its own processes , and management information reporting. Architecture governance is the practice and orientation by which enterprise architectures and other architectures are managed and controlled.
Deference to hierarchy and positional power tends to reinforce outmoded belief systems.
So where do you look to find the design principles for building a highly adaptable organization? You look to systems that have demonstrated their adaptability over decades, centuries, even aeons. For more than 4 billion years, life has evolved at least as fast as its environment.
Nature inoculates itself against the risks of environmental change by constantly creating new genetic material through sexual recombination and mutation. Variety is one essential principle of adaptability. Markets, too, are adaptable. Over the past 50 years, the New York Stock Exchange has outperformed virtually every one of its member companies. Competition is a hallmark of both markets and evolutionary biology.
On the NYSE, companies compete to attract funds, and investors are free to place their bets as they see fit. Decision making is highly distributed, and investors are mostly unsentimental. As a result, markets are very efficient at reallocating resources from opportunities that are less promising to those that are more so.
In most companies, however, there are rigidities that tend to perpetuate historical patterns of resource allocation. Executives, eager to defend their power, hoard capital and talent even when those resources could be better used elsewhere. Legacy programs seldom have to compete for resources against a plethora of exciting alternatives. The net result is that companies tend to overinvest in the past and underinvest in the future.
Hence, competition and allocation flexibility are also important design principles if the goal is to build a highly adaptive organization. Constitutional democracies rank high on any scale of evolvability. In a democracy, there is no monopoly on political action. Social campaigners, interest groups, think tanks, and ordinary citizens all have the chance to shape the legislative agenda and influence government policy.
Whereas change in an autocratic regime comes in violent convulsions, change in a democracy is the product of many small, relatively gentle adjustments. If the goal is continuous, trauma-free renewal, most large corporations are still too much like monarchies and too little like democracies.
To reduce the costs of change in your organization, you must embrace the principles of devolution and activism. Whatever big management challenge you choose to tackle, let it guide your search for new principles. For example, maybe your goal is to build a company that can prevail against the steadily strengthening forces of commoditization—a problem that certainly demands management innovation.
Around the world, companies are outsourcing and offshoring business processes to vendors that provide more or less the same service to a number of competing firms.
- Assessing Linkages On Purpose, Sustainability, & Responsibility: Part 2;
- Does corporate performance now include a social licence to operate??
- Tommo & Hawk.
Businesses are collaborating across big chunks of the value chain, forming partnerships and joining industrywide consortia to share risks and reduce capital outlays. Add to this a worldwide army of consultants that has been working overtime to transfer best practices from the fast to the slow and from the smart to the not so clever.
As once-distinctive capabilities become commodities, companies will have to wring a whole lot of competitive differentiation out of their ever-shrinking wedge of the overall business system. Surprisingly, scholars have paid little attention to the process of management innovation. First we identified significant management innovations from to To whittle this list down to the most important advances, we evaluated each innovation along three dimensions: Was it a marked departure from previous management practices?
Did it confer a competitive advantage on the pioneering company or companies? And could it be found in some form in organizations today? In light of these criteria, here are a dozen of the most noteworthy innovations. To beat back the forces of commoditization, a company must be able to deliver the kind of unique customer value that can only be created by employees who bring a full measure of their initiative, imagination, and zeal to work every day.
Principles of Corporate Governance
The machinery of bureaucracy was invented in an age when human beings were seen as little more than semiprogrammable robots. Bureaucracy puts an upper limit on what individuals are allowed to bring to their jobs. Where do you find organizations in which people give all of themselves? You might start with Habitat for Humanity, which has built more than , homes for low-income families since Share a beer with a few of the part-time hackers who have churned out millions of lines of code for the Linux operating system.
Each of these organizations is more of a community than a hierarchy. People are drawn to a community by a sense of shared purpose, not by economic need. Control is more peer based than boss based. Emotional satisfaction, rather than financial gain, drives commitment. For all those reasons, communities are amplifiers of human capability.
Whole Foods, you will remember, long ago embraced the notion of community as an overarching management principle. To fully appreciate the power of a new management principle, you must loosen the grip that precedent has on your imagination. Painful as it is to admit, a lot of what passes for management wisdom is unquestioned dogma masquerading as unquestionable truth.
How do you uncover management orthodoxy? Pull together a group of colleagues, and ask them what they believe about some critical management issue like change, leadership, or employee engagement.