Aligned or misaligned?

What about the idea of a cultural IT/business divide? How persistent is it?

Chiappetta: I think that one good thing we saw as a result of the dot-com blowups was that most companies' IT shops are now less focused on small IT-led projects, and more focused on delivering business value to their organization.

Griffin: We still see both sides—IT that likes to play with its toys, business doing what business does. People are creatures of habit. They enjoy staying in their familiar comfort zones. So this is not a technology problem, but a people problem.

Quiring: You rarely see a company where IT and business don't have a friction, where both sides (don't) express grassroots complaints—"We don't have the resources," "Our needs aren't understood"—that lay the groundwork for evolutionary change, IT governance structures, quarterly prioritizations around business needs. But another way to drive alignment is for business to become deeply committed to a better understanding of IT and what IT capabilities can do for the business. IT organizations should love it if their customers are looking for that level of participation—that's a high bar. You have got to be at the top of your game to meet the expectations of business (executives) who are involved in understanding IT's potential.

Rheiner: Overcoming the divide has to happen at senior offices, and it has to be overcome by breaking down walls, getting groups to live together, putting business analysts out in the community. You have to be aware that the communities often speak two different languages, and you need to look for business people who understand technology.

Robertson: Unfortunately, it's a common phenomena but a focus on aligning the two sides will help bridge that gap. By definition, investment in IT requires balancing multiple and competing priorities throughout the business. How IT handles this situation is a major "test" on how well IT is aligned. An aligned IT/business will optimize the use of scarce IT funds and resources. An IT function that is not aligned will result in loss of credibility, the business implementing technology without IT, excessive costs and unhappy "customers."

What are key indicators that alignment is being well practiced, or at least well pursued?

Quiring: First, a simple but meaningful strategy—not one that's 20 priorities long; a strategy that's specific enough to be effective but simple enough to be communicated. Second, communication of strategy. A strategy that's sitting in a binder on a shelf is unlikely to be pervasive and ubiquitous within the organization. The strategy should show collaboration not only from all business units but also from IT, proving that IT strategy has been embedded and taken into the enablement of business strategy. Third, feedback on strategy from employees is really critical. You need truly rigorous, structured feedback from all levels of the organization.

Rodwick: There has to be some kind of organizational mechanism for IT/business functions to come together, to make decisions and share experiences. This requires some degree of transparency—not just a few people in a meeting, but a way to make a lot of people understand the plan and the expectations. Metrics also play a part: How satisfied are the users? Are people able to use systems? Are they waiting continually for their requirements to be met?

Willoch: Look at how much difficulty they have or don't have around compliance. Examine KPIs (key performance indicators) around the auditing bill, and you will see there an indicator of the company's degree of alignment or misalignment.

What are some key indicators of misalignment?

Chiappetta: Misalignment can be indicated by having twenty different ways to do the same thing—the organization hasn't figured out the single best way to do something and align it to the business. Keep an eye on customer satisfaction as well. If a customer sees that you are treating him differently across channels, he is likely to become dissatisfied.

Griffin: You want to watch for situations where IT historically has responded to business needs on a point-by-point basis and is only now being asked for an integrated view because no one had the foresight to architect a roadmap for integration of IT with business. Unfortunately that's how a lot of IT systems grew—they didn't build a sturdy foundation and collaboration with business.

Quiring: Unutilized software licenses can be a very top-line indicator of a problem. Finding a lot of things that didn't go forward, initiatives that weren't completed, project failures, unused capital investments. But you have to be careful—you can't stifle innovation. Dozens of small IT projects being started and abandoned could be a sign of innovation rather than misalignment. But a lot of large projects going for a long time before being shut down (at high cost) probably indicates some serious alignment issues.

Rheiner: Are you failing to complete projects, make revenue numbers and so on? Additionally, you have to be alert for the adversarial relationship that exists between IT and business in some organizations.

Robertson: If you can't map back a direct connection between IT initiatives and corporate goals, or you have an environment where business "tosses" needs over a wall to IT, you have alignment problems. You need a partnership where IT is involved with the business planning process on both strategic and short-term tactical levels ... Be alert for large numbers of special projects or projects in the pipeline that are not completely aligned with business goals. Good indicators of misalignment are projects that die on the vine—ones that stop because they lose sponsorship or funding.

Rodwick: Waiting in line too long for services; no one knowing what's going on; interdepartmental rivalries; decisions based on whim or political power rather than rational processes.

Willoch: (Again,) look at compliance. A company that has difficulty assembling compliance-required information efficiently is undoubtedly misaligned.

Are some organizations simply unaware that they are misaligned? How do you communicate the need for alignment to management?

Chiappetta: Barring operational meltdown, misalignment usually becomes apparent when the IT infrastructure isn't agile enough to enable the business to respond to competitors, customer needs, or regulatory issues. You need to take some risks, be innovative. Learn to think of some of your IT spend in the same way you think of marketing expenditures.

Griffin: Many know they've got a problem but aren't sure how to address it. IT may be working on a problem, while business is ignoring the same problem, or vice versa. And, there's still resistance to change on both sides of the fence.

Quiring: Inertia is a powerful thing. "Business as usual" is the status quo. A holistic, powerful motivator can be a CFO who's decided to start doing IT benchmarks, IT spend comparisons with competitors and industry, and so on. If the company's P/E ratio doesn't justify the expenditures you will have impetus for revolutionary change in IT alignment.

Robertson: Most companies know they aren't properly aligned but they don't know the real and/or opportunity costs of the misalignment. Both the business and IT sides should work together to define how IT can add value and measure its results. Misalignment is not just an IT issue; it takes both parties to recognize it and to fix it.

Rodwick: If you don't have proper metrics, you can't know how you stand. It's possible to hire consulting organizations to do benchmarks of your company's IT performance, but that activity requires some expenditure of money.

Willoch: Multinational, transaction-intensive organizations are the most switched on. Traditional industrial companies, even massive ones, don't really recognize it.

Let's take that "pursuit" of proper alignment a little further. Is alignment a project that you can initiate, fund and get "done" in a certain period? Or is it a long-term and perhaps ongoing project?

Griffin: You need both the long-term view and an understanding of what you can do in the short-term in order to get some real results from alignment. A service-oriented approach lets you leave applications in place while deploying new workflow and data management processes; you can fix underlying problems without replacing the entire architecture. You'll also have a holistic view of your financial position and a better understanding of your vendors. All of this is enabled because of technology, which gives IT a better pool of resources to respond more quickly and appropriately to business needs.

Rheiner: Some companies are good at process change and others aren't. You need to know whether the company can handle immediate change, or whether you put a roadmap in place and manage against the roadmap. Either way, you have to start immediately, to understand that alignment is an evolution, not a revolution, and constantly be looking at process improvements and adjusting as necessary.

View next topic