AR26607 Governance TI

Grembergen, W. y De Haes, S. (enero,2010). A research journey into enterprise governance of IT, business/IT alignment and value creation .
International Journal on IT/Business Alignment and Governance, 1 (1) pp. 1-13. (AR26607)
International Journal on IT/Business Alignment and Governance, 1(1), 1-13, January-March 2010 1
a research Journey into Enterprise Governance of IT, Business/IT alignment and Value Creation
Wim Van Grembergen, University of Antwerp Management School, University of Antwerp, Belgium Steven De Haes, University of Antwerp Management School, University of Antwerp, Belgium
aBSTraCT
Enterprise governance of IT is a relatively new concept in literature, and is gaining more interest in the academic and practitioners world. Enterprise governance of IT addresses the definition and implementation of processes, structures and relational mechanism that enable both business and IT people to execute their responsibilities in support of business/IT alignment and the creation of value from IT-enabled business investments. This article introduces important theories and practices around Enterprise governance of IT based on joint research and practical experience of the authors (and editors-in-chief of this journal) within the Information Technology Alignment and Governance (ITAG) Research Institute (University of Antwerp Management School). The article is based on the authors 8-year journey into Enterprise Governance of IT and aims to outline the core themes of interest of this new International Journal on IT/Business Alignment and Governance. In this way, this introductory article paves the way for many more research initiatives within this challenging research domain. Keywords: Business/IT Alignment, Enterprise Governance of IT, IT Governance, Value Creation
InTroduCTIon
When you are reading this article, you are looking at the very first article of the inaugural issue of the International Journal on IT/Business Alignment and Governance (IJITBAG). We are very pleased with your interest in this journal and the topics that will be addressed in
DOI: 10.4018/jitbag.2010120401
this and all the forthcoming issues. With this introductory article, we as editors-in-chief do want to share with you our main insights in this challenging research domain, based on our collaborative research and practical experience in the field the previous years. This research and experience goes back many years, and to strengthen our research efforts, we have founded in 2003 the Information Technology Alignment and Governance
Copyright 2010, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
2 International Journal on IT/Business Alignment and Governance, 1(1), 1-13, January-March 2010
Research Institute (ITAG) within the University of Antwerp Management School (www.uams. be/itag). The concept of IT governance was emerging at that time in both academic and practice-oriented literature and definitions and models were developed and promoted. To prevent the IT governance discussion to stay within the IT area, our minds evolved over the years towards the broaderbusiness oriented concept of enterprise governance of IT. We investigated how contemporary organizations are implementing these concepts in practices, analyzed the impact of these implementations on the complex construct of business/ IT alignment and explored the relationships towards achieving more business value out of IT investments. In this article, we introduce some of our conclusions and insights resulting from these main research streams. We welcome all feedback on steven.dehaes@ua.ac.be and wim. vangrembergen@ua.ac.be and do want to invite you to submit your research articles for consideration in the International Journal on IT/Business Alignment and Governance in the future (www.igi-global.com/ijitbag).
InTroduCInG ThE ConCEpT oF GoVErnanCE oF IT

IT governance is one of these concepts that suddenly emerged and became an important issue in the information technology (IT) area. It is not clear when exactly the concept originated as we understand it now. Gartner introduced the idea of Improving IT governance for the first time in their Top-ten CIO Management Priorities for 2003 (ranked third). In 1998, the IT Governance Institute was founded to disperse the IT governance concept. In academic and professional literature, articles mentioning IT governance in the title began to emerge late 1990s. In the context of the leading academic conference Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences (HICSS) IT governance was defined as organizational capacity exercised by the board, executive management
and IT management to control the formulation and implementation of IT strategy and in this way ensure the fusion of business and IT (Van Grembergen, 2002). After the emergence of the IT governance concepts, the notion received a lot of attention. However, due the focus on IT in the naming of the concept, the IT governance discussion mainly stayed a discussion within the IT area. We have experienced this in our research many times, where we tried to contact the CEO for an interview on IT governance issues and immediately got transferred to the CIO. In the field, many IT governance implementations are driven by IT, while one would expect that the business would and should take a leading role here as well. It is clear that business value from IT investments can not be realized by IT, but will always be created at the business side. For example, there will be no business value created when IT delivers a new CRM application on time, on budget and within functionalities, and when afterwards the business is not integrating the new IT system into its business operations. Business value will only be created when new and adequate business processes are designed and executed enabling the sales people of the organization to increase turnover and profit. (Van Grembergen & De Haes, 2009; Thorp, 2003). This discussion raised the issue that the involvement of business is crucial and initiated a shift in the definition, focusing on the business involvement, towards enterprise governance of IT. As defined in our most recent textbook (Van Grembergen & De Haes, 2009), enterprise governance of IT is an integral part of corporate governance and addresses the definition and implementation of processes, structures and relational mechanisms in the organization that enable both business and IT people to execute their responsibilities in support of business/IT alignment and the creation of business value from IT enabled investments (see Figure 1). Enterprise governance of IT clearly goes beyond the IT related responsibilities and expands towards (IT related) business processes needed for business value creation. Also the
Figure 1. Enterprise governance of IT, business/IT alignment and business value (Van Grembergen & De Haes, 2009)
standardization organization ISO moved into this direction, with the release in 2008 a new worldwide standard defined as Corporate Governance of IT (ISO/IEC 38500, 2008). In this standard, ISO puts forward six principles for governance of IT, addressing both business and ITs roles and responsibilities, that express preferred behavior to guide IT related decision making. In the same line of thinking, the IT Governance Institute (ITGI) complemented its IT governance best practices framework COBIT (ITGI, 2007), focusing on IT processes and responsibilities, with the Val IT framework (ITGI, 2008), addressing the business processes and responsibilities in value creation. We have been involved in the development of these frameworks for many years and have experienced this broadening view towards enterprise governance of IT as very enriching evolution within the ITGI frameworks. This change in naming and focus might appear subtle and not groundbreaking, but it implies a crucial shift in the minds of business people. The leading role of IT people in IT governance has always been a paradox. The same thing happened in the era of business process reengineering, where also in many cases IT took a leading role reinventing business processes. It is however clear that business processes and business value creation can and should only be in the ownership of business people. On the other hand, we have to acknowledge that in practice, this mind shift will not happen by itself or by changing the name of the concepts. We belief that IT management is in a unique position to act as a change agent in the organization and to realize the business buy-in over time. Using similar argumentations as for enterprise governance of IT, a rationale could be
built up to promote governance requirements for other key assets in the organization. Typical examples could be human resources governance and financial governance. In this context, Weill and Ross (2004) identify six key assets through which an organization can accomplish its strategies and generate business value: human assets, financial assets, physical assets, IP assets, information and IT assets, relationship assets (see Figure 2). Using their words: Senior executive teams create mechanisms to govern the management and use of each of these assets both independently and together. Governance of the key assets occurs via a large number of organizational mechanisms, for example structures, processes, procedures and audits. (Weill & Ross, 2004) Finally, it is important to note that there is a clear distinction between IT governance or enterprise governance of IT and IT management. IT management is focused on the effective and efficient internal supply of IT services and products and the management of present IT operations. IT governance/enterprise governance of IT in turn is much broader, and concentrates on performing and transforming IT to meet present and future demands of the business (internal focus) and business customers (external focus) (Peterson, 2003). This higher-level focus of IT governance/enterprise governance of IT is confirmed in the IT governance definition of ITGI (2003), which states that IT governance is the responsibility of executives and the board of directors. Pragmatically, one could say that IT management is the prime responsibility of the IT Director while the Chief Information Officer (CIO) in co-operation with the business is focused on IT governance/enterprise governance of IT.
Figure 2. Key asset governance (Adapted from: Weill & Ross, 2004)
EnTErprISE GoVErnanCE oF IT In praCTICE

Having developed a high-level model for enterprise governance of IT does not imply that governance is actually working in the organization. Conceiving the enterprise governance of IT model is the first step, implementing it into a sustainable solution is the next challenging step. Our research (Van Grembergen & De Haes, 2008; De Haes & Van Grembergen, 2009a) showed that organizations can and are deploying enterprise governance of IT by using a holistic mixture of various structures, processes and relational mechanisms. Enterprise governance of IT structures include organizational units and roles responsible for making IT decisions and for enabling contacts between business and IT management decision-making functions (e.g. IT steering committee). This can be seen as a kind of blueprint of how the governance framework will be structurally organized. Enterprise governance of IT processes refers to the formalization and institutionalization of strategic IT decision making and IT monitoring procedures, to ensure that daily behaviors are consistent with policies and provide input back to decisions (e.g. IT balanced scorecard). The relational mechanisms finally are about the active participation of, and collaborative relationship among, corporate executives, IT management, and business management and
include announcements, advocates, channels and education efforts. Some examples of these structures, processes and relational mechanisms are provided in Figure 3. In the many case organizations we visited (Van Grembergen & De Haes, 2008; De Haes & Van Grembergen, 2009a), we saw that most organizations are indeed leveraging a mix of structures, processes and mechanisms. Of course, it should be noted that a silver bullet approach does not exist in this matter. Each organization has to select its own set of enterprise governance of IT practices, suitable for their sector, size, culture etc. Our case research clearly showed that organizations tend to find it much easier to implement structures in their organizations as opposed to processes (De Haes & Van Grembergen, 2008; Van Grembergen & De Haes, 2009). However, we have also seen that much of these structures can not be effective without supporting processes. For example, an IT steering committee can not make appropriate investment decisions without an appropriate and mature portfolio management process, including the development of solid business cases. It also appeared that relational mechanisms, such as training, awareness building, etc., receive a lot of attention in the beginning stages of an enterprise governance of IT implementation project and become less important when the governance framework gets embedded into day-to-day operations. This is not surprising as
Figure 3. Structures, processes and relational mechanisms for IT governance
the introduction of an approach towards enterprise governance of IT should be regarded in the first place as a large change program within the organizations. Another interesting finding to pinpoint is that our enterprise governance of IT definition implies a prime responsibility of the board of directors (as part of their corporate governance responsibility), while specific mechanisms to achieve this such as IT expertise at level of board of directors are less existent in organizations. This can possibly be explained by the fact that making the board of directors more IT literate is not easy to achieve, or that the board is still not fully aware of the strategic importance of IT. More recently, the idea of IT leadership emerged in many discussion fora. IT leadership can be defined as the ability of the CIO or similar role to articulate a vision for ITs role to the company and ensure that this vision is clearly understood by managers throughout the organization. If the CIO is not able to talk in business oriented terms at executive level, his impact at that level will be small. This
mechanism is highly dependent on the individual competencies of the CIO and not many methods are available to manage it. However, we have seen that good leadership can be a very powerful catalyst to bring enterprise governance of IT in an organization to a next level. A good balance between leadership and the appropriate governance structures and processes needs to be found (Van Grembergen & De Haes, 2009; De Haes & Van Grembergen, 2009b). To better understand how organizations are implementing enterprise governance of IT, we have supplemented our case research with delphi research, leveraging an expert panel of academics, business and IT managers and consultants, to try to inventorize and evaluate structures, processes and relational mechanisms that contemporary organizations are using in implementing enterprise governance of IT (De Haes and Van Grembergen, 2008). This exercise resulted in a list of 33 enterprise governance of IT practices, and their respective evaluations in terms of perceived effectiveness and
perceived ease-of-implementation. Based on this, also a minimum baseline was constructed, as a list of practices that organization at least should have. After several review rounds, the expert panel categorized these 10 practices as key instruments for enterprise governance of IT (Figure 4). This minimum baseline contains a mixture of more strategic oriented (e.g. IT strategy committee at level of board of directors) and management oriented (e.g. IT project steering committee) practices. It is also clear that practices such as IT steering committee, portfolio management, project governance/management constitute the core framework to describe how investments in organizations emerge, are prioritized and realized. In that sense, most of the practices above clearly contain both business and IT oriented roles and responsibilities.
Enterprise Governance of IT and Business/IT alignment

In our definition of enterprise governance of IT, we state that it should be an enabler for business/IT alignment. But what does alignment between the business and IT exactly mean? Henderson and Venkatraman were the first to clearly describe the interrelationship between business and IT in their well-known Strategic Alignment Model or SAM model. According to their model, Business/IT alignment is the fit and integration among business strategy, IT
strategy, business structures and IT structures (Henderson & Venkatraman, 1993). Business/ IT alignment clearly is a complex construct, even more because there is not a universal way to measure business/IT alignment in an organization. Many measurement models have been developed, each having their own assumptions and approaches (Van Grembergen & De Haes, 2009; Chan & Reich, 2007). A well known business/IT alignment maturity model has been developed by Luftman, which analyses business/IT alignment around six attributes: communication, competency and value measurement, governance, partnership, scope and architecture and skills. (Luftman, 2000) In parallel with other researchers, we have been using this model within our ITAG Research Institute, concluding for example that the Belgian financial sector is positioned at a maturity of 2.69 on a scale of 5, that many other sectors worldwide are hovering between average maturity levels of 2 and 3, and that the financial services sector globally spoken is only performing at an average level compared to other sectors. (Van Grembergen & De Haes, 2009; Luftman & Kempaiah, 2007). To provide practitioners with hands-on guidance in the business/IT alignment domain, a research project by the UAMS - ITAG Research Institute and the IT Governance Institute worked on developing pragmatic insights into how concrete business goals can drive IT goals and vice versa, as visualized in Figure 5. If maintaining
Figure 4. Minimum baseline practices for enterprise governance of IT (De Haes & Van Grembergen, 2008)
Figure 5. Business goals driving IT goals (Van Grembergen Wim, De Haes Steven, & van Brempt, 2008)
the enterprise reputation and leadership is an important business goal, a supporting IT goal could be ensuring IT services can resist and recover from attacks (Van Grembergen, De Haes, & Van Brempt, 2008). This delphi method based research was executed across multiple industries and led to the identification of a generic list of IT related business goals and IT goals and how they (could) relate (see Figure 6). In practice, every enterprise will have their own distinct sets of business and IT goals. Priorities within these sets will differ depending on a variety of internal and external factors, such as company size, industry, and geography. The results of this research provide practical guidance for professionals in the attempt to build up a cascade of business goals and IT goals for their specific organization and in this way obtain a better insight in the business/IT alignment issue. Enterprises can do that efficiently by starting from these generic business and IT goals, selecting what applies to them and updating it for enterprise specific situations. We have been using this approach in our practice in a number of organizations and experienced often that some of their business goals were not supported by IT goals and that some IT goals did not refer to business goals indicating a low business/IT alignment. In some cases, very operational (technical) were
defined, suggesting that they were still in an IT factory mode. Such practical business/IT alignment analysis is a good starting point towards implementing enterprise governance of IT, assuming that enterprise governance of IT is an important enabler for business/IT alignment. Our recent research underpins this assumption, coming to the conclusion that organizations with a mature mix of enterprise governance of IT structures, processes and relational mechanisms very likely achieve a higher degree of business/IT alignment maturity compared to other similar organizations (De Haes & Van Grembergen, 2009b). In this research, we measured business/IT alignment in 10 Belgian financial sector organizations, using Luftmans alignment maturity model (see above). In an extreme case research approach, we extracted the two best and two worst performers of this sample and tried to explain the difference in alignment maturity by looking at the maturity level of their enterprise governance of IT practices (cf. list of 33 practices, see above). It was demonstrated that all the organizations, both with high and low business/alignment maturity, did have a lot of practices in place, but the average maturity of these practices was below maturity level 2 in the poorly aligned organizations and clearly higher in the highly aligned organizations. In their governance efforts, organizations should strive for getting structures, processes and
Figure 6. Linking IT goals to business goals (Van Grembergen Wim, De Haes Steven, & van Brempt, 2008)
relational mechanism at least at maturity level 2 which implies that these practices have developed to the stage where similar procedures are followed by different people undertaking the same task.
Enterprise Governance of IT and Business Value

Our most recent research goes beyond business/ IT alignment and tries to explore the association between enterprise governance of IT and business value from IT-enabled investments. After all, the end goals of investing in enterprise governance of IT practice is achieving more value out of IT enabled investments. Previous research streams have worked on this issue through the concept of business/IT alignment. Studies by Chan et al. (2001) and Sabherwal and Chan (1997), for example, confirm the hypothesis that alignment between business and IT strategies improves business performance. Building on these research results, it can be concluded that the whole cascade as presented in Figure 1 is supported with empirical evidence, demonstrating that enterprise governance of IT enables business/IT alignment (see previous section of this article), which in turn enables business performance. A more specific approach was adopted in our latest research, which focuses on the relationships between the implementation of enterprise governance of IT frameworks COBIT 4.1 and Val IT 2.0 and the achievement of IT and business goals. COBIT 4.1 and Val IT 2.0 are two best practice process models developed by the IT Governance Institute (ITGI, 2007; ITGI, 2008), which are receiving more and more attention in the field as frameworks to implement enterprise governance of IT. COBIT defines 34 IT processes, categorized into four domains: planning and organization (PO), acquisition and implementation (AI), delivery and support (DS), monitoring and evaluation (ME) (ITGI, 2007). Val IT presented 22 IT related business processes, which are categorized in three domains: value governance (VG), portfolio management (PM) and investment management (IM) (ITGI,
2008). The assumption in this research is that by applying Enterprise Governance of IT practices as presented in COBIT and VALIT, the likelihood of achieving the IT goals increases. Achieving IT goals in turns increases the likelihood of achieving business goals such as client satisfaction and revenue growth; business goals that can be used as a proxy for business value (see Figure 7). The research was based on an international survey, gathering over 500 data entries covering 91 variables. The Pearson correlation technique was used to assess the different associations within this dataset. This analysis clearly revealed positive relationships between (1) the implementation status of COBIT/Val IT processes and the achievement of IT goals, and (2) between the achievement of IT goals and the achievement of business goals. This result suggests that the implementation of COBIT/Val IT practices ultimately results in the achievement of business goals, or in a better business value if we can assume that the achievement of business goals is a good proxy for organizational performance. Looking at the correlations into more detail, it seemed that especially IT processes (COBIT) dealing with strategy, direction, IT investment and risk and with acquisition of applications and infrastructure have the highest impact on a specific set of IT goals (see Figure 8). Regarding the business processes (Val IT), the high impact processes are fully distributed over the three domains of Val IT (value governanceVG, portfolio management-PM, investment management-IM). On the other hand, some processes were identified that did not reveal strong correlations with any of the IT goals. For example, it was found that the implementation of the COBIT process Define the information architecture seems to have no direct impact on the achievement of any of the IT goals. One can only assume that, although this process is relevant, it is still less known or it plays a role at an intermediate level. A broad set of specific IT goals was found attributing most to the achievement of some general business goals, typically referring to
Figure 7. Governance practices and business value (Van Grembergen Wim, De Haes Steven, & van Brempt, 2009)
Figure 8. High impact IT processes and high impacted IT goals (IT goals numbers refer to number in Figure 6) (Van Grembergen, De Haes, & Van Brempt, 2009)
improving business processes and cost optimization (see Figure 9). We did not only measure the associations between the achievement of IT goals and business goals, but also compared these results against our previous research where we reported on the most important IT goals and (IT related) business goals for organizations across different sectors (Van Grembergen, De Haes, & Van Brempt, 2008). This comparison
revealed a knowing-doing gap for some important goals, implying that organizations are aware of the importance of these goals but do not manage to realize them in a proper way. A typical example is the IT goal Align the IT strategy to the business strategy which was ranked as the most important goal (rank 1) but only ranked 7th regarding actual achievement status. As an opposite example, the IT goal provide IT compliance with laws and regula-
Figure 9. High impact IT goals and high impacted business goals(IT and business goals numbers refer to number in Figure 6) (Van Grembergen, De Haes, & Van Brempt, 2009)
tions was ranked on the 5th place in terms of importance, but received the highest rank for achievement status.
ConCluSIon
In this article the authors describe their eight year research journey into IT governance. Over the years, they came to the conclusion that, in order to focus more on the business involvement, a shift in name towards Enterprise Governance of IT was needed. Enterprise Governance of IT is defined as the definition and implementation of processes, structures and relational mechanisms that enable both business and IT people to execute their responsibilities in support of business/IT alignment and the creation of value from IT-enabled business investments. In the context of their Information Technology Alignment and Governance (ITAG) Research Institute, they conducted multiple research projects trying to reveal which Enterprise Governance of IT practices are implemented in organizations and what their relationship is with business/IT alignment and business value. As reported in this article, their explorative research led to the identification of 33 Enterprise Governance of IT practices and showed
associations between these practices, alignment and business value. The researched topics introduced in this article will remain the central research themes within the ITAG Research Institute. These topics are also the central subjects of this new International Journal on IT/Business Alignment and Governance (IJITBAG). The mission of the journal is to further advance theory building and practice regarding management and governance issues within the IT-related business domain. The journal encourages practice-oriented research articles from academics, case studies, and reflective articles from practitioners. Both quantitative and qualitative research articles are welcome, and special attention is giving to explorative research reports that leverage innovate research methodologies to explore new insights in the practitioners field and theory.
rEFErEnCES
Chan, Y., Huff, S., Barclay, D. W., & Copeland, D. W. (1997). Business strategic orientation, information systems strategic orientation, and strategic alignment. Information Systems Research, 8(2), 125150. doi:10.1287/isre.8.2.125
Chan, Y., & Reich, B. (2007). IT Alignment: what have we learned. Journal of Information Technology, 22, 297315. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jit.2000109 De Haes, S., & Van Grembergen, W. (2008). An exploratory study into the design of an IT governance minimum baseline through Delphi research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 22. De Haes, S., & Van Grembergen, W. (2009a). An exploratory study into IT governance implementations and its impact on business/IT alignment. Information Systems Management, 26(2), 123137. doi:10.1080/10580530902794786 De Haes, S., & Van Grembergen, W. (2009b). Exploring the relationship between IT governance practices and business/IT alignment through extreme case analysis in Belgian mid-to-large size financial enterprises. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 22(5). Henderson, J. C., Venkatraman, N., & Oldach, S. (1993). Continuous Strategic Alignment: Exploiting Information Technology Capabilities for Competitive Success. European Management Journal, 11(2), 139149. doi:10.1016/0263-2373(93)90037-I ISO/IEC 38500. (2008). Corporate governance of information technology. Retrieved from http:// www.iso.org ITGI. (2007). COBIT 4.1. Retrieved from http:// www.itgi.org ITGI. (2008). Enterprise Value: Governance of IT investments, The Val IT Framework. Retrieved from http://www.itgi.org Luftman, J. (2000). Assessing Business-IT alignment Maturity. Communications of AIS, vol. 4, no. 14 Luftman, J., & Kempaiah, R. (2007). An update on business/IT alignment: a line has been drawn. MISQ Executive, 6(3).
Peterson, R. (2003). Information Strategies and Tactics for Information Technology Governance. In W. Van Grembergen (Ed.), Strategies for Information Technology Governance. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing. Sabherwal, R., & Chan, Y. (2001). Alignment between business and IS strategies: a study of prospectors, analyzers and defenders. Information Systems Research, 12(1), 1133. doi:10.1287/isre.12.1.11.9714 Thorp, J. (2003). The Information Paradox. New York: McGraw-Hill Reyerson. Van Grembergen, W. (2002). Introduction to the Minitrack: IT Governance and its Mechanisms. In Proceedings of the 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS). Van Grembergen, W., & De Haes, S. (2008). Implementing Information Technology Governance: Models, practices and cases. Hershey, PA: IGI Publishing. Van Grembergen, W., & De Haes, S. (2009). Enterprise Governance of IT: Achieving Strategic Alignment and Value. New York: Springer. Van Grembergen, W., De Haes, S., & van Brempt, W. (2008). Identifying and aligning business goals and IT goals: full research report. Rolling Meadows, IL: IT Governance Institute. Van Grembergen, W., De Haes, S., & van Brempt, W. (2009). Building the business case for COBIT and VAL IT: executive briefing. Rolling Meadows, IL: ISACA. Weill, P., & Ross, J. (2004). IT Governance: How Top Performers Manage IT Decision Rights for Superior Results. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Wim Van Grembergen, PhD, is professor at the Economics and Management Faculty of the University of Antwerp (UA) and at the University of Antwerp Management School (UAMS). He teaches information systems at bachelor, master and executive level, and researches in IT governance, IT strategy, IT performance management and the IT balanced scorecard. Within his IT Alignment and Governance (ITAG) Research Institute (www.uams.be/itag) he also conducts applied research in these domains. Dr. Van Grembergen is a frequent speaker at academic and
professional meetings and conferences and serves in a consulting capacity to a number of firms. He has several publications in leading journals and published books on IT governance and the IT balanced scorecard. His most recent book with Steven De Haes Enterprise Governance of IT: Achieving Strategic Alignment and Value is published in 2009 (Springer). Steven De Haes, PhD, is professor information systems management at the University of Antwerp Management School (UAMS) and the Economics and Management Faculty of the University of Antwerp (UA). He has teaching assignments in many executive and master programs in the domain of IT governance, IT assurance, strategic alignment, value creation, IT performance measurement, etc. He is actively engaged in applied research within the IT Alignment and Governance (ITAG) Research Institute (www.uams.be/itag) and acts as an advisor to firms in these domains. He has several publications in leading academic and professional journals and has presented research results at many international conferences. In 2009, he co-authored with Wim van Grembergen the book Enterprise Governance of IT: Achieving Strategic Alignment and Value (Springer).

AR26607 Governance TI

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

AR26607 Governance TI

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Grembergen, W. y De Haes, S. (enero,2010). A research journey into enterprise governance of IT, business/IT alignment and value creation .

InTroduCInG ThE ConCEpT oF GoVErnanCE oF IT

EnTErprISE GoVErnanCE oF IT In praCTICE

Figure 3. Structures, processes and relational mechanisms for IT governance

Enterprise Governance of IT and Business/IT alignment

Enterprise Governance of IT and Business Value

S-ar putea să vă placă și