1 / 12

Some highlights of the Process and Politics: IT Governance in Higher Education ECAR Study

Some highlights of the Process and Politics: IT Governance in Higher Education ECAR Study. Presented by Judy Borreson Caruso Information Technology Council UW-Madison September 19, 2008. Study on Governance in HE. EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research

thaddeus-oneill
Download Presentation

Some highlights of the Process and Politics: IT Governance in Higher Education ECAR Study

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Some highlights of the Process and Politics: IT Governance in Higher Education ECAR Study Presented by Judy Borreson Caruso Information Technology Council UW-Madison September 19, 2008

  2. Study on Governance in HE • EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research • 438 CIO respondents (Carnegie: 106 Doctoral, 129 Masters) • 216 Executives (non-IT) • June 2007

  3. Definition of IT Governance • “Specifying the decision rights and accountability framework to encourage desirable behavior in using IT” (Peter Weill and Jeanne Ross – MIT) • Who: • makes which decisions • provides inputs and analyzes the issues • sets priorities • settles disputes

  4. Framework: Good governance processes • Actively designed • Well understood • Fosters timely decisions • Results in behavior that is aligned with and helps achieve strategic goals

  5. Study focused on • Maturity of IT governance in HE • Roles in IT governance • Committees and processes • IT alignment with institutional goals • IT governance effectiveness

  6. Maturity

  7. IT alignment by IT maturity 1= strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=neutral, 4=agree, 5=strongly agree

  8. Participation in governance committees/processes

  9. Effectiveness of IT governance 1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=neutral, 4=agree, 5=strongly agree

  10. Factors associated with higher agreement about ITG effectiveness • Active design of IT governance • Perceived ability of key ITG participants to describe ITG accurately • Higher overall mean participation in providing input and taking part in decision making • Incorporation of measurement and review in IT governance • ITG involvement in formal project review and approval • ITG participation in institutional budgetary processes

  11. At my institution, IT governance… 1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=neutral, 4=agree, 5=strongly agree

  12. What does this mean? • Most respondents agree – ITG process results in timely decisions, balance instn/local needs, is effective • Conclusion, institutions should fortify IT governance: • Politics, decisions are complex • Active design of IT governance/understood • ITG participation in IT performance measurement, budgeting and projects

More Related