Alignment Traps to Avoid Wisconsin

provided by: 
Originally published at Internet.com

When discussing the role of IT in any organization, it is important to take a step back and look at the organization itself. When we hear of alignment problems between IT and the rest of the enterprise, this invariably betrays fundamental flaws in the thought processes surrounding what an organization is and how it is structured and managed.

Viewed this way, alignment is not an IT problem: It is, rather, a management problem, for it is management that is responsible for meeting goals and objectives.

To explain, we must first establish some common terms and set the proper context. An organization, commercial or not, is a system comprised of functional areas purposefully assembled to attain a goal or goals. If there isn't at least one goal, then there isn't a system because there is no unifying direction.

Threats to Objectives and Goals

Goals are needed to shape the actions of the functional areas. From a management perspective, functional-area objectives must be established so that actions can be coordinated toward achieving the organization's goal. Goal-oriented activity is the definition of productivity.

IT enables functional areas to attain their objectives. IT plays a supporting role and works through other functional areas by using technology to act as a force-multiplier to improve productivity. This activity must be performed by working with the other areas. It cannot happen without sufficient involvement of IT personnel, as opposed to IT "pushing" technology at the functional areas in the hopes of improving productivity. Functional areas also must play a vital role, engaging IT and ensuring that proper requirements are understood so that services can be properly developed (or purchased) to meet these needs.

At the same time, risks to these functional area objectives and organizational goals need to be understood and properly managed, for risks introduce threats to objectives and goals. So while management can set direction, dangers and problems can arise that affect whether objectives are attained and thus impact the entity's success.

To counter this, properly architected controls must be implemented. Essentially, controls are processes that serve to manage variation and thus reasonably assure stakeholders that outcomes will fall within an acceptable range as defined by management.

Extending on the above we can identify the following traps to avoid:

* Improper goals - An entity needs to identify why it exists. If it can't, then there are very real problems from the outset. The acronym "SMART" for specific, measurable, realistic and time-bound construction of goals and objectives can help people think about how goals should be structured.

Additionally, not only must goals be clear and readily understandable, they also must be clearly communicated. If more than one goal is identified for an organization, then the goal framework also must be properly constructed for internal consistency.

* Improper objectives - Functional areas need objectives that support the attainment of the entity's goals. If objectives do not support the goal, then resources and time are wasted -- and the goal jeopardized. Far too often objectives are not intentionally designed to support the overall attainment of the goal.

More Alignment Traps to Avoid

* Focusing on the wrong efforts - Activities and investments that do not support the attainment of functional-area objectives must be carefully reviewed. Either the efforts are wasteful or there are previously unknown dependencies driving the efforts that must be scrutinized.

* Not understanding productivity - Additional people, processes and technology do not necessarily relate to improved productivity. Only if there is increased movement toward the goal has productivity been affected.

* Silos and local over optimization - It is possible to do all of the right things within functional areas and still fail. When functional areas are allowed to be silos and there is a failure to understand that an entity is a system, then attempts to improve activities within a silo can negatively impact the attainment of goals.

Functional area output can best be thought of as a vector in that there is force and direction. Only by managing these vectors can the organization move in the right direction in a timely, effective, efficient and economical manner.

* Lack of Causality - Stakeholders must understand the relevance of what they do in relation to goals and objectives. They must understand, be they employee, contractor or supplier, that what they do truly matters. The cause and effect relationship must be clear. People must understand that what they do truly makes a difference.

* Lack of Accountability - People must be held accountable for their actions, or inactions, relating to the attainment of objectives and goals. If there isn't accountability, then human nature and entropy will inevitably intervene. Processes will break down and results will become suboptimal.

* Lack of Risk Management - It is the purposeful planning and coordination of functional area objectives combined with risk management that will optimize a system. Management is tasked with delivering predictable results in accordance with functional area objectives and the overall goals of the organization. If risks are not managed then the resulting variation will jeopardize this mandate.

Without proper goals, an organization will be adrift. Once goals are established, then functional-area objectives must be aligned to maximize the overall entity's productivity. At the same time, risks must be understood and managed to ensure that objectives and goals are properly safeguarded.

IT must be actively involved with the formulation of strategy and tactical plans, due to its ability to deploy technology as a force-magnifier and to assist with the management of risks. With the proper management thought processes and supporting culture, the potential value of the organization can be optimized.