Analysis: Invest in Tech as you Would Stocks and Bonds

The IT Governance Institute introduces Val IT.
IT projects should be treated as business-change projects enabled by IT, and the leaders of the affected business unit or units should be accountable for achieving specific project benefits laid out in advance. This is the core principle of Val IT, a new framework introduced by the IT Governance Institute (ITGI) and based on the non-profit group's widely adopted COBIT framework for IT Governance.

"Val IT recommends a portfolio-type approach to managing IT investments," says Everett Johnson, international president of ITGI. "That means you'll do something about the investments that aren't delivering the desired results, much as you would stocks in your own investment portfolio."

To size up IT projects before and after the investment decision, the Val IT framework offers a series of strategic, architectural, delivery and business-value analyses (see chart below) that answer four key questions: are we doing the right things, are we doing them the right way, are we getting the projects done well and are we realizing the benefits?

Offering best practices and guidance designed to compliment COBIT, Val IT is delivered through three publications (downloadable at a framework document setting out principles, a booklet on how to develop an effective business case and realistic benefit statements, and a case study based on the application of these principles at ING. The global financial services giant found that IT investments could deliver a much higher rate of return than conventional investments such as real estate or equities, but it kept a close watch on IT projects with a management process aimed at terminating projects early when they're not headed for success. Says Johnson, "that's something that rarely happens in many businesses."


Is investment: Is investment: Do we have: Do we have:
* In line with vision?
* In line with architecture?
* Effective change
* Clear understanding of
* Consistent with business? * Consistent with
architecture principles?
* Competent tech. &
bus. resources to deliver:
* Clear accountability
for benefits?
* Contributing to objectives? * Contributing to
fulfillment of architecture?
- Required capabilities? * Relevant metrics?
* Providing value at
acceptable risk?
* In line with other
- Required org. changes? * Effective realization
Editor's Choice
John Edwards, Technology Journalist & Author
Carrie Pallardy, Contributing Reporter
Alan Brill, Senior Managing Director, Cyber Risk, Kroll
John Bennett, Global Head of Government Affairs, Cyber Risk, Kroll
Sponsored by Lookout, Sundaram Lakshmanan, Chief Technology Officer
Brandon Taylor, Digital Editorial Program Manager
Jessica Davis, Senior Editor
Richard Pallardy, Freelance Writer
Sponsored by Lookout, Sundaram Lakshmanan, Chief Technology Officer
Sara Peters, Editor-in-Chief, InformationWeek / Network Computing