The development of a hard and soft IT governance assessment instrument

Abstract Current IT governance research is largely focused on hard governance. Soft governance needs more attention. The MIG model (Maturity IT governance) was designed because an IT governance maturity model covering both the hard and soft parts of governance did not exist. Using the MIG model, this paper describes the development of an instrument to measure hard and soft governance maturity: the MIG assessment instrument. It summarizes the operationalization of a maturity model for hard and soft IT Governance. The paper gives a detailed description of the result of the development of the MIG assessment instruments’ first cycle. A research contribution to the MIG model was a solution for the implementation of the focus area informal organization in the instrument. We found an easy and simple solution by using the nine focus areas of the maturity model as a framework for the informal organization. The instrument is intended to be used in combination with interviews. The instrument will be used, validated and improved in several cycles using the results from the case studies.

[1]  Anthony T. Cobb,et al.  INFORMAL INFLUENCE IN THE FORMAL ORGANIZATION: PERCEIVED SOURCES OR POWER AMONG WORK UNIT PEERS , 1980 .

[2]  Ryan Peterson,et al.  Configurations and coordination for global information technology governance: complex designs in a transnational European context , 2001, Proceedings of the 34th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[3]  L. Diamond.  IT Governance : How Top Performers Manage IT Decision Rights for Superior Results , 2005 .

[4]  Alan R. Hevner,et al.  Design Science in Information Systems Research , 2004, MIS Q..

[5]  Jos van Hillegersberg,et al.  The Continuing Mismatch Between IT Governance Theory and Practice: Results from a Delphi Study with CIO's , 2013, AMCIS.

[6]  Qing Hu,et al.  The Impact of Mergers & Acquisitions on IT Governance Structures: A Case Study , 2004, J. Glob. Inf. Manag..

[7]  C. McDonald,et al.  IT Governance in Public and Private Sector Organisations: Examining the Differences and Defining Future Research Directions , 2007 .

[8]  Jay R. Galbraith.  Organization Design: An Information Processing View , 1974 .

[9]  Lazar Rusu,et al.  IT Governance Maturity in the Public Sector Organizations in a Developing Country: The Case of Tanzania , 2010, AMCIS.

[10]  Alan R. Hevner,et al.  The Three Cycle View of Design Science , 2007, Scand. J. Inf. Syst..

[11]  Adrian Davies.  Best Practice in Corporate Governance: Building Reputation and Sustainable Success , 2006 .

[12]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Measuring the Linkage Between Business and Information Technology Objectives , 1996, MIS Q..

[13]  W. V. Grembergen,et al.  Structures, Processes and Relational Mechanisms for IT Governance , 2004 .

[14]  Mark C. Paulk,et al.  Capability Maturity Model for Software , 2001 .

[15]  Ryan Peterson,et al.  Crafting Information Technology Governance , 2004, Inf. Syst. Manag..

[16]  Norshidah Mohamed,et al.  A Conceptual Framework for Information Technology Governance Effectiveness in Private Organizations , 2012, Inf. Manag. Comput. Secur..

[17]  J. Collins,et al.  Level 5 leadership. The triumph of humility and fierce resolve. , 2001, Harvard business review.

[18]  Jörg Becker,et al.  Developing Maturity Models for IT Management , 2009, Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng..

[19]  Dave Ulrich,et al.  Capitalizing on capabilities. , 2004, Harvard business review.

[20]  Nils Urbach,et al.  Understanding IT Governance Success And Its Impact: Results From An Interview Study , 2013, ECIS.

[21]  David M Cook.  Mitigating Cyber-Threats Through Public-Private Partnerships: Low Cost Governance with High-Impact Returns , 2010 .

[22]  Jung Hoon Lee,et al.  IT Governance-Based IT Strategy and Management: Literature Review and Future Research Directions , 2008 .

[23]  Jos van Hillegersberg,et al.  IT Governance Maturity: Developing a Maturity Model Using the Delphi Method , 2015, 2015 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[24]  K. Cameron,et al.  Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture: Based on the Competing Values Framework , 1999 .

[25]  Paulo Henrique de Souza Bermejo,et al.  Planning and Implementing IT Governance in Brazilian Public Organizations , 2011, 2011 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[26]  Annas Vijaya,et al.  The impact of Information Technology Governance maturity level on corporate productivity: A case study at an Information Technology services company , 2011, 2011 International Conference on Advanced Computer Science and Information Systems.

[27]  Kevin C. Desouza,et al.  An Argument for Centralization of IT Governance in the Public Sector , 2015, 2015 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[28]  Cláudia Maria Lima Werner,et al.  A roadmap to the Collaboration Maturity Model (CollabMM) evolution , 2011, Proceedings of the 2011 15th International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design (CSCWD).

[29]  Noor Habibah Arshad,et al.  IT governance practices model in IT project approval and implementation in Malaysian public sector , 2010, 2010 International Conference on Electronics and Information Engineering.

[30]  Björn Niehaves,et al.  Maturity Models in Information Systems Research: Literature Search and Analysis , 2011, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[31]  Hüseyin Tanriverdi,et al.  Performance Effects of Information Technology Synergies in Multibusiness Firms , 2006, MIS Q..

[32]  John Rohrbaugh,et al.  A Spatial Model of Effectiveness Criteria: Towards a Competing Values Approach to Organizational Analysis , 1983 .

[33]  Juhani Iivari,et al.  Action research and design science research - Seemingly similar but decisively dissimilar , 2009, ECIS.

[34]  G. Philip Rogers.  The Role of Maturity Models in IT Governance: A Comparison of the Major Models and Their Potential Benefits to the Enterprise , 2009 .

[35]  B. Berg.  Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences , 1989 .

[36]  John Bessant,et al.  An evolutionary model of continuous improvement behaviour , 2001 .

[37]  Ting-Peng Liang,et al.  The Impact of IT Governance on Organizational Performance , 2011, AMCIS.

[38]  Lejf Moos,et al.  Hard and Soft Governance: The Journey from Transnational Agencies to School Leadership , 2009 .

[39]  Constance E. Helfat,et al.  The dynamic resource-based view: capability lifecycles , 2003 .

[40]  B. Wernerfelt,et al.  A Resource-Based View of the Firm , 1984 .

[41]  Matthew Warren,et al.  Corporate governance and information technology : findings from an exploratory survey of Australian organizations , 2011 .

[42]  Jos van Hillegersberg,et al.  The Development of an IT Governance Maturity Model for Hard and Soft Governance , 2014 .

[43]  Marlies van Steenbergen,et al.  The Design of Focus Area Maturity Models , 2010, DESRIST.

[44]  Henry Mintzberg,et al.  The structuring of organizations : a synthesis of the research , 1980 .

[45]  Gail Ridley,et al.  Attempting to Define IT Governance: Wisdom or Folly? , 2006, Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'06).

[46]  Stefan Koch,et al.  Dimensions and Operationalisations of IT Governance: A Literature Review and Meta-Case Study , 2012, CONF-IRM.

[47]  Rusli Abdul Roni,et al.  EXPLORING THE APPROACHES FOR COBIT PROCESS IN MALAYSIAN 100 TOP CORPORATE GOVERNANCE COMPANIES , 2012 .

[48]  Mathias Ekstedt,et al.  The Effect of IT Governance Maturity on IT Governance Performance , 2010, Inf. Syst. Manag..

[49]  Tobias Mettler,et al.  Situational maturity models as instrumental artifacts for organizational design , 2009, DESRIST.