Problems will naturally arise in an organization due to some factors. Apparently, frustrations will come and blow out the minds of the people working in the organization specially between the IS professionals and the users. Like any other activity, planning is so much vital to achieve the desirable results being forecasted. Normally, any business or organization has their own corresponding strategies on how to make their own company expand and at the same time attain their goals being set. Any business involves various risks—it is natural and inevitable. That is why planning is essential to make an organization survive and still compete in the industry knowing that they are involved in the survival of the fittest manner.
As defined, Strategic Information System Planning is the analysis of a corporation’s information and processes using business information models together with the evaluation of risk, current needs and requirements. The result is an action plan showing the desired course of events necessary to align information use and needs with the strategic direction of the company (Battaglia, 1991).
Lederer and Sethi (1988) surveyed 80 organizations to examine the problems faced by information systems managers when they attempt to implement one of three alignment methodologies, BSP, SSP or IE. Barlow (1990) has also examined the SISP methodologies and
has provided some insights into their structure and implementation problems. Bergeron et al. (1991)
examined the issue of application of two ‘impact’ methodologies, Porter’s Value Chain Analysis and
Wiseman’s Strategic Thrust Methodology. These studies and the insights developed by us form the basis of this section which provides a critique of the existing methodologies. The detailed list of problems in implementing SISP methodologies has been classified by Lederer and Sethi as resource, planning process, or output related problem associated with the three methodologies.
According to this survey, the most severe problem identified by IS managers is the failure to secure top management commitment for carrying out the final plan.
Normally, IS managers will somehow feel and experience the burden brought by the various problems, ongoing changes and the inconsistencies of the IS plan of a particular organization. This would really make them feel frustrated. Due to these factors, the plan would not be hundred percent sure that what is thought to be the final plan will be pursued. As the day goes by, changes will come, developments and greater and brighter ideas will arise. This means that the top management which is accountable and responsible for carrying out the goals and plans of the organization will expect to have not-so-good feedbacks from their subordinates. For sure, this would affect the people behind the IS planning and as well as the users. Integrity is diminished because of the inconsistencies and changes.
The second most severe problem identified is the requirement for substantial further analysis after the completion of the IS plan.
Analysis is a critical part of having the planning. After the Information System plan is established, supplementary and advanced study is needed to facilitate and manage the plan; study that would integrate the best propositions being set for the expansion and growth of the organization. Since many ideas are coming from the planning team, the salient things and the detailed fine points necessary to be dealt with will bring confusion to the IS managers—another frustration that needs to be answered.
Both these problems are related to the output of the planning process. Besides these top two, six of the next top eight problems are related to the resources required to carry out the strategic information systems planning (success of the plan depends on the team leader, difficulty in finding the team leader meeting the criteria specified in the study, methodology lacking computer support, planning exercise taking long time, etc.). Among the top ten problems encountered while
implementing one of these methodologies (or, even while implementing an in-house methodology), three are common: difficulty in obtaining top management commitment for implementing the outputs, the requirement of substantial further analysis and difficulty in finding a good team leader.
The results of this survey suggest that IS planners are not particularly satisfied with their methodologies. If the objective of the SISP exercise is to align IS objectives with business goals, then detailed, lengthy and complex SISP may be of limited value. Where the objective is to use IT to impact a business strategy, these methodologies may not generate useful ideas for that purpose.
Bergeron et al. (1990), however, point out that the value chain analysis and Wiseman’s strategic
methodologies do help in achieving that purpose. Barlow (1990) suggests that the large number of
methodologies that have been developed can often ‘add confusion rather than clarity to the (IS)
planning process.’
Salient points which emerge from this and the preceding sections are:
• Although strategic information systems planning is a major concern, most organizations find
it difficult to undertake it. Besides their lack of experience with SISP, absence of a comprehensive, structured, easy to use methodology may also be a main reason for it. It is possible that the advances in Information Technology and their applicability in organizations has outpaced all formal methodologies evolved in the 70s and 80s or evolved in 90s as marginally modified versions of the earlier methodologies, which were largely dominated by IBM’s Business
Systems Planning.
• Further, as pointed out by Barlow (1990) also, the overall success of an integrated business/technology architecture depends upon the organizational structure, the level of IT experience within the company and the availability of information resources. Since these factors differ between firms, there may not be a single best way to view IT planning.
A comprehensive methodology for SISP will need to incorporate both the ‘impact’ and the ‘align’
views. Since it is vital to face the frustrations between the IS professionals and the users, with proper cooperation, and attitude for both parties, success will surely come.
No comments:
Post a Comment