Friday, December 16, 2005
More thoughts on IT Portfolio Management
The ability to achieve projections made by enterprise architecture teams based on optimizing the portfolio with limited resources is as much art as science and should be treated as such...
In previous blog entries, I have talked about the relationship between enterprise architecture and venture capitalists. Maybe the conversation can take on an additional dimension as they understand the real meaning of IT portfolio management. I wonder if they could start sharing their thoughts on this subject. Anyway, EA's should serve as key strategists, offering art of the possible ideas and concepts in the formation of corporate strategy and balancing of investments.
By providing a venture capitalist approach in calculated risk taking based on the potential IT solutions could yield increased productivity, decreased costs and drive revenue growth which is the ultimate in IT / business alignment.
EA's should also be responsible for the education of IT employees. This should not be deferred to the folks in human resources. They are best capable and demonstrating marketing savvy and thought leadership skills; providing a balance between managing (different than leading) the status of IT investments, serving as an advocate for both new and existing solutions (aka stewardship) and promoting for the goodness and value created by IT.
Like the VC community, EA's also need to communicate key messages pertaining to IT throughout the company and overcome cultural resistance. Too many of us defer this responsibility to folks who have read PMBOK but otherwise don't know the difference between hsit and shinola.
Unlike the VC Community, they do understand the difference between portfolio management and the governance it brings vs control frameworks that stifle both true governance and real innovation. One of the trends is the adoption of COBIT which is noble but detrimental. The best way to stifle innovation is to start measuring it...
| | View blog reactionsIn previous blog entries, I have talked about the relationship between enterprise architecture and venture capitalists. Maybe the conversation can take on an additional dimension as they understand the real meaning of IT portfolio management. I wonder if they could start sharing their thoughts on this subject. Anyway, EA's should serve as key strategists, offering art of the possible ideas and concepts in the formation of corporate strategy and balancing of investments.
By providing a venture capitalist approach in calculated risk taking based on the potential IT solutions could yield increased productivity, decreased costs and drive revenue growth which is the ultimate in IT / business alignment.
EA's should also be responsible for the education of IT employees. This should not be deferred to the folks in human resources. They are best capable and demonstrating marketing savvy and thought leadership skills; providing a balance between managing (different than leading) the status of IT investments, serving as an advocate for both new and existing solutions (aka stewardship) and promoting for the goodness and value created by IT.
Like the VC community, EA's also need to communicate key messages pertaining to IT throughout the company and overcome cultural resistance. Too many of us defer this responsibility to folks who have read PMBOK but otherwise don't know the difference between hsit and shinola.
Unlike the VC Community, they do understand the difference between portfolio management and the governance it brings vs control frameworks that stifle both true governance and real innovation. One of the trends is the adoption of COBIT which is noble but detrimental. The best way to stifle innovation is to start measuring it...
