Chapter 3: Literature Review
Siviy, Penn & Harper (2005) mentioned that in the understanding of how IT frameworks complement each other, a “general case” should be used. This results in the creation of a customised IT framework. This research study applies a “general case” approach. The literature review details whether or not each of the IT frameworks complement each other and the most appropriate methodology to complement each other. This supports the best practice definition by Bogan and English (1994), which describes a best practice as evolving methodologies that has shown consistent results of superior quality and used as a benchmark within the organisation.
Considerations for implementing IT frameworks
King III defines IT governance as “the effective and efficient management of IT resources to facilitate the achievement of corporate objectives” (Liell-Cock, et al., 2009: 5). Symons, et al. (2005: 2) adds to the definition of IT governance in that it is simply “the process by which decisions are made around IT investments”.
All organisations have some form of IT governance, however many of these organisations have governance processes that are “adhoc and informal” due to minimal consistency in their decision making and monitoring of outcomes (Symons, et al., 2005). According to Symons, et al. (2005), good IT governance requires a framework that is made up of three components, namely structure, process and communication. On the contrary, Liell-Cock, Graham & Hill (2009) claimed that measurement, control and direction forms the main framework of IT governance. It is further stated in King III that the organisation‟s board is responsible for the IT governance framework that is selected for implementation. In support of King III, Hardy (2006) advised that senior management need to understand IT frameworks in detail, understanding their standards, overlaps, and how they can be used to effectively govern the organisation. By involving senior executives or management, organisations can avoid a situation whereby the implementation of IT frameworks result in being costly, unfocused on business objectives and treated as a technical guidance (Hardy, 2006).
According to literature, in order to successfully implement any IT framework, the following must also be considered by the organisation as critical success factors:
•Setting up the right tools and techniques for processes for both implementation and future maintenance (Neničková, 2011). In addition, the implementation of these tools and techniques must be aligned to and integrated into the organisation‟s risk management process and control frameworks (Hardy, 2006).
•Alignment between the business and IT, i.e. connecting between the strategic business objectives and striving towards similar goals (Neničková, 2011).
•Most frameworks provide detailed processes in terms of tracking incidents, identifying problems, etc. However in order for employees to benefit from these processes, they need to follow them. It can be an organisational challenge to change the behaviour of employees to adjust to the respective frameworks (Worthen, 2005). Performance management and tracking to ensure a balance between the outcome which business expects and the outcome which IT expects(Neničková, 2011).
•Transforming the leadership from being a reactive cost into being a proactive, strategic leadership (Neničková, 2011).
•Define clear roles and responsibilities for the implementation process and have a conflict management system in place (Neničková, 2011).
•The implementation of governance frameworks are difficult, can cause disruption in business activities, and has a high risk of failure, particularly if there is a lack of sponsorship, investment and support from senior management (Heston and Phifer, 2009). Commitment and participation of senior management and other stakeholders are crucial, particularly for decision making, management leadership and long term commitment (Neničková, 2011).
•Heston and Phifer (2009) argued that most organisations have limited experience when it comes to implementing governance frameworks. The number of standards that exist is excessive and often redundant, especially as organisations require straightforward frameworks that add value and are effective in terms of delivery and acceptance (Heston and Phifer, 2009).
•Awareness and understanding (such as business purpose and benefits, organisational learning, staff involvement, training and mentoring) of the framework that is being implemented will result in the acceptability of the framework (Neničková, 2011, Hardy, 2006). Furthermore, customising the frameworks to suit the organisational need will make senior management aware of the value IT best practices can contribute to the business (Hardy, 2006).
ITIL and CobiT as complementary frameworks
Cater-Steel, et al. (2006) argued that CobiT and ITIL are complementary and when combined can provide an organisation with a powerful IT governance and best practices in IT support. The primary reason as to why ITIL and CobiT work well is because ITIL focuses on service management and operations in the IT sector, whereas CobiT focuses on governance and control in the IT space (Cater-Steel, et al., 2006).
CobiT focuses on IT processes based on what organisations need instead of how to achieve what the organisations want. ITIL focuses on best practices on how to get what organisations want by defining comprehensive procedures and processes, i.e. a road map on how to get there (Hill and Turbitt, 2006). ITIL aims to guide the organisation with best practices in aligning business and IT, whereas CobiT aims to guide the organisation in terms of business needs and organisational goals. In addition, CobiT provides management with direction in terms of control, monitoring, benchmarking of critical success factors, key performance indicators and key goal indicators (Hill and Turbitt, 2006).
Implementing governance frameworks are challenging, however transition must be managed via the business priorities (Hill and Turbitt, 2006). According to Hill and Turbitt (2006), ITIL and CobiT are complementary frameworks and can be used concurrently to facilitate management and alignment of the IT and business objectives. A combination of ITIL and CobiT can result in improved quality, better customer services and a cost reduction (Hill and Turbitt, 2006). In a comparison of ITIL and CobiT undertaken by Sahibudin, Sharifi & Ayat (2008), it was noted that ITIL and CobiT are very similar in terms of defined processes.
According to Hill and Turbitt (2006), the CobiT framework can be used as an integrator between practices and strategic business objectives. Due to the generic nature of the processes defined in CobiT, additional specific processes and standards can be easily attached to the CobiT framework, thereby creating a chain of guidance (Hill and Turbitt, 2006). The CobiT framework enables organisations wanting to adopt ITIL to have an effective IT governance framework for the successful implementation of ITIL. In addition, CobiT has the capability to measure the organisation‟s performance in terms of its people, processes and technology (Hill & Turbitt, 2006).
Chapter 1: Orientation
1.2. Purpose and objectives of the study
1.3. Statement of the problem and sub-problems
1.4. Delimitations of the study
1.5. Significance of the study
Chapter 2: Theoretical Framework
2.2. Information Technology Infrastructure Library (ITIL)
2.3. Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI)
2.4. Control Objectives for Information and Related Technologies (CobiT)
2.5. Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK)
Chapter 3: Literature Review
3.2. Considerations for implementing IT frameworks
3.3. ITIL and CobiT as complementary frameworks
3.4. ITIL and CMMI as complementary frameworks
3.5. ITIL and PMBOK as complementary frameworks
3.6. CMMI and COBIT as complementary frameworks
3.7. CMMI and PMBOK as complementary frameworks
3.8. CobiT and PMBOK as complementary frameworks
Chapter 4: Research Methodology
4.2. Research problem and sub-problems
4.3. Research methodology
4.4. Research design
4.5. Ethical considerations
Chapter 5: Research Results
5.2. Profile of respondents
5.3. Results from the semi-structured interviews
5.4 Validity and reliability of data collection
5.5 Analysis of the data
5.6 Discussion of the results
Chapter 6: Recommendations and Conclusion
6.2. Recommendations for implementing multiple IT frameworks concurrently
6.3. Recommendations for future research
GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT
Best Practices for Implementing Multiple Concurrent IT Frameworks