Konrad Walser
bureaucracy in various ways […]. However, there is also a danger that organizations could be tempted to adopt the‘ idolized’ approach to the use of ICTs […] to achieve organizational transformation. This approach sees ICTs as providing simple answers to what are complex organizational and cultural issues”. Jain( 2007) adds further:“ The findings […] suggest that the issue of how E‐Government and bureaucracy impact each other in reciprocal ways is quite complex. The current status of research into this issue does not offer adequate clarity into the underlying processes at work or the likely outcomes to be expected. Future research efforts are thus required to get a better understanding of these issues.“ In terms of the failure of projects in PA, the following assertions from( Mertens 2008) can be cited: politicians like to profile themselves they like to be quoted in press when there are setbacks in IT projects; deadline pressure created by budget plans, ‐laws that are often more oriented around calendar years and legislative periods; assessment criteria and restrictions in IT projects in PA are more diverse than in private sector; executives / specialists working in IT in PA are paid below average; performance‐related element of compensation comparatively low; proportion of those with law degrees among employees is high, as is their influence; danger that tenders and contracts are over‐specified from a legal perspective; attempt to transfer risk from public contracting authority to private contractor receives too much weight; data protection plays major role which can lead to sub‐optimal economic and IT solutions.
2.2 COBIT and its statements on IT project governance
COBIT 4.1 operates the ' Manage Projects‘ process as PO10( ITGI 2007). COBIT stands for Control objectives for information and related technology. The control objectives of this process are not listed here but presented in Figure 1 because of space reasons. Additionally it can be deduced from the RACI chart( RACI stands for responsible, accountable, consulted, informed) per COBIT 4.1( ITGI 2007) for PO10 that CEOs( chief executive officer) and CFOs( chief financial officer)( administrative management board( AM) with IT representation / CIO( chief information officer) and finance) have to assume responsibility for the projects. As the CIO sits in the AM, the AM can influence programme and project management. The Business Executive is the responsible person from the contracting authority. Depending on the different distribution of power scenarios, there are more or less decentralised or autonomous administrative units in the area of IT management in PA. Centralised administrative units with little autonomy are easier to manage and require other types of business IT alignment mechanisms than heterogeneous, decentralised and autonomous administrative units. Management and audit functions must influence compliance with centrally prescribed standards, policies and guidelines. The Standard ISO / IEC 38500 talks in this context about direct, monitor and evaluate activities. This article explicitly deals with the overriding governance and not the actual execution of the projects.
3. Development of an( IT) project governance framework
3.1 Possible measures for rectifying problems
The following measures can be initiated to get a better handle on( IT) project governance in PA. The presence of a CIO on the administrative management board( Ward and Mitchell 2004) is imperative, and the separation of power in projects is of central significance. Having the CIO as a member of the management board ensures that IT is represented at management level. As such, IT management and project governance receive more weight. If there is no CIO, non‐delegable responsibility for IT must be transferred to another member of the management board. Administrative information management as a key competence of PA is to be understood as the comprehensive,( non) electronic management of information for operating the administrative business. It includes ITG, IT( service) management, IT strategy and enterprise architecture management. IT Projects should be seen as undertakings derived from the IT strategy and enterprise architecture. Projects should have a clearly defined / described remit. A business case must be created for all of them. In light of future challenges in administration, responsibilities for IT are under consideration. The role of the CIO as the AM member responsible for information management ensures that the issue of IT is incorporated into the executive decisionmaking process. The administrative business side has clear responsibility for IT. To date this has seldom worked. The separation of powers in the area of project management is key to ensuring that duties, competencies and responsibilities( DCR) in PA are regularly defined and allocated. It must be ensured that the allocation of DCR is done in such a way that it creates a system of CaB. This reduces the likelihood of IT projects failing. In the sense of power separation between the management board, finance department, project management and the commissioner of the project, a decision square is established for which CaB models are created. Depending on the project size, these ensure either that projects do not fail or, if necessary, can be stopped at an early stage. This pattern of CaB, ultimately providing better project governance, will later be addressed in more detail.
544