Workshop 3 The University of Texas February

Workshop 3 @ The University of Texas, February 7 -9, 2006 IT • LP : : The Information Technology Leaders Program Measures

Workshop 3 @ The University of Texas, February 7 -9, 2006 IT • LP : : The Information Technology Leaders Program Measure n. 1. The dimensions, quantity, or capacity of something as ascertained by measuring: Length, area, volume, and mass are basic measures of material properties.

Workshop 3 @ The University of Texas, February 7 -9, 2006 IT • LP : : The Information Technology Leaders Program Measures — What? and Why? What would be helpful to measure in your university’s IT environment and why?

Workshop 3 @ The University of Texas, February 7 -9, 2006 IT • LP : : The Information Technology Leaders Program Finance ¶ Historically, financial measures have been the first and foremost measure of interest to management. ¶ But, financial measures alone have never provided adequate information for operational support.

Workshop 3 @ The University of Texas, February 7 -9, 2006 IT • LP : : The Information Technology Leaders Program The Balanced Scorecard 1990 multicompany study: Measuring Performance in the Organization of the Future. ¶ Existing performance measurement approaches were hindering organization’s abilities to create future economic value. ¶ New approach: four distinct sets of measures: finance, customer, internal process, and innovation and learning linked to vision and strategy. ¶

Ob je ct Me ive as s Ta ure s rg et s In iti at ive s Finance “To succeed financially, how should we appear to our shareholders? ” Internal Business Processes je “To achieve our vision, how will we sustain our ability to change and improve? ” Ta ure s rg et s In iti at ive s es as tiv ct Me ive as s Ta ure s rg et s In iti at ive s Learning and Growth Me je c “To satisfy our shareholders and customers, what business processes must we excel at? ” Ob Vision and Strategy Ob tiv In i tia ts es es ge ur as Ta r “To achieve our vision, how should we appear to our customers? ” Me je c tiv es Customer Ob Workshop 3 @ The University of Texas, February 7 -9, 2006 IT • LP : : The Information Technology Leaders Program The Balanced Scorecard

Workshop 3 @ The University of Texas, February 7 -9, 2006 IT • LP : : The Information Technology Leaders Program Thinking about University IT What do we need to know? ¶ How our customers think we are doing. Information about the delivery of outcomes. ¶ Information about the internal performance of our processes. ¶ ¶ How our staff are doing?

Workshop 3 @ The University of Texas, February 7 -9, 2006 IT • LP : : The Information Technology Leaders Program Measurement Framework Satisfaction – how well are we doing? • Customer – how satisfied are our customers with our products and services • C. f. , http: //web. mit. edu/ist/survey • Employee – how satisfied are our staff with their work and working environment • C. f. , http: //www. cit. cornell. edu/cit/qwl/ • C. f. , http: //web. mit. edu/workfamily/qolsurvey. h tml • C. f. , http: //www. insightlink. com/ Performance – numerical indicators of capacity and results • System • E. g. , email messages processed/day • Process • E. g. , avg. time to resolve call to help desk • E. g. , avg. number of purchase orders processed by ERP system per business day • Intraprocess task • E. g. , avg. time to first response to web posting of a request to the help desk Cost – what are the financial costs associated with the unit? • Organization • What is the cost of central IT? • System • What is the cost of operating the ERP system? • Service • What is the cost of providing email? Per message processed? • Process • What is the cost of processing a purchase order? • Intraprocess task • What is the first-response cost in the help desk process?

Workshop 3 @ The University of Texas, February 7 -9, 2006 IT • LP : : The Information Technology Leaders Program Dashboards What do I do if I want to use measures such as these for operational purposes? ¶ Defining what is significant. ¶ Collecting it. ¶ Making it available. ¶ Using it.

Workshop 3 @ The University of Texas, February 7 -9, 2006 IT • LP : : The Information Technology Leaders Program Draft MIT Dashboard

Workshop 3 @ The University of Texas, February 7 -9, 2006 IT • LP : : The Information Technology Leaders Program References 1. The Balances Scorecard, Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA, 1996. [Slide 6 reproduces Figure 11 on Page 9. ] 2. “Aligning IT with Firm Business Strategies Using the Balanced Scorecard System, ” Quing Hu and C. Derrick Huang, Proceedings of the 38 th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences – 2005, http: //csdl. computer. org/comp/proceedings/hicss/2005/2268/08/22680230 a. pdf 3. “Management by Fact: Benchmarking Uniersity IT Services, ” Jennifer Dowling Dougherty, William Clebsch, and Greg Anderson, EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY, Number 1, 2004. [Available at: http: //www. educause. edu/Library. Detail. Page/666? ID=EQM 0413; see also, http: //web. mit. edu/ist/about/benchmarking/. ] 4. “Digital Dashboards: Driving Higher Education Decisions, ” Elazar C. Harel and Toby D. Sitko, EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research Bulletin, Volume 2003, Issue 19, September 16, 2003. 5. Information about MIT’s Help. Desk dashboard as well as current dashboards can be found at: http: //web. mit. edu/ist/support/dashboard/.