Multiple intelligences expert system a computer based course advisor for high...
It governance in higher education institutions in the philippines
1. IT GOVERNANCE IN HIGHER
EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS
IN THE PHILIPPINES
Dave E. Marcial
College of Computer Studies, Silliman University
Dumaguete City, Negros Oriental
demarcial@su.edu.ph
2. Presentation Outline
• Introduction and
Review of
Literature
• Methodology
• Results
• Conclusion and
Recommendations
• This paper presents
the empirical
investigation of the
level of prioritization
and degree of
implementation of IT
governance in higher
education institutions
(HEIs) in the
Philippines.
3. What is IT Governance?
• the responsibility of the board of directors
and executive management.
• an integral part of enterprise governance
and consists of the leadership and
organizational structures and processes that
ensure that the organization’s IT sustains
and extends the organization’s strategies
and objectives
(IT Governance Institute (ITGI) Board briefing on IT Governance, 2nd Edition)
4. What is IT Governance?
• as specifying the decision rights
and accountability framework to
encourage desirable behavior in
the use of IT
Weill, P. and Woodham, R. (2002).
5. Overall Objectives of IT Governance
–to understand the issues and
the strategic importance of IT,
–to ensure that the
expectations for IT are met,
and IT risks are mitigated.
(IT Governance Institute (ITGI) Board briefing on IT Governance, 2nd Edition)
6. Purpose of IT governance
– to direct IT endeavors,
– to ensure that IT’s performance meets the
following objectives:
• IT is aligned with the enterprise to realize
the promised benefits.
• IT assets are used responsibly.
• IT-related – often cross-functional – risks
are managed appropriately.
(IT Governance Institute (ITGI) Board briefing on IT Governance, 2nd Edition)
13. Results of Good IT Governance
–IT projects that are aligned with
the business strategy
–IT projects that deliver the
required business value
–Alignment of IT and
organizational capabilities with
business strategy
Hendrickx, H. H.M. (2010)
14. Good IT Governance has five
characteristics:
1. Principles are explicit and derived from the IT
strategy.
2. The operating logic is explicitly shared
between stakeholders.
3. Structure, social processes, and control are
explicitly managed.
4. Sufficient attention to the social aspects of
governance9 is required; social processes are
the weakest link of governance.
5. Governance is differentiated by IT sub-
domains.
Hendrickx, H. H.M. (2010)
21. Challenges
1.Given ongoing fiscal challenges, CIOs must
focus on the wise stewardship and inclusion
of all available resources, the appropriate
restructuring of the IT organization, and the
rationalizing and right-sourcing of the IT
systems and service portfolio.
22. 2. IT organizations must use project
portfolio management to identify
critical projects, establish true
priorities, and ensure project
alignment with institutional missions.
Challenges
23. 3. CIOs must build and maintain strategic
partnerships, participate on key
executive and campus committees,
collaborate with peers across
institutions, and develop new
partnerships with state organizations.
Challenges
24. Critical Questions in IT Governance
1. With ongoing increased scrutiny of budgets and priorities, what reusable and
supportive frameworks can be developed with constituent groups and strategic
partners?
2. How can CIOs lead discussions about priorities using language and techniques
that are amenable to broad campus constituencies?
3. Are IT leaders seeking opportunities to understand quality, efficiency, and
effectiveness in a wide institutional context and determining how technology
might offer solutions?
4. How can IT leaders influence external controlling bodies, such as boards and
state-level governing agencies, about the importance of information technology
and the significance for teaching, learning, and operations?
5. How are IT leaders applying right-sourcing strategies and a rethinking of core
services in alignment with the institutional mission?
6. How are IT leaders thinking creatively about the "new normal"?
7. What strategies will CIOs use to lead their organizations in new directions?
25. • Level of prioritization IT Governance in
higher education institutions in the
Philippines
26. • Degree of implementation of IT
Governance in higher education
institutions in the Philippines?
27. • Test of relationship between degree of
implementation IT Governance in higher
education institutions in the Philippines
and:
Manager’s Level of Technical Skill
IT Manager’s Level of Human skill
IT Manager’s Level of Conceptual Skill
IT Manager’s Extent of Decision-making
28. IT Manager’s Gender
IT Manager’s Civil Status
IT Manager’s Highest Educational Attainment
IT Manager’s Working Status
IT Manager’s Teaching Status
• Test of relationship between degree of
implementation IT Governance in higher
education institutions in the Philippines
and:
29. –HEI’s Number of Years of Existence
–HEI’s Total Internet Bandwidth
• Test of relationship between degree of
implementation IT Governance in higher
education institutions in the Philippines
and:
30. • Test of differences between the level of
prioritization and degree of implementation of the
teaching and lIT Governance in higher education
institutions in the Philippines in terms of the:
• total number of years of existence of the HEIs;
• annual IT expenditures of the HEIs;
• total Internet bandwidth of the HEIs;
• level of proficiency of the respondent’s technical skills;
• rating of the respondents’ human skills;
• rating of the respondent’s conceptual skills; and
• extent of participation in decision-making of the
respondents.
31. • Descriptive (survey method)
• Questionnaire
• February 4 - April 30, 2011
• stratified sampling
• Heads in the management of IT (MIS)
• 95 HEIs
33. • refers to the level of importance or urgency of
IT governance in the higher education
institutions
5 – Essential
(Item needs to be done in the current year)
4 – High priority
(Item needs to be done in the next 3 years )
3 – Medium priority
(Item needs to be done in the next 6 years)
2 – Low priority
(Item needs to be done in the next 9 years)
1 – Not a priority
(Item is never been considered)
PRIORITIZATION
34. • refers to the degree of realization or execution of IT
Governance in the higher education institutions
5 – Very Highly Implemented
(Item is performed and done with careful review and
evaluation)
4 – Highly Implemented
(Item is performed but continuing and on-going)
3 – Moderately Implemented
(Item is in the strategic plan but no action yet)
2 – Fairly Implemented
(Item is discussed and considered for inclusion in the next
strategic plan)
1 – Not Implemented
(Item is never been considered)
IMPLEMENTATION
35. Prioritization and Implementation of IT Governance
Items
Level of Prioritization Degree of Implementation
Weighted
Mean
Description
Weighted
Mean
Description
1. IT governance
process should
have the
performance
measures and
other metrics
necessary to
make informed
decisions
3.76
High
Priority
2.87
Moderately
Implemented
36. Prioritization and Implementation of IT Governance
Items
Level of Prioritization Degree of Implementation
Weighted
Mean
Description
Weighted
Mean
Description
2. The current governance
structure, including
advisory committees,
should facilitate or
impede planning,
prioritizing, and
implementing IT
initiatives, sharing
expensive resources,
actions that could
improve campus IT
services
3.88
High
Priority
3.05
Moderately
Implemented
37. Prioritization and Implementation of IT Governance
Items
Level of Prioritization Degree of Implementation
Weighted
Mean
Description
Weighted
Mean
Description
3. IT governance
process should be
designed in a
coherent fashion and
not just simply an
accumulation of
inherited practices &
institutional
traditions
3.89
High
Priority
3.03
Moderately
Implemented
38. Prioritization and Implementation of IT Governance
Items
Level of Prioritization Degree of Implementation
Weighted
Mean
Description
Weighted
Mean
Description
4. The MIS should
have appropriate
advisory
committees, and
be constituted to
ensure broad
constituent input
3.91
High
Priority
2.98
Moderately
Implemented
39. Prioritization and Implementation of IT Governance
Items
Level of Prioritization Degree of Implementation
Weighted
Mean
Description
Weighted
Mean
Description
5. MIS leaders
for the future
should have a
leadership-
development
path for IT
leaders
3.98
High
Priority
3.08
Moderately
Implemented
40. Prioritization and Implementation of IT Governance
Items
Level of Prioritization Degree of Implementation
Weighted
Mean
Description
Weighted
Mean
Description
6. The MIS leader
should sit in an
administrative
post and
participate in
institutional
strategic
planning bodies
4.01
High
Priority
3.37
Moderately
Implemented
41. Prioritization and Implementation of IT Governance
Items
Level of Prioritization Degree of Implementation
Weighted
Mean
Description
Weighted
Mean
Description
7. The institution’s
executive team
should understand
that the role of an
MIS leader is not
about technology
itself but is about
the ability of a
campus to achieve
its goals and
objectives through
technology
4.02
High
Priority
3.27
Moderately
Implemented
42. Prioritization and Implementation of IT Governance
Items
Level of Prioritization Degree of Implementation
Weighted
Mean
Description
Weighted
Mean
Description
8. MIS leaders should
seek opportunities
to understand
quality, efficiency,
and effectiveness in
a wide institutional
context and
determine how
technology might
offer solutions
4.05
High
Priority
3.19
Moderately
Implemented
43. Prioritization and Implementation of IT Governance
Level of Prioritization Degree of Implementation
Weighted
Mean
Description
Weighted
Mean
Description
Aggregate Mean 3.94
High
Priority
3.11
Moderately
Implemented
45. Test of Differences
Variables Remarks
No. of years of existence, level of prioritization, and degree of
Implementation
Significant
No. of curricular offerings, level of prioritization, and degree of
Implementation
Significant
Annual IT Expenditures, level of prioritization, and degree of
Implementation
Significant
Total Internet Bandwidth, level of prioritization, and degree of
Implementation
Significant
Level of Proficiency of Technical Skills, level of prioritization, and
degree of Implementation
Significant
Rating of Human Skills, level of prioritization, and degree of
Implementation
Significant
Rating of Conceptual Skills, level of prioritization, and degree of
Implementation
Significant
Extent of Participation in Decision-making, level of prioritization,
and degree of Implementation
Significant
46. Test of Relationship
Factors
Chi
Square
Correlation p-value Remarks
IT Manager’s
Level of
Prioritization
83.185 0.670 0 Significant
Manager’s Level
of Technical
Skill
21.681 0.439 0.041 Significant
IT Manager’s
Level of
Conceptual
Skill
17.857 0.403 0.022 Significant
47. Test of Relationship
Factors Chi Square Correlation p-value Remarks
IT Manager’s Level of
Human skill
14.784 0.372 0.063 Not Significant
IT Manager’s Extent of
Decision-making
1.105 0.115 0.997 Not Significant
IT Manager’s Gender 2.164 0.154 0.706 Not Significant
IT Manager’s Civil Status 1.195 0.117 0.879 Not Significant
IT Manager’s Highest
Educational
Attainment
11.285 0.344 0.186 Not Significant
IT Manager’s Working
Status (fulltime or
part time)
6.565 0.263 0.161 Not Significant
IT Manager’s Teaching
Status (With teaching
load or w/o teaching
load)
4.957 0.231 0.292 Not Significant
HEI’s Number of Years of
Existence
17.119 0.396 0.645 Not Significant
HEI’s Total Internet
Bandwidth
14.847 0.448 0.25 Not Significant
48. • IT Governance in the HEIs is highly prioritized, implies
that IT Governance needs to be done in the next 3 years
• IT Governance in the HEIs is moderately implemented,
implies that this is already in the strategic plan but no
action yet
• There is a strong evidence that level of prioritization of IT
Governance is positively significant to degree of
implementation
• There is a moderate evidence that IT manager’s level of
technical skill and conceptual skill are positively related
to degree of implementation of IT governance in the
HEIs
• There is a suggestive evidence that IT manager’s level of
human skill is positively related to degree of
implementation of IT Governance in the HEIs
49. • There is no significant relationship between
degree of implementation of IT Governance in
HEIs and:
– IT Manager’s Extent of Decision-making ,
– IT Manager’s Gender,
– IT Manager’s Civil Status,
– IT Manager’s Highest Educational Attainment,
– IT Manager’s Working Status (fulltime or part-
time),
– IT Manager’s Teaching Status (With teaching load
or w/o teaching load),
– HEI’s Number of Years of Existence, and
– HEI’s Total Internet Bandwidth.
50. • to rethink IT governance in HEIs (but should be
infrequent) and adopt the process proposed by
Weill & Woodham
1. Map the “as is” IT governance
2. Identify the institutional objectives for the HEIs and the
associated desirable behaviors
3. Consider the way the typical MIS governs IT and how the top
performers on each financial metric are different
4. Redesign the institution’s IT governance
5. Identify the performance goals, metrics and accountabilities
required for the new governance models
6. Plan the move from the “as is” to the “to be” governance
mechanism recognizing the major organizational and cultural
changes involved
51. • to make the governance mechanism
transparent to all IT personnel
• to clearly design IT governance with the
desirable behaviors in mind
• to educate IT managers and users
understand and use the governance
• to make governance structures simple and
to optimize a small number of
performance goals and metrics
52. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
• HEIs through their School Heads, MIS Heads and
Directors,
• Philippine Society of IT Educators,
• Computing Society of the Philippines,
• Philippine e-Learning Society,
• Cebu Educational Foundation for Information
Technology, and the
• ICT Association in Dumaguete and Negros Oriental, for
sharing their database of members;
• Silliman University through the Faculty Development
Committee
53. (Main) References
• Hendrickx, H. H.M. (2010). Governance in it
and architecture. CTO CME Industry Unit,
Hewlett-Packard Expanding Concepts Of It
Governance Working Group
• Weill, p. and Woodham, R. (2002). Don’t just
lead, govern: Implementing effective it
governance. Center for information systems
research, Massachusetts Institute Of
Technology
