Once defined, a governance model will deliver the control, alignment, accountability, transparency and compliance results desired by organization leaders.

1. • Cognizant 20-20 Insights
Governance Model: Defined
Executive Summary program managers representing perspectives
from North America, the UK, continental Europe,
A CIO may command universal agreement on the
India and Asia Pacific were identified. All the
need for a strong governance model, but among
program managers were from the senior levels
program managers, there is little shared ground
of their organizations, with an average of 20
on just what a governance model is. It is not that
years of IT experience. They were given a simple
the intent of a governance model is elusive. On
exercise: Write down in two to three sentences
the contrary, there is industry-wide consensus
your response to the question, “What is your
that a governance model enables an organization
definition of a governance model?” A sampling of
to achieve a desired, and potentially mission-crit-
the responses follows:
ical, objective.
This white paper explores pragmatic thinking on • “Program governance is a structured, tempo-
rary set of processes, escalation/communica-
the components of a governance model. Once
tion and organization structures that steer and
defined, the governance model will deliver the
guide the program during its lifecycle while
control, alignment, accountability, transparency
reaching the agreed end state.”
and compliance results desired by organization
leaders. • “Software project governance is the art of
using processes across the project to assure
Impact of Governance Model Ambiguity that a finished quality project gets delivered
With industry watch groups citing success rates on-time and on-budget.”
in the 30% or lower range for IT projects,1 the
downside of ambiguity in the definition of a
• “Program governance is a working set of
processes and management structures that
governance model is undeniable. allow key decisions to be made during the
lifecycle of the program to ensure that the
It may be true that a lack of executive support
benefits and outcomes of the program are
or waning user involvement both undermine
achievable.”
great initiatives. Yet the absence of a well-defined
governance model that harnesses executive Vendors contribute to the lack of consensus
mindshare and user enthusiasm may be a more among program managers with their eagerness
unifying observation. to insert a branded point of view on governance
into the marketplace, along with their products,
To establish a baseline on the divergent views held certifications and training programs.
by professionals on the definition of a governance
model, we conducted a simple survey. A group of It need not be so complicated.
cognizant 20-20 insights | october 2011

2. Consider the basic governing needs of any Governance Model Overview
endeavor. Regardless of size, scope or complexity,
all endeavors require that decisions be made,
things be done and people interact with other
Decisioning
people. Whether it’s “arrange surprise party Structures
for spouse” or “implement SAP across the
enterprise,” the effort requires the orchestra-
tion of decision-making supported by a set of
recognized protocols so individuals can anticipate
one another’s actions, enabled by some type of COGNIZANT
Governance Model
collaboration mechanism. For Success
Components of a Governance Model Collaboration Operating
In its most elementary form, then, a governance Enablers Processes
model is the coordinated interaction of three
components:
• Decisioning structures
Figure 1
• Operating procedures
• Collaboration enablers
The Potential for Good or Chaos
Decisioning Structures There is good and bad news regarding ever-
expanding distributed decision-making. The good
Experience has shown that decisioning structures
news is that the distance between decisioning
are frequently, if not solely, defined by organi-
need and disposition narrows, progress-to-plan
zation charts. Three-tier governance models
is maintained, and costs are optimized. The bad
depicting descending authoritative control — from
news is that utter chaos could be just one invisible
steering committee to program management
decision away.
office to project workstreams — provide excellent
clarity in the hierarchical flow of control. The Pre-defined roles and responsibility matrices
big, macro decisions are precisely allocated to extend the clarity of governance model organi-
executives, stakeholders and zation charts by providing more precision in the
other decision-makers listed
Pre-defined roles on the organization chart. allocation of decisions to authorized staff. The
real world, however, is filled with an enormity of
and responsibility unknowns that challenge even the most thought-
The issue with casting the
matrices extend the decisioning component of
ful RACI (responsible, accountable, consulted,
clarity of governance the governance model solely
informed) chart.
model organization on an organization model is How can governance model decisioning structures
that most decisioning takes
charts by providing place not at the macro level,
adaptively manage in our reliably unpredictable
world?
more precision in the but at the micro level.
allocation of decisions It is the accumulated impact
The Leadership Culture
to authorized staff. of small micro decisions,
To preserve the good and keep the bad at bay,
governance model decisioning structures need
made by team members
the crisp lines of authority derived from organi-
laboring toward their individual targets, that
zation and RACI charts, supplemented by a more
maintains an initiative’s momentum. The daily
amorphous authority derived from a leadership
grind of declaring an issue closed, deciding
culture — a leadership culture that rewards,
if a risk is worth mitigating or tuning a design
supports and encourages decision makers, yet
change is performed by a myriad of invisible
holds them to the same absolute accountability
players on the organization chart. More signifi-
as organization chart decision makers.
cantly, as team sizes expand and co-location
diminishes, the decisioning prerogative becomes Defining a leadership culture can be as problem-
more widely distributed. atic as defining a governance model. We believe
cognizant 20-20 insights 2

3. that culture is defined by the rules and lessons There simply is no pre-set collection of processes
deemed valuable enough to be passed down from with a single-size-fits-all profile.
generation to generation. Projects assume their
own cultures, adopting rules and lessons that An argument can be advanced that there is, at
drive behavior. least, an essential set of required processes. A
project with defined start/end dates commis-
Some elements of a leadership culture can sioned to deliver a specific product requires a
be engineered through the following types of minimal set of processes, such as:
measures:
• Have a plan to achieve results
• Recruit leaders with savvy instincts committed (plan management).
to leadership mentoring and training.
• Work with other teams
• Require frequent communications. (interdependency management).
• Understand team dynamics by employing • Remove obstacles that impede progress to
group dynamics models, such as the Tuckman the plan (issue management).
Model of Group Development (e.g., forming,
storming, norming, performing) or Cog’s • Avoid risks (risk management).
Ladder (e.g., the polite, why we’re here, power, • Manage scope boundaries
cooperation and esprit stages). (scope management).
• Set clear behavior expectations, evaluate, • Communicate to stakeholders
improve and move forward. (communication management).
Yet despite all the psychology of building a Legitimate arguments could be made equally well
leadership culture, success comes down to the for an alternate list of processes. The first step in
following: Creating an environment where people determining which processes
feel good about rolling up their sleeves and just are required is developing It is advisable to
doing the right thing. an astute understanding of
the behaviors that will best
consider industry
Operating Procedures support your initiative in processes as baseline
“What’s the process for that?” Every program achieving its goal. definitions that can
manager has heard this question, most likely
multiple times. The adoption of regularized expec- With the end in mind, process- be re-tuned and
tations defining how things are done is elementary es can be selected from the mixed-and-matched to
rich pool of industry thought
to converting random work efforts into collective
leaders. Purists may demand,
meet your initiative’s
results. Nearly 90% of the program managers
who responded to the challenge of defining a “PMI or the highway.” It is particular needs.
governance model included processes as a model advisable, however, to con-
component. sider industry processes as baseline definitions
that can be re-tuned and mixed-and-matched to
Several entities provide a wide selection of meet your initiative’s particular needs.
thoughtful process models and protocol defini-
tions, including the Project Management Insti- Process Relevance
tute (PMI), Projects In Controlled Environments People gravitate toward what works and shun
(PRINCE2), Control Objectives for Information what is perceived as bureaucratic overhead.
and Related Technology (COBIT), Information When process compliance atrophies, then the
Technology Infrastructure Library (ITIL) and overall effectiveness of the governance model is
others. Navigating this sea of processes is its own proportionally diminished. Unfortunately, process
challenge. abandonment is not an “if” but a “when” event.
Which Processes are Best? Two factors drive diminishing process relevance.
Ferreting out the best processes for a particular The first is the nature of a process. Process
endeavor is not made any easier by experts and efficiency is based on a prescriptive definition
advisors touting their collection of processes as of data, authorization and event sequencing. A
world-class or best-of-breed. The answer to what by-product of any repeated activity is an inventory
is really world-class or best-of-breed is an unfor- of process improvements. Periodically refreshing
tunate and very unsatisfying “that depends.” processes demonstrates the governance model’s
cognizant 20-20 insights 3

4. responsive agility to adapt to changing business minimal chance of success, a governance model
needs and user preferences. must have capabilities equal to the challenge of
receiving, aggregating, preserving and throttling
The second factor driving diminished process these vast volumes of data. More importantly, the
relevance occurs as initiatives move through their real value of the governance model collaboration
phase lifecycle. For example, early in a project’s component is providing people a mechanism to
lifecycle, plan management and interdependency share, in real-time, their insights and observa-
management significantly tions. It is the cumulative impact of real-time
Given that today’s consume a project’s pro- shared insights and observations that transforms
work world is flooded cess focus. These processes
become less relevant as the
random, raw data into valuable information.
with unregulated flows project transitions to opera- Globalized, Virtualized World
of fast-moving data, tional mode. In that phase, Clearly, grand endeavors have succeeded long
a governance model process level management,
service
relevance shifts to before vast volumes of data flowed over cloud-
enabled information portals and social collabo-
lacking a collaboration incident and other service ration platforms accessible via mobile devices.
enabler component is support procedures. Egyptian pharaohs, after all, built pyramids using
disconcerting. The takeaway is to conduct —
clay tablets.
well in advance of a project The world today is, of course, quite different. The
lifecycle phase change — a process review to irony is that we have not only been enabled by
validate process relevancy for the upcoming this infinitely connected world, but we have also
project phase. been transformed by it. The workforce today is
global. The workplace is increasingly a transient,
Collaboration Enablers virtualized environment, where an office can be
When engaging in discussions on governance defined by nothing more than a patch of ground
model definition, the mention of collaboration with reliable mobile device reception. Given
enablers as a model component typically solicits ubiquitous access to an abundance of informa-
the response, “Hmm,” followed by silence. Even tion, governance model design may have some
allowing for liberal interpretation, fewer than clay feet to shed.
30% of the program manager respondents in our
informal survey mentioned collaboration tools in At the Speed of Data
their governance model definition (see Figure 2). Consider the consequences of a two-legged
governance model attempting to manage data
Given that today’s work world is flooded
that arrives quickly, frequently and with content
with unregulated flows of fast-moving data,
value that diminishes over shorter and shorter
a governance model lacking a collaboration
time spans.
enabler component is disconcerting. For decision
makers and operating processes to have even a
Governance Model Survey Results
100%
Respondents were asked
80% 88% 88% which components were
included in their governance
60% model definition.
40%
20% 29%
18%
0%
Decisioning Operating Collaboration Other
Structures Procedures Enablers
Source: Cognizant survey of program managers
Figure 2
cognizant 20-20 insights 4

5. When rescuing struggling projects, the issue repeat it.” But having an institutional memory
management process is a high-priority review that preserves not only the decisioning data but
target. Issue management is the operating also the thought process revealing why a decision
procedure designed to remove obstacles impeding was made may well be the slim edge a project
progress to plan — a result highly desired by any needs in order to hit its aggressive deadlines.
struggling effort. Issue data also have the arrival
In our highly time-pressur-
speed and accelerated perishable date character-
ized, time-is-money world,
Absent a collaboration
istics noted earlier.
a three-legged governance enabler to capture
Not surprisingly, projects in duress typically model that integrates deci- and knit disparate
have two elements of the governance model in sion makers and operating
place. Decisioning structures are adequately procedures with high-value
issue data together,
defined, and operating procedures have adoption information will deliver the decision makers and
rates within acceptable norms. However, almost control, alignment, account- the issue process are
without fail, the diagnostic review reveals that ability, transparency and com-
the underlying collaboration tool for issues pliance results desired by all.
victims rather than
management is an Excel-based issue registry masters of their data.
and a storm of e-mails flooding the in-boxes of The Exercise – Redux
decision makers. Absent a collaboration enabler Let’s return to the exercise and write down in two
to capture and knit disparate issue data together, to three sentences a response to the question,
decision makers and the issue process are victims “What is your definition of a governance
rather than masters of their data. model?”
Institutional Memory “A governance model is the interaction of three
The response to, “Why did we make that decision?” components: decisioning structures providing
should not be, “We don’t know — the manager who management control at macro and micro levels;
made that decision left the project.” The response operating procedures converting random work
should have an auditable timeline that is accom- efforts into collective results; and collaboration
panied by the data and attachments generated enablers managing information flowing in an
from decision inception to decision disposition. ever-expanding, globalized and virtualized work
world.”
It may be trite to cite the old adage, “Those who
cannot remember the past are condemned to Your CIO will welcome your clarity.
Foonote
1
“Chaos Manifesto 2011,” The Standish Group, March 2011.
About the Author
Jay Kiskel is Cognizant’s Program Management Practice Lead for the Nordics. The author of PMI/
ITIL-based delivery practices, he has honed his hands-on techniques over a 30-year IT career delivering
large, global, multi-million dollar business/IT transformation initiatives in the financial services, consumer
goods, manufacturing and telecommunication sectors. Jay is well-traveled in global markets, including
a two-year assignment in Bangalore, India, and has worked on engagements in Moscow, Hong Kong and
Shanghai. He received his bachelor’s degree in Applied Mathematics from Rutgers University. He can be
reached at Jay.Kiskel@Cognizant.com.
cognizant 20-20 insights 5

6. About Cognizant
Cognizant (NASDAQ: CTSH) is a leading provider of information technology, consulting, and business process out-
sourcing services, dedicated to helping the world’s leading companies build stronger businesses. Headquartered in
Teaneck, New Jersey (U.S.), Cognizant combines a passion for client satisfaction, technology innovation, deep industry
and business process expertise, and a global, collaborative workforce that embodies the future of work. With over 50
delivery centers worldwide and approximately 118,000 employees as of June 30, 2011, Cognizant is a member of the
NASDAQ-100, the S&P 500, the Forbes Global 2000, and the Fortune 500 and is ranked among the top performing and
fastest growing companies in the world. Visit us online at www.cognizant.com or follow us on Twitter: Cognizant.
World Headquarters European Headquarters India Operations Headquarters
500 Frank W. Burr Blvd. 1 Kingdom Street #5/535, Old Mahabalipuram Road
Teaneck, NJ 07666 USA Paddington Central Okkiyam Pettai, Thoraipakkam
Phone: +1 201 801 0233 London W2 6BD Chennai, 600 096 India
Fax: +1 201 801 0243 Phone: +44 (0) 20 7297 7600 Phone: +91 (0) 44 4209 6000
Toll Free: +1 888 937 3277 Fax: +44 (0) 20 7121 0102 Fax: +91 (0) 44 4209 6060
Email: inquiry@cognizant.com Email: infouk@cognizant.com Email: inquiryindia@cognizant.com
© Copyright 2011, Cognizant. All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted in any form or by any
means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the express written permission from Cognizant. The information contained herein is
subject to change without notice. All other trademarks mentioned herein are the property of their respective owners.