ICT Management > Strategy & Planning, Managing ICT Projects

Seven Steps to a Decision on IT

By Lasa Information Systems Team

Making a decision can be difficult, especially in the complex area of ICT where many different answers may the right one. Working on these seven points can help you come to a decision which will be successful for your organisation.

1 Clarify Your Objectives

You need to know where your organisation is going, and what it is trying to achieve. You must be able to spell this out in plain English, not technical terms.

2 Work Out Key Criteria

These might be hard facts: financial limits or increased numbers of clients, for example. They may be questions: who will do the work? How will it affect our relationship with our clients? with our funders? with other agencies?

3 Draw Up a Shortlist of Possibilities

It is a mistake to focus on a specific product. Be prepared to think laterally and look at all the alternatives. You may need to seek advice on what's possible.

4 Analyse Costs, Benefits and Risks for Each Option

At this point you don't necessarily need detailed costings. Realistic estimates should be enough to allow a sensible decision to be made. The benefits and risks should be spelled out, even if they are hard to measure.

5 Consider Knock-on Effects

This is a good time to consult with those who might be affected: firstly to make sure you have taken into account their experience and insights into the wider impact of the proposed changes; secondly to help you take action to allay any fears or deal with problems before the plans get set too firmly.

6 Carry Out Technical Evaluation

You may need to take specialist advice at this point, both to make sure that you have asked the right technical questions, and to help you understand the answers.

7 Make a Decision at the Appropriate Level

The Management Committee should generally take the final decision on major developments, because they have responsibility for the well-being of the whole organisation. The implication, however, is that they must be given the full facts on which to base their decision, presented so that thay can truly understand the implications.

Case study on decision-making process

"We need a Web site - and quickly, or we'll be left behind!"

Many managers have heard this statement recently, either from staff or their Management Committee. How might you respond? This case study uses the decision-making process recommended on above to see how it might work when faced with a proposal such as a Web site.

The Westerly Advice Centre (WAC) is recognised as the leading tribunals and appeals agency in their area. A few other centres refer people directly to them, and several more phone them up from time to time for specialist advice, or to check particularly difficult cases. For some time there has been talk of setting up a support group, resourced by WAC, to put this relationship on a more formal basis. Now the suggestion has come up that, instead, they could set up a Web site. The manager decides to set up a small working party to sort out a proper response.

1. Clarify your objectives - for the organisation overall if it is a big review, or for this particular development if it is a smaller decision.

The working party first has to debate what WAC's objectives might be. Proposals include:

• To spread their expertise as widely as possible.
• To remain a recognised centre of excellence (and thus protect their funding).
• To raise funds by passing on their expertise and supporting other agencies for a fee.
• To reduce the burden of tribunal and appeal work by sharing it with other agencies.
• To give clients a greater choice of where they get support with tribunals and appeals.
• To raise their profile outside their immediate area.
• To promote their reputation as a go-ahead, innovative agency.
• To keep their staff at no more than the present level, since the office is already cramped.

From these, they decide that their most important objectives are to spread their expertise as widely as possible, and to share the burden of tribunal and appeal work with other agencies.

2. Work out the key criteria which will enable you to decide whether new computer systems, or changes to existing systems, would contribute to achieving those objectives

 

Having thought about their objectives, WAC decide that the main questions which will need answering are:

• will we be able to manage with our existing staff, or else raise the money to pay for extra staff time?
• how will we ensure that the other agencies keep as up to date as WAC?
• what sort of referral system will we need, to ensure that clients get allocated to the most appropriate agency?

3. Draw up a shortlist of possibilities worth further investigation.

The WAC shortlist includes:

• a Web site, where WAC would put up to date cases and guidance for agencies in the area
• regular traditional-style training courses provided by WAC for local agencies
• a tribunal and appeals worker support group, hosted by WAC
• an inter-agency referral procedure, supported by a computerised booking system.

4. Analyse the costs, benefits and risks for each option being investigated

When WAC looks at the possibilities, the working party does some detailed research. The main findings are:

• the Web site runs the risk of duplicating RightsNet, which is already well established, and it is not clear that they would have time to support it
• traditional courses seem to lose money, and take staff out of the office for whole days at a time
• the support group would be useful, but people are not often free to attend - what they really need is support as and when they need it
• the referral procedure is something that several agencies would support, and that the local authority would be interested in funding, as it would allay their fears about possible duplication of effort among the advice agencies
• leaving things as they are could have advantages - any new ideas would take a lot of effort to get off the ground.

As a result, the favourite options look like being the support group - if it can be run as a network, rather than through too-frequent meetings - and some kind of computer-supported referral system.

5. Consider any possible "knock?on" effects of the changes, positive or negative

WAC realises that they will have to look at their own staff's job descriptions and working practices if they decide to go ahead. The committee agrees to negotiate on these with the staff before a final decision to go ahead.

6. Carry out any technical evaluations necessary

WAC bring in a consultant, who suggests that an internet-based system might best meet their needs. If it was run as a Web site, there could be links to rightsnet, thus taking advantage of existing work. There could be locally written pages covering questions that had a more local application, and there could be links through to a computer-supported booking and referral system. This would cost several thousand pounds in all, but funding for a fair proportion of that is available. A specification is drawn up, so that tenders can be sought if the go-ahead is given. The other option considered in depth is to run a telephone-based support network and referral procedure. This is obviously much cheaper to set up, but would have heavy staff implications.

7. Make a final decision at the appropriate level

The working party recommends to the committee that the Web-based option should be pursued, but that in order to make it work, firm support must be obtained from the other advice agencies. The committee agrees to proceed on this basis.