Alexander Wehrmann

Quantitatives IT-Portfoliomanagement

KernpunkteZentraler Bestandteil des IT-Business-Alignments ist das IT-Portfoliomanagement (ITPM), d. h. die auf ökonomischen Kriterien beruhende Auswahl von IT-Projekten und deren Allokation zu einem Portfolio. In diesem Beitrag wird ein Ansatz zum quantitativen ITPM vorgestellt und dessen Umsetzung am Beispiel einer realen Fallstudie expliziert.⊎ Im Ansatz wird der Fokus auf die integrierte Optimierung von Rendite und zeitpunktbezogenen Risiken sowie auf die Operationalisierbarkeit gelegt.Beide Punkte sind in bisherigen methodisch fundierten Verfahren nicht befriedigend berücksichtigt.⊎ Die Steuerung einzelner Geschäftseinheiten über dezentrale IT-Budgets ist ökonomisch nicht sinnvoll, weshalb ein übergreifendes ITPM notwendig ist.⊎ IT-Portfolios werden heute oftmals nur an Renditekennziffern gemessen. Dies ist zwar notwendig, aber nicht hinreichend. Vielmehr muss die Bewertung Risikoverbundeffekte gleichermaßen berücksichtigen, da heutzutage ca. 70% aller IT-Projekte durch Sachverhalte, die sich im Projektrisiko widerspiegeln, nicht planmäßig durchgeführt werden können.AbstractBased on previously released research this paper focuses on the question of how IT projects should be allocated to a risk/return balanced IT portfolio. Therefore we develop an approach that exploits the structure of IS Architectures and scenarios to identify project risks as well as dependencies between projects. As a result, different clusters of efficient portfolios with distinctive risk/return-properties can be derived. The presented approach is designed to support management decisions in a pragmatic manner when selecting IT portfolios. By using real data of a major German financial services provider we exemplify the implementation and the results of the presented approach.

Integrierte Ex-ante-Rendite-/Risikobewertung von IT-Investitionen

In enterprises decisions whether to undertake investments into IT projects or not have to be made regularly. Regarding the fact that two out of three IT projects fail or do not reach their expected value the need for an integrated valuation which addresses returns and connected risks is evident. The impact of development aspects (e.g. the process model used) and project size on the risk-return position of IT projects is demonstrated and it is shown how this can be taken into account when valuing, optimizing and selecting IT investments.

Ein COCOMO-basierter Ansatz zur Entscheidungsunterstützung beim Offshoring von Software-entwicklungsprojekten

KernpunkteDie Gesamtkosten eines Softwareprojektes können durch Auslagerung von Entwicklungsleistungen an einen Offshore-Drittanbieter erheblich reduziert werden. In diesem Beitrag wird gezeigt, wie sich die Kostenreduktionspotenziale verschiedener Sourcing-Alternativen objektivieren und quantifizieren lassen. Im vorgestellten Modell, das der Entscheidungsunterstützung dient, werden neben den erwarteten Kostenvorteilen auch die damit verbundenen Risiken berücksichtigt.Eine starke Fokussierung auf Lohnkostenunterschiede provoziert beim Offshoring von Softwareentwicklungsprojekten geradezu eine Fehleinschätzung der erwarteten Einsparungen.Die Höhe der erzielbaren Kostenreduktion ist insbesondere von den Produktanforderungen des Softwareprojektes und den damit verbundenen unternehmensspezifischen Merkmalen des Drittanbieters abhängig.Je höher die Unsicherheit hinsichtlich der konkreten Ausprägung dieser Attribute ist, desto geringer sind die zu erwartenden Einsparungen. Das heißt eine erhöhte Unsicherheit wirkt sich auf das Einsparungspotenzial stets negativ aus. Abweichungen in der Projektgröße hingegen spielen nur eine untergeordnete Rolle.AbstractA COCOMO-based Approach to Decision Support in Offshoring Software Development Projects In this paper we examine the evaluation of software development projects when several offshore service providers are involved. Therefore it supports the process of setting up a sourcing portfolio. The introduced decision support model is based on the well-known effort estimation approach COCOMO which supports the transfer into practice remarkably. Based on the costs of a proprietary development, the model describes to what extent the related development effort is affected by the sourcing decision. Additionally it quantifies the expected savings by considering the risk involved in the sourcing decision. As a result it can be stated that solely focusing on labour cost differences will usually lead to false decisions. Finally a detailed case study shows the practicability of the decision support model and illustrates its results.

Optimized Software Licensing – Combining License Types in a License Portfolio

Although software licenses usually range among the most expensive items within the IT budget, they still lack the necessary attention by many companies. Therefore, most companies inadequately have implemented their software asset management neglecting further potential for cost reduction, which can be obtained by optimizing the use of different license types. This paper shows how possible savings can be realized by combining different types of licenses in a license portfolio. The model presented is based on the most common license types considering different user groups as well as their behavior. Additionally to cost risks, the risk of service quality is also taken into consideration. The following examples illustrate the model’s high relevance and show how it can be applied in practice.

Are Requirements for Graduates of Master and PhD Programs in Business and Information Systems Engineering Changing

For the past 40 years, one of the hallmarks of the German academic education in Wirtschaftsinformatik (Business and Information Systems Engineering, BISE) has been the strong intake of university graduates by industry, regardless of reaching either diploma, master, or doctoral level. In the mid-1970s, the first BISE study programs were introduced at the Universities of Darmstadt, Linz, and Vienna as well as at the University of Applied Sciences Furtwangen, driven by a growing industry demand. Today more than 100 higher education institutions in Germany, Switzerland, and Austria offer BISE degrees – both on the bachelor and master level. Moreover, many PhD graduates from BISE doctoral programs pursue a professional career in industry instead of staying in academia. Consequently, balancing rigorous and relevant scientific education, a fruitful collaboration has been established in the last decades between industry and higher education institutions, both with study programs that fit the needs of the industry, and research collaborations that involve public-private partnership projects that enable an easier transition of PhD graduates into industry. However, in light of increasingly rapid innovation cycles in industry on the one hand, requiring market-driven technological research, and changing qualification schemes for academia on the other hand, requiring top quality IS publications, this balance is jeopardized. For earlier BISE PhD graduates, the question of aiming for an industrial or an academic career did not need an answer until the concrete application for a postdoctoral position. Today, with academic career paths being driven significantly by single academic papers, this decision needs to be made much earlier. Does this focus on publications weaken the historically strong collaboration between the industrial and the academic world in IS? Are there still concrete benefits of having a PhD degree when entering the industrial job market? Will it be possible to move between academia and industry (in both directions), even in later years, without giving up a career? In this discussion, we convey experiences of BISE researchers in their capacity as individuals who are involved in managing an international master program or being part of appointment committees, providing their views on the changing market environments and how they react to these. Furthermore, we invited experienced representatives from different industries to share their view on the ideal graduate of the future with us. The objective of the discussion is to contrast the inside-out view (academia) with an outside-in view (industry) and provide illustrations of the challenges that both will have to address in the future. We suggested the following guiding questions for creating the reflection statement: 1. For industry: What is currently the typical qualification profile of a master and/or PhD graduate that you are looking for? Moreover, if there is a gap between the profile looked for and the actual profile of the graduates, how do you cope with this situation? Furthermore, does the overall supply of graduates meet the demand for new hires? 2. For academia: What is currently the typical qualification profile of a master and/or PhD graduate that leaves your institution? How do you currently cope with the requirements for PhD graduates that want to stay in academia? What is your strategy of learning from industry to find out what they are looking for? 3. For industry: What are the expected changes – in terms of changing hard and soft skills – that you anticipate in the required profiles in the next five years? Do you expect that university graduates will have this profile? If not, how do you plan to react? 4. For academia: What are the expected changes – in terms of changing hard and soft skills – that you anticipate in the required profiles in the next five years ? How do you plan to cope with the changing requirements for PhD graduates that want to stay in academia? In your opinion, how should higher education in-