Strong criticism of IT

Johan Magnusson believes that GUSPP is mostly about keeping costs down.

Scathing criticism of GUSPP

The GUSPP inhibits change and does not meet the needs of the organisation. These are some of the conclusions of the investigation that Johan Magnusson and Tomas Lindroth conducted into the University of Gothenburg’s governance model for university-wide systems, projects and processes. – Our verdict is scathing. But we also believe that the university director was brave enough to let a couple of critical researchers carry out the investigation, Johan Magnusson explains.

THE MODEL IS designed to ensure that the organisation has cost-effective access to basic IT, the analysts state in their report. – However, all forms of digital business development are being inhibited by the GUSPP. A public body that has a model that clearly contradicts the government’s goal that Sweden should become a world leader in digitalization is quite remarkable, says Johan Magnusson, Associate Professor at the Department of Applied Information Technology.

A fundamental problem is the organisation itself. The management of GUSPP consists of six senior managers within the Central Administration as well as a representative of the PIL unit. Neither the vice chancellor nor a pro vice-chancellor have been included, nor a representative of the organisation.

– AND THAT IS strange, considering that one of the goals of GUSPP is to operate in close collaboration with the organisation. Since the core business is not involved and therefore cannot influence the process, lecturers and researchers in some cases develop their own solutions, independent of the central projects.

The University of Gothenburg also does not have centrally adopted goals and a strategic direction when it comes to digitalization. This makes it difficult for GUSPP’s portfolio management to prioritize: the investments that are made entail including as many projects as possible within the budget.

There is also no financing model, which entails another difficulty in planning, both for the IT department and for the core business, Johan Magnusson explains.

– THE LACK OF strategies and a financing model sends the message that the goal is to take control of IT costs rather than drive business development. This is also illustrated by the fact that resource allocation for development has decreased from 20 to 15 percent since 2018. When the core business does not feel that it is receiving any central support, there is a risk of so-called shadow IT developing, i.e. the purchase, development and use of IT that is not centrally sanctioned.

With the increasing standardization of IT solutions, the distance between the IT unit and the organisation grows.

It is a sad development, because digitalization should not primarily support the Central Administration but instead develop the university’s research and education ...

JOHAN MAGNUSSON – USERS GET USED to not being involved in the digital business development and priorities are about keeping costs down. It is a sad development, because digitalization should not primarily support the Central Administration but instead develop the university’s research and education, says Johan Magnusson.

Between 2018 and 2020, the central costs for IT decreased by 22 percent per user. – As IT services become increasingly cheaper, it could be perceived as a natural development. But usage is increasing at a faster rate than the decrease in price, so costs should be going up instead. So what we are seeing instead is that a lot of IT is being financed out in the organisation instead of centrally. This bypasses portfolio management, which of course further diminishes the opportunities for control.

IF YOU ONLY look at digitalization as an IT issue, you will not succeed. To be successful, management must instead be involved, knowledgeable and prepared to invest resources, Johan Magnusson points out. – Just as managers gain further training in legislation, personnel issues and finance, it should be self-evident that they also receive training in digitalization. Management should also be more involved when it comes to developing different governance models that take into account the university’s unique circumstances.

Johan Magnusson believes that the results he and Tomas Lindroth have obtained are hardly surprising for the people who work within GUSPP. – The University of Gothenburg has extremely skilled employees who really want to do a good job, which makes it all the more lamentable that we have a model that does not take advantage of their knowledge and commitment.

THE INVESTIGATION also includes three scenarios for future management of IT and digitalization. The first scenario involves continuing in much the same way as now, while the second scenario involves limited investment in digitalization as business development. – One example of a solution that scenario two could support is Apademin, an app that Alexandra Weilenmann developed to help researchers build apps for data collection. As it is not centrally sanctioned, it is not used extensively, but it could easily have been included in the business development.

The third scenario is about creating a digitalization department with 15–20 research engineers. In this scenario, they work with orders but also with outreach activities, which aim to capture needs and opportunities, Johan Magnusson explains. – The new technology that is developed in this way could be made publicly available, not only for University of Gothenburg employees, but for everyone with similar needs throughout the country, perhaps even outside Sweden. This enables our researchers to gain access to the best solutions, while at the same time benefiting the entire country. Consequently, we will contribute to meeting the goal of digital development set by the government.

Eva Lundgren

FACTS

Portföljstyrning som magiskt

tänkande (Portfolio management as magical thinking) is an investigation into the suitability and efficacy of the governance model GUSPP (Management of the University of Gothenburg’s common systems, processes and projects), conducted by Johan Magnusson and Tomas Lindroth, researchers at the Department of Applied Information Technology, the research consortium Digital Förvaltning and the Swedish Center for Digital Innovation. Among other things, the report shows that portfolio management lacks strategy and suffers from a lack of representation, and thus stands in direct opposition to the goals the management model is striving to achieve. Portfolio management also suffers from significant monitoring costs, which contribute to low development efficiency and creates ambiguity about IT costs.

Valuable analysis for further diskussion

– The investigation is interesting and challenging, and it is particularly pertinent that it was conducted by the university’s own researchers. We were familiar with most of the existing governance model, but it is very important to have it analysed and structured, as in the report. The larger discussion about digitalization was a bit unexpected, but very valuable, explains University Director Anna Lindholm.

ANNA LINDHOLM BELIEVES that the GUSPP projects can be divided into a three-point scale: IT-driven projects, projects that can be IT-driven but which also have the potential for business development, as well as projects that contain what the analysts call digitalization and which are not IT-driven. – GUSPP is predominately in step one but also in step two, which entails great opportunities to develop the business. However, we need to be better at needs inventory, involvement, gaining support and buy-in, impact analyses and decision-making, among other things. The financial challenges have meant, just as the analysts have identified, that we have been too focused on cost control. What the analysts focus on is the digitalization of the business. The matter is formally outside the scope of the GUSPP, but it is of the utmost importance for the university, and how we plan to take care of it is something we have begun to discuss within the university management.

ANNA LINDHOLM POINTS OUT that digitalization issues are included in the University of Gothenburg’s strategies and in the university-wide business plan, but that it is still unclear how these will take shape. – The reason we have not yet made any decisions regarding the GUSPP is because we were waiting for Karin Röding’s investigation. At present, the Central Administration and the PIL unit work on the basis of the current assignments when it comes to developing and managing university-wide IT support systems, and staying within the framework of the established budget. In portfolio management, however, we have initiated a discussion about the proposals that aim to see how we can improve the governance model. If the assignment changes, the university will probably need to look at which model and which working method best benefit it. The Central Administration will be prepared to participate in this, and the investigation has interesting proposals in regard to this.