IT governance research suggests the existence of a gap between theoretical frameworks and practice. Although current ITG research is largely focused on hard governance (structure, processes), soft governance (behavior, collaboration) is equally important and might be crucial to close the gap. The goal of this study is to determine what IT governance maturity models are available and if there remains a mismatch. The authors conducted a systematic literature review to create an overview of available IT governance maturity models. The study shows five new IT governance maturity models were introduced. Only one of the new IT governance maturity models covers hard and soft IT governance in detail. This model and corresponding instrument was used to illustrate its usability in practice. The authors demonstrate that combining the instrument with structured interviews results in a usable instrument to determine an organization's current maturity level of hard and soft IT governance.

IT governance (ITG) has stayed a challenging matter for years. Research suggests the existence of a gap between theoretical frameworks and practice. Although current ITG research is largely focused on hard governance (structure, processes), soft governance (behavior, collaboration) is equally important and might be crucial to close the gap. The goal of this study is to evaluate the usability of a new ITG maturity instrument that covers hard and soft ITG in detail. We conducted ten case studies and evaluated the instrument positively on usability; but feedback also revealed that the assessment questions needed improvements. We demonstrate that combining the instrument with structured interviews results in an enhanced and usable instrument to determine an organization's current level of hard and soft ITG. We conclude that this new instrument demonstrates a way to reduce the mismatch between ITG maturity theory and practice.

IT governance (ITG) has stayed a challenging matter for years. Research suggests the existence of a gap between theoretical frameworks and practice. Although current ITG research is largely focused on hard governance (structure, processes), soft governance (behavior, collaboration) is equally important and might be crucial to close the gap. The goal of this study is to determine if there remains a mismatch and test the usability of a new ITG maturity model. We conducted a systematic literature review to create an overview of available ITG maturity models, used one of these in ten case studies and evaluated its usability. The study shows five new models were introduced, and only one of the new ITG maturity models covers hard and soft ITG in detail. This model and corresponding instrument was used to test its usability in practice. The instrument was evaluated positively on usability; but feedback also revealed that the assessment questions needed improvements. We demonstrate that combining the instrument with structured interviews results in an enhanced and usable instrument to determine an organization’s current level of hard and soft ITG. We conclude that this new instrument demonstrates a way to reduce the mismatch between ITG maturity theory and practice.

Earlier research showed firms with superior IT governance (ITG) have more than 20% higher profits than firms with poor governance given the same strategic objectives. This article forms part of an on-going independent research project on effectiveness and maturity of ITG. It is known that corporate governance (CG) and ITG are related. However, little is known on how this relation works. This relation can be described in several ways; for example, from a performance (added value) or a conformance (rules and regulation) perspective. Current governance research is largely focused on hard governance. Hard governance refers to elements like structures and processes. Soft governance is related to social aspects like human behavior and organizational culture. This study focuses on the relation between CG and ITG from a performance perspective and is based on a systematic literature review and a series of ten case studies. In the case studies an adjusted assessment instrument for hard and soft ITG was used. A systematic literature review was conducted to validate the relevance of the focus areas of this instrument for CG. The instrument used in the case studies was adjusted with a corporate perspective to be able to compare results from a corporate and a departmental (business and IT) perspective. Our research showed that an integrated approach for ITG and CG is needed, and what focus areas need attention in this relation. The value of this paper is twofold: It describes the basic outlines of the focus areas relating ITG and CG. Some of which are not yet getting a lot of attention in current research, especially continuous improvement and the informal organization. It lists the results from a series of ten cases studies, in which twelve focus areas have been discussed with sixty participants from a departmental (IT and business perspective) and a corporate perspective.

Current IT governance research is largely focused on hard governance. Soft governance needs more attention. The MIG model (Maturity IT governance) was designed because an IT governance maturity model covering both the hard and soft parts of governance did not exist. Using the MIG model, this paper describes the development of an instrument to measure hard and soft governance maturity: the MIG assessment instrument. It summarizes the operationalization of a maturity model for hard and soft IT Governance. The paper gives a detailed description of the result of the development of the MIG assessment instruments first cycle. A research contribution to the MIG model was a solution for the implementation of the focus area informal organization in the instrument. We found an easy and simple solution by using the nine focus areas of the maturity model as a framework for the informal organization. The instrument is intended to be used in combination with interviews. The instrument will be used, validated and improved in several cycles using the results from the case studies.

To advance in maturity, organizations should pay attention to both the hard and soft sides of IT governance (ITG).The hard side is related to processes and structure, the soft side to social aspects like behavior and organizational culture.This paper describes a study to develop an ITG maturity model (MM) that includes both.Our research method is based on literature study, the Delphi method and makes use of a Group Decision Support System.We chose to design a focus area MM.In this type of MM maturity is determined by a set of focus areas.The study reveals one MM as being appropriate for hard ITG.For soft ITG we found no single model appropriate.Soft governance needs more specific capabilities defined for each focus area individually.Based on knowledge from literature and experts we selected models for each focus area.Three alternatives for informal organization need further research.

To be able to advance in maturity, organizations should pay attention to both the hard and soft aspects of governance. Current literature on IT governance (ITG) is mostly directed at the hard part of governance, focusing on structures and processes. The soft part of governance is related to social aspects like human behavior and organizational culture. This part of governance receives much less attention in the literature. The goal of the study is to design a model which covers hard and soft governance and can be used as a basis for a maturity model (MM). We adopted a research method based on a combination of design science and a Delphi study using the Spilter Group Decision Support System. In this paper we build upon a systematic literature study we conducted. In this study we did not find a MM for ITG that covers the hard and soft part of governance. We thus designed a new maturity ITG (MIG) model using knowledge from literature and experts. As the first step we designed an initial model using literature. This initial model was discussed and improved with experts from practice during a Delphi study with four rounds. The result was a MM with four domains and a context of the organization. The four domains are 'Collaboration', 'Structure', 'Process' and 'Behavior'. Within each domain focus areas were defined based on knowledge from literature and experts. The focus areas 'Culture' and 'Internal organization' from the initial model were moved to the context component because they could be seen as value free. They belong in the situational part of the MM and not in the maturity grid. The contributions of this paper are twofold: n1) a description of the focus areas of the MIG model, i.e. an ITG MM which covers both hard and soft governance: this is of value because such a model for ITG does not exist and is needed in practice; 2) a description of the design process of the MM: this is of value because the procedures and methods that led to current MMs have only been documented very sketchily or implicitly.

Despite all efforts in the last decennium, IT governance continues to be a "top 10" issue for CIO’s. The goal of our research program is to determine which disciplines and frameworks are used for IT governance and which streams in IT governance literature do best align with current practices. This study describes the results of a literature review and Delphi study of IT governance effectiveness and maturity and assesses the (mis)match between IT governance theory and practice. The Delphi study was conducted with a group of 14 CIO’s of mid-sized and larger organizations. Based on the literature review and Delphi study, results show that six IT governance streams can be distinguished. We conclude that these six streams are an effective way to study the variety of IT governance practices. The study further concludes that there still exists a mismatch between IT governance theory and practice.