A human-oriented framework for IT value creation
Think about IT value.
In my work as business technologist, I am often intrigued by the difficulties we have to create value-adding information systems. Functional and non-functional requirements, UX, speed, accessibility, mobile, security, ... you know them by heart but can you prioritize them, from an end-user point of view?
What if we would have a well-thought value model or framework that would help us to understand what ‘Value’ is on that operational information system level? Imagine the applications there are for this. If we understand what a user values in a computer system and in what sequence different values come in to play (eg. functionality before reliability before speed) we would have the tools and insights to control and ultimately improve IT value creation on the ‘coal-face’ level.
Such an ‘IT Value Hierarchy’ could be used to improve the way we build user satisfaction questionnaires, how we perform operational assessments, we could extend the user satisfaction area of balanced scorecards and, applied in a more active manner, we could help to set out the priority of requirements during system development and IT realisations in a more rationalized manner.
In 2014 I researched this area as part of a master thesis project and as I think that the results are interesting, I now share them with you.
‘Value’ is an interesting but complex concept.
So, what is value? From an economical viewpoint, ‘value’ is related to tangible and intangible benefits derived from a certain investment. Return on investment, increase of revenue, lowering costs, higher efficiency and effectivity are the keywords here.
In human psychology, ‘value’ is linked to the perception of, again, benefits, but more related to intangible aspects. Safety, happiness, love, belonging, esteem, self-actualisation are some of the key building blocks of ‘value’, seen from a human psychology perspective.
As value as such is already quite a complex concept to grasp, to understand and to manage, ‘IT value creation’ is even a more confusing concept.
What is IT value? And how to achieve it?
In today’s business world, where technology is interconnected and interwoven with running an enterprise, the IT value question is a very important one and becoming even more important. Ensuring value creation through IT investments is on top of mind of leadership. During the last years, the knowledge related to this concept has been maturing exponentially, through means of academic research, professionalization of practices and the exploration of related interest areas.
Through this work some clear constructs and insights have been developed in order to mature the academic and professional practices that are related to IT value creation. One of the most important learnings is that good enterprise governance of IT will lead to improved business-IT alignment, which will lead to better opportunities for IT value creation (read more here).
During the years, this construct has been enriched with many methods, models, better practices and ‘tools’ that make the theory executable and make it ready for the next level of exploration, by both the academic as by the business world. The work done in this area enables us to achieve better realisation of value through IT investments.
Also from a purely operational perspective many organisations struggle with IT value on the coal-face level with questions such as:
- What is important to a human when they use an information system? Functionality above usability? Security about portability? ...
- How to prioritize requirements when developing software products? What kind of requirement to deliver in what sequence?
The real problem is not whether machines think but whether men do.
B.F. Skinner
Holistic and strategic measurement of value
There are concepts that can help to measure, balance and realize IT value creation in alignment with strategic business objectives, such as the IT Balanced Scorecard or the possibility to derive IT goals from Enterprise goals through concepts delivered by ISACA.
This is still on the level of the strategic enterprise, it is quite holistic and it strives for ‘tangible’ measurements. This is useful, for strategic and high-level usage but the end-user may not be forgotten.
What is the worth of KPIs proven a well-aligned Business-IT strategy but with unsatisfied end-users? What’s happening on the ‘coal-face’ level and how to deal with it? Don’t forget that one of the biggest challenges with IT is not so much the implementation and making the ‘bits and bites work’, but it is also about actual user adoption, accepting the changes caused by IT investments and to make the systems really ‘work’ - supporting the end users in their work.
What is value creation according to end-users and is there a hierarchy (or ‘sequence’) of the value criteria? Are there, like in human psychology, so-called ‘satisfiers and dis-satisfiers’?
I have chosen a different angle to the matter, by trying to blend in value measurement elements and proxies from social science and psychology with a factual set of ‘value criteria’ taken from the ISO institute.
Based on the criteria of ISO/IEC 25010:2011, I have asked a Delphi user group (as part of a master thesis research in 2014) to select the relevant criteria, label them as ‘satisfiers, dis-satisfiers or delighters’ (Herzberg) and to create an order as to realize a ‘hierarchy of IT value criteria’ from a ‘coal-face’ level perspective (Maslow).
The result is a light-weight array of described and classified criteria which gives insight in what end users see as ‘value’ delivered by IT systems and in what order values should be delivered. The model can be used to render user satisfaction questionnaires or other instruments in order to measure ‘business value’ creation by the use of IT systems (from an end-user perspective).
Selecting a set for IT value attributes using ISO/IEC 25010:2011 (Value Criteria)
To measure the quality of computer systems, applications and components the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) has developed a commonly accepted set of criteria, ISO/IEC 25010:2011. I have used this ISO model as value criteria during the Delphi research. The Delphi’s are asked whether a certain ISO criterion is relevant or not. Only relevant criteria are used during the next steps of the research.
About Delphi-research approach
The Delphi method (/ˈdɛlfaɪ/ del-fy) is a structured communication technique, originally developed as a systematic, interactive forecasting method which relies on a panel of experts. The experts answer questionnaires in two or more rounds. After each round, a facilitator provides an anonymous summary of the experts’ forecasts from the previous round. Thus, experts are encouraged to revise their earlier answers in light of the replies of other members of their panel. It is believed that during this process the range of the answers will decrease and the group will converge towards the "correct" answer. Finally, the process is stopped after a pre-defined stop criterion (e.g. number of rounds, achievement of consensus, stability of results) and the mean or median scores of the final rounds determine the results.
The concept of satisfiers, dis-satisfiers & delighters applied (Herzberg) (Classification of the value criteria)
As per Herzberg, we use the concept of satisfiers, dissatisfiers and delighters in the second step of the Delphi research. The Delphi’s are asked to classify the value criteria (the relevant ones, taken from the ISO set) as a satisfier, a dissatisfier or as a delighter. A criterion can only be part of a distinct classification type, and can never belong to more than one of the classification types. The outcome of this part of the Delphi research is a classification of the (relevant) value criteria:
- Dissatisfiers: (IT) Value criteria that are expected ‘out of the box’ by a user. These are intrinsic hygiene factors. When these value criteria are not fulfilled, the user will be unsatisfied. When fulfilled, it will not lead to satisfaction by default.
- Satisfiers: (IT) value criteria that give satisfaction when fulfilled. When not fulfilled, it will not lead per se to an unsatisfied user. These are also called ‘motivators’.
- Delighters: (IT) value criteria that lead to a surplus of satisfaction when fulfilled but which are unexpected / unrequired by the user and not even latently present as value criteria.
The Value Hierarchy Model applied (Sequencing the value criteria)
As per Maslow, we follow the theory that there is a sequencing in satisfaction and value criteria. A user cannot move forward to a desire to fulfill the next level of satisfaction unless the preceding level has been fulfilled.
An IT value hierarchy
The research was done with a Delphi group consisting of twenty ‘subject matter experts’. All of them are persons that make intensive use of IT computer systems in the context of performing their professional activities.
The Delphi research had three ‘rounds’ based on distinct questions sets:
- Question Set 1: Testing the relevance of the IT Value Attributes from ISO
- Question Set 2: Classification in to satisfiers, dissatisfiers & delighters of the relevant value attributes + feedback of question set 1 results to Delphi group and consensus making on question set 1.
- Question Set 3: Making the sequence of the value criteria as per the Maslow-based hierarchical model + feedback question set 2 result to Delphi group and consensus making on question set 2.
Visualized through a pyramid (like the Maslow-style of presenting the value criteria), the following model is the outcome of the research:
Interpretation of the model
Reading from the bottom to the top of the pyramid, following the arrows that define the reading direction, you go through a sorted, prioritized array of IT value criteria. The Delphis that have anticipated in the research have defined these criteria through a first prioritization round, then a classification round (assigning the classifications ‘dissatisfier’, ‘satisfier’ and ‘delighter’ to each of the value criteria which have been taken from the ISO ISO/IEC 25010:2011 scale) and lastly a sorting round, building the end result as shown above.
This model states that each of the preceding value criteria ideally should have been fulfilled before being able to enter in to the next value criterion. This follows the logic of Maslow. A value is a dis-satisfier, a satisfier or a delighter. A dis-satisfier is an intrinsic hygiene factor: when not fulfilled it renders the user to be unsatisfied. When fulfilled it will not per se make the user happy. Dis-satisfiers build the bottom of the hierarchy. A satisfier (or motivator) will deliver satisfaction when fulfilled but will not per se make a user unhappy when not realized. Satisfiers make up the middle part and top area of the hierarchy. A delighter is an unexpected / unrequired ‘feature’ and when fulfilled it will realize a surplus of satisfaction. Delighters form the top of the hierarchy. This classification is line with the theory of Herzberg.
This model clearly stipulates that the hierarchy starts with the dis-satisfiers functionality, performance and usability. Efficiency (dis-satisfier), maintainability (satisfier) and security (delighter) build the middle of the hierarchy and portability, freedom from risk and context coverage (the degree to which a system can be used with effectiveness, efficiency, freedom from risk and satisfaction in specified contexts of use and in contexts beyond those initially explicitly identified) are the delighters that form the top of the value pyramid.
Some thoughts
From a practical perspective, having this model on hand, some ‘mysteries’ become more clear. Why are mainframe systems still so much in use and are difficult to replace? Mainframe systems clearly fall in the below part of the value hierarchy. They are functional (although through a command-line UI), they are performant and usable (they don’t offer state of the art GUIs but they can be controlled in a manner that is very easy once you have learned the function keys and control features). However, they are also difficult to extend and to change, but these aspects are seen as satisfiers according to the model. They are for sure not portable and will not supply and functionalities outside of its context but these are delighter and are in the top of the value chain.
It seems that according to this model, building new systems that are fully covering IT this value hierarchy seems to be a very daunting and difficult task. Striving for an optimal coverage of the value hierarchy when executing IT projects will result in improved user satisfaction.
Passive applications of the model
- To use as a basis for the creation of user satisfaction questionnaires and –surveys. This model offers a research-based set of value criteria (classified and sequenced) which can be used to build a complete survey, or as a set of classified criteria (dissatisfiers, satisfiers, delighters) to measure IT value ‘maturity’. This is following the theory that satisfiers only can be achieved after ‘all’ dissatisfiers are in place. The same goes for delighters, after satisfiers.
- The model could serve as a ‘plug in’ for an assessment model in the user satisfaction area of the IT BSC.
Active applications of the model
- When developing IT systems, the model can be used to prioritize the features that are build. Following the model, priority should be given to features that enable dissatisfier-type value criteria first, then to satisfiers and ultimately, to delighters.
- More specifically, the model offers a rationale that can be used for ‘agile’ approaches, as it can help in prioritizing sprints.
If you have questions or if you want to obtain a copy of the full study, let me know.
