The Evolution of Alignment in Information Systems Planning

In our recent information systems class, we delved into the evolving concept of alignment within the field of information systems (IS) planning. The discussion began with the recognition that information resources comprise not just information technology (IT) but also the information itself. This broader perspective means that alignment isn’t solely about technology; it’s about both technology and information working in tandem to support and enhance organizational objectives.

Traditionally, alignment focused on ensuring that management information systems (MIS) were in sync with the organization’s goals. However, this view expanded to encompass the entire spectrum of information resources—both IT and information—leading to a more holistic approach. This expansion is encapsulated in the SPIRE model, which stands for Strategic Planning for Information Resources. SPIRE broadens the concept of alignment by emphasizing that both IT and information strategies should be aligned with the organization’s overall strategy.

In addition to SPIRE, we explored the concept of Information Resource Assessment (IRA). While SPIRE focuses on aligning information resources with organizational strategy, IRA takes it a step further by recognizing that information resources can actually influence and reshape organizational strategy. This means that IT and information aren’t just passive tools but active elements that can drive strategic change within an organization.

This shift in understanding aligns with the historical evolution of technology’s role in organizations. In the 1980s and 1990s, the term “strategic information systems” emerged, highlighting how companies began leveraging technology to gain competitive advantages. For instance, American Hospital Supply revolutionized the industry by providing terminals to hospitals, allowing them to order supplies directly. This not only streamlined the ordering process but also created strong linkages and switching costs, effectively influencing the company’s strategy through technology.

In this context, alignment wasn’t just about ensuring systems supported the organization’s existing goals; it was about recognizing that technology could actively shape and redefine those goals. This led to a cyclical model where strategic planning for information resources and information resource assessment continuously influenced each other—a dynamic interplay between aligning with the organization’s strategy and using technology to transform it.

The concept of alignment continued to evolve, eventually encompassing four distinct types:

1. Alignment between Organizational Strategy and IS Strategy: Ensuring that the IS strategy supports and enhances the organization’s overall objectives.
2. Alignment between Organizational Strategy and Process Architecture: Aligning organizational processes with strategic goals so that operations effectively support what the organization aims to achieve.
3. Alignment between IS Strategy and Information Architecture: Making sure that the IS strategy is supported by a robust information architecture that facilitates necessary information flows.
4. Alignment between Process Architecture and Information Architecture: Ensuring that business processes and information systems work seamlessly together, so that the information required by processes is readily available and accurate.

This expanded view of alignment recognizes that it’s not just about matching IT systems with organizational goals but about a comprehensive integration of strategy, processes, and information across the entire organization.

In modern organizations, this complex alignment is often facilitated by Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems. ERP systems integrate various business processes and information flows into a unified system. For example, when an order is placed, the ERP system automatically updates inventory levels, adjusts accounts receivable, and initiates fulfillment processes. This seamless integration ensures that processes and information architectures are aligned, supporting the organization’s strategic objectives in real time.

As we move into the current era, the concept of alignment has further evolved into what we now refer to as convergence. In today’s digital landscape, we talk about digital strategy, which posits that digital strategy is inherently business strategy. Digital technologies are so deeply embedded in all aspects of a business that separating business strategy from IT strategy—and then trying to align them—no longer makes sense. In this environment, traditional notions of alignment are challenged because digital technologies aren’t just tools used by the business; they are integral components of the business itself.

Despite this recognition, there’s still much debate and research underway to clearly define what digital strategy truly means. Scholars are exploring how digital strategy replaces or modifies traditional concepts of alignment. Questions arise about whether alignment is still a relevant concept in a digital environment or if we need entirely new models to understand how strategy is formulated in this context.

This journey—from initial capacity planning, through bottom-up planning and architectural planning, to strategy set transformation, and onto strategic planning for information resources and information resource assessment—illustrates the evolution of thinking in the IS field. Each stage represents a shift in how organizations perceive and leverage technology and information, moving from support functions to strategic assets capable of transforming the business.

Within this evolutionary framework, it’s important to contextualize key contributions to the field, such as King’s paper. Before King’s work, the focus was primarily on aligning IT systems with existing organizational strategies, with technology seen as a support function. King’s paper introduced the idea that IT could not only support but also influence and shape organizational strategy. This was a significant shift, acknowledging that information resources could be leveraged to create competitive advantages and drive strategic change.

After King’s contribution, the field continued to evolve, embracing the idea that technology and information could actively transform organizations. This led to the development of more comprehensive alignment models and, eventually, to the current focus on digital strategy and convergence.

As students and future professionals in the field, it’s crucial to understand these developments and their interconnectedness. Each concept and model builds upon the previous ones, contributing to a richer understanding of how technology and information shape organizational strategies. If there are aspects of these theories or their implications that are unclear, it’s important to engage in discussions to deepen our comprehension and appreciate their significance in the ever-evolving landscape of information systems.