Sources used in this document:

In contrast to the current Alcan application management, the model proposed by Robert Ouellette significantly reduces inefficiencies by reallocating leadership from the individual business groups to a centralized corporate group with a top-down model; i.e., governance and directives come from Ouellette and his IT team rather than the individual business group fiefdoms. The creation of a shared service centre was particularly wise. This centralized service reigned in the previous inefficiencies caused by billing and management of services, providing a common, shared service model across the business groups, facilitating the use of "shared competencies, consolidation, standardization, reuse and low-cost access to expertise" (Dube et al., 2009, Pt. B, p. 2). In addition, the newly structured IT management governance model is a good move because it permits a collaborative effort between the senior IT management personnel, who are concerned with global IT objectives, and the individual business groups' IT directors/VPs, who are concerned with the respective business groups' own business objectives and responsibilities. In other words, Ouellette's model removes the business groups' autonomy, which resulted in the inefficiencies discussed earlier, but at the same time provides a platform for each business to "take stock of current initiatives and better plan for future projects" (Dube et al., 2009, Pt. B, p. 5).

On the other hand, Ouellette's model is very aspirational, and does not account for real-world practicalities and problems, i.e., it focuses primarily on corporate efficiency. For instance, re-centralization of IT management facilitates, among other things, "provisions for global management of IT human resources" (Dube et al., 2009, Pt. B, p. 12). This recentralization of human resources, however, must take into account varied labor and employment laws, which it apparently does not. By having a centralized process, Alcan will be exposing itself to unforeseen litigation costs that could have (and in fact may have) been avoided by having localized oversight and compliance. Moreover, Ouellette's model imposes a significant amount of bureaucratic oversight. Although such oversight may facilitate the standardization of practices and norms, it may in fact impeded efficiency because of the red tape that IT must now navigate in servicing the business groups.

I agree with Ouellette's proposals, but believe they are overly aspirational. His plan addresses the inefficiencies caused by the unbridled discretion of the various business groups by mandating accountability through bureaucratic oversight. Such oversight, however, may in fact reduce efficiency, as it places more roadblocks for each business group's IT management to focus on the immediate needs and objectives of each of the groups. Moreover, Ouellette has not proposed any estimated costs for his migration of data and consolidation of information into two data centres. In fact, there is no explanation at all as to the exact costs of his overhaul. Ouellette's plan will ultimately be measured by the amount of costs he can save the company. Without any estimate of how much it will cost to implement his plan and to maintain the changes, it is difficult to measure whether his proposals are cost -- effective, let alone viable.