492-Article Text-2079-1-10-20230519
492-Article Text-2079-1-10-20230519
492-Article Text-2079-1-10-20230519
Abstract
1. INTRODUCTION
568
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Journal of Information Systems and Informatics
Vol. 5, No. 2, June 2023
These problems have posed obstacles to our company's IS/IT development and
have hindered our employees' work. Consequently, we have implemented
preventive and remedial measures, including staff training and system
improvements. Seeking an assessment of our corporate governance's ability to
manage IT resources, we aim to prevent similar issues in the future and ensure
efficient and effective utilization of our information technology. To achieve this,
we employ the COBIT-2019 framework, an international standard for IT
governance. We hope to see broader adoption of this framework in the
management field, as it serves as a tool and standard for determining the capability
level of IT resource management within our company [4].
2. METHODS
COBIT was developed based on two principles, namely principles that describe
the core requirements of a governance system for information and technology
companies and principles of a governance framework that can be used to build a
governance system for companies [10]. COBIT is a framework for enterprise
information and technology governance and management intended for the entire
enterprise [11]. Enterprise I&T means all the technology and information
processing that a company does to achieve its goals, regardless of where this
happens in the company [12]. In other words, enterprise I&T is not limited to the
IT department of a company but certainly includes it [13]. The COBIT framework
makes a clear distinction between governance and management. These two
disciplines cover different activities, require different corporate structures, and
serve different purposes. Governance ensures that [14]:
1. Stakeholder needs, conditions and options are evaluated to determine
balanced and agreed corporate goals.
2. Direction is set through prioritization and decision-making.
3. Performance and compliance are monitored against agreed directions and
objectives.
In Table 1, the results of alignment goals mapping are based on company goals,
namely AG12 and AG13. From COBIT-2019 and Enterprise Goals-Alignment
Goals, only those marked with the P (Primary key) symbol were selected, while
the S (Secondary key) symbol was not dominant, so they were not chosen.
Table 2 explains the enterprise goals used, namely EG01, and the alignment goals
used, namely AG13, regarding knowledge, skills, and initiatives for business
innovation. The selection of enterprise and alignment goals is based on the
company's goals as a service provider company aiming to improve the quality of
their services using the established goals.
In Table 3, the selection of the IT process is carried out due to the problems
experienced by companies regarding Human Resources, including a lack of
training in human resources and an attendance system that often encounters issues
when recording employee attendance. These problems can be addressed using the
COBIT-2019 framework, specifically the APO07 domain concerning Managed
Human Resources. The capability level will be measured using the APO07 domain
to enhance the system's effectiveness and resolve these issues.
Table 5 shows the capability level gap identified by the company. The target is set
at level 3, while the current position of the company is at level 2 with an average
score of 77.2%. The assessment criteria require an average score of > 80% for
each level to progress to the next level. Therefore, it can be concluded that the
company currently possesses a capability level of 2 and an average score of 77.2%
for level 3. As a result, it is unable to advance to the next level and remains at level
2.
3.6. Recommendations
The results of the distribution of audit documents were carried out and given to
the company in the form of a questionnaire. The audit documents were divided
into various subtypes, each with a questionnaire for each capability level. From the
questionnaire results, some of the problems that occur in the company can be
analyzed as follows.
1. Training is not carried out regularly so that the quality of employee skills
is not balanced between one another.
2. Too dependent on some IT staff who have more significant experience
and skills.
3. Documentation of system creation is often not carried out and is ignored
by IT Developers.
4. Knowledge management is not implemented within the company, so
new employees sometimes need help adapting.
From the findings and the impact, it has on the company, then some
recommendations for improvement can be given to help the company to fix the
problems they have. In Table 6, the recommendations given are as follows:
Based on the results of the capability level achieved, in order to help the
company, reach level 3 in the APO07 domain. In Table 7, the
recommendations given are as follows:
4. CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
G-Tech: Jurnal Teknologi Terapan, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 674–682, Mar. 2023, doi:
10.33379/gtech.v7i2.2393.
[13] A. Asmah and M. Kyobe, Towards an Integrative Theoretical Model For
Examining IT Governance Audits. 2018. doi: 10.1145/3209415.3209423.
[14] L. Englbrecht, S. Meier, and G. Pernul, “Towards a capability maturity
model for digital forensic readiness,” Wireless Networks, vol. 26, pp. 4895–
4907, Oct. 2020, doi: 10.1007/s11276-018-01920-5.
[15] Information Systems Audit and Control Association., COBIT 2019 Design
guide designing an information and technology governance solution.
[16] A. Levstek, T. Hovelja, and A. Pucihar, “IT Governance Mechanisms and
Contingency Factors: Towards an Adaptive IT Governance Model,”
Organizacija, vol. 51, pp. 286–310, Dec. 2018, doi: 10.2478/orga-2018-
0024.