Organizational Feasibility

The final technique used for feasibility analysis is to assess the organizational feasibility of
the system, how well the system ultimately will be accepted by its users and incorporated
into the ongoing operations of the organization. There are many organizational factors that
can have an impact on the project, and seasoned developers know that organizational
feasibility
can be the most difficult feasibility dimension to assess. In essence, an organizational
feasibility analysis attempts to answer the question: If we build it, will they come!"
#ne way to assess the organizational feasibility of the project is to understand how well
the goals of the project align with business objectives. Strategic alignment is the fit between
the project and business strategy$the greater the alignment, the less risky the project will
be from an organizational feasibility perspective. %or e&ample, if the 'arketing (epartment
has decided to become more customer focused, then a )*' project that produces
integrated customer information would have strong strategic alignment with 'arketing+s
goal.'any IT projects fail when the IT department initiates them because there is little or
no alignment with business unit or organizational strategies.
, second way to assess organizational feasibility is to conduct a stakeholder analysis.- ,
stakeholder is a person, group, or organization that can affect .or will be affected by/ a new
system. In general, the most important stakeholders in the introduction of a new system are
the project champion, system users, and organizational management .see %igure 0122/, but
systems sometimes affect other stakeholders as well. %or e&ample, the I3 department can
be a
stakeholder of a system because I3 jobs or roles may be changed significantly after its
implementation.
#ne key stakeholder outside of the champion, users, and management in
'icrosoft+s project that embedded Internet 4&plorer as a standard part of 5indows was the
6.3. (epartment of 7ustice.
The champion is a high1level non1I3 e&ecutive who is usually but not always the person
who created the system request. The champion supports the project by providing time,
resources .e.g., money/, and political support within the organization by communicating the
importance of the system to other organizational decision makers.'ore than one champion
is preferable because if the champion leaves the organization, the support could leave as
well.
5hile champions provide day1to1day support for the system, organizational management
also needs to support the project. 3uch management support conveys to the rest of
the organization the belief that the system will make a valuable contribution and that
necessary
resources will be made available. Ideally, management should encourage people in
the organization to use the system and to accept the many changes that the system will
likely create.