This diagram details the decision-making authority and hierarchy of IT Governance at ECU and how the input is received. For example, changes in needs and technologies many times originate from stakeholders. The decisions on how to adapt to those needs and changes is either resolved in the day-to-day IT operational process or through the IT governance structure. Decisions of varying scope and impact can be made by the IRCC, IRCC subcommittees, or the Technology Steering Committee (meets as needed). Distributed IT, campus representatives, deans and directors, and the Faculty Senate have representatives on the IRCC. At times, decisions are presented to other executive committees such as the Academic and Executive council and/or the Board of Trustees.
The ECU community and other stakeholders communicate technology changes and IT needs to:
The committees above then communicate with the IRCC and the Technology Steering Committee, if required, and may be vetted by the Faculty Senate or Distance Education and Learning Technology Committee.
Occasionally, the Academic Council, Executive Council and the Board of Trustees may be part of the decisions-making process.
This diagram demonstrates how feedback occurs from the ECU community and stakeholders into the ITCS main functional areas. For example, IT Security has many customers; however, they primarily interface with the representatives from the attorney, risk management and auditor's office. Any issues that cannot be handled operationally flow to the CIO, IRCC and/or the Technology Steering Committee. These issues involve policy, new decisions, strategic investments and technology changes. Conversely, feedback from the faculty senate and other representatives can flow from ITCS or directly to any of the IT Committees.The ECU Community and other stakeholders can include:
Feedback from these groups goes to the appropriate ITCS area. These areas include:
Issues not handled operationally flow to the Chief Information Officer, IRCC or Technology Steering Committee.