A framework for resource allocation and benefit tracking for software
development using SCRUM
Martin Hulsman(Maastricht University, October 2014)
This paper is a case study that describes the approach to resource allocation and benefit tracking of
IT-enabled innovation for the case of bol.com, a Dutch e-commerce company, which uses SCRUM as
a methodology for software development. After documenting the bol.com approach based on
process documents, interviews and participative experience, we use COBIT 5 as a frame of reference
to assess to what extent the bol.com approach qualifies as good practice.
This topic presents an important challenge for bol.com: While IT-enabled innovation has a central
position, there is a clear need for increased control. Although the use of SCRUM has many benefits, it
leads to a number of innovation governance challenges: Business budgeting needs plans upfront
even if solution development does not, cost-benefit analyses are required for capacity (and hence
capital) allocation, and ex-post financial evaluation is required for continuous improvement to capital
budgeting. Researching solutions to this challenge is relevant for the business executive, for the
Controller, and for the IT professional.
The bol.com approach to resource allocation and benefit tracking was developed iteratively and from
a practitioner’s perspective. We have described its structures, processes and relational mechanisms.
We establish that this approach was influenced by SCRUM, but not equally in all areas: Development
team structure and estimation logic are SCRUM characteristics with strongest influence.
To this description, we apply the COBIT 5 enabling processes as a frame of reference. We establish
that, although some criticism of COBIT 5 exists, it is nonetheless a useful framework for this case
study. A small selection of relevant COBIT 5 enablers for resource allocation and benefit tracking
follows from understanding of relevant IT-related goals. We audit the bol.com approach by mapping
it to activities in the relevant COBIT 5 processes. Then, we assess compliance by evaluating if the
activity is performed systematically. This audit establishes that for activities in scope, the bol.com
approach is compliant with 58%, partly compliant with 37% of activities. We propose potential
remedies for each of the partly and non-compliant activities, which can be summarized in 8
adjustments to bol.com approach. With remedies applied, the bol.com approach counts as a good
practice control framework.
From conducting this audit, we can reflect on COBIT 5. COBIT 5 proves to be a useful framework for
evaluating this IT governance framework. However, COBIT 5 is quite big. Application of COBIT 5
enabling processes requires thoughtful interpretation. Also, COBIT 5 does not specify a balance
between level of control and required administration.
We conclude that the bol.com approach to resource allocation and benefit tracking in the context of
SCRUM is a good practice control framework if remedies are applied. We recommend bol.com to
implement a subset of the identified remedy groups. We observe that COBIT 5 is a useful framework,
but should be used thoughtfully and not without moderation. The bol.com case proves that a control
framework in line with COBIT 5 good practice can be developed for the context of SCRUM.