Testing the Organisational Will to Deliver Real ITAM Change
Driving meaningful IT Asset Management (ITAM) change requires more than just adopting recommendations; it demands a strong organizational commitment, strategic alignment, and a clear focus on overcoming potential stumbling blocks. Many organizations face common challenges that can slow down or derail ITAM efforts, even when the intent to improve is present. By understanding and addressing these challenges, businesses can pave the way for long-term success in their ITAM journey.
Here are several non-negotiable checks every organization must consider:
There are several common stumbling blocks that organizations face when trying to adopt good IT Asset Management (ITAM) process recommendations:
1. Executive Support and Buy-in is absent or vague = lack of funding and visibility
A significant red flag is when executive support is either absent or vague. This can lead to a lack of funding and visibility for ITAM initiatives. In organizations where asset management isn’t prioritized, ITAM recommendations may struggle to gain traction and eventually fall by the wayside.
2. Lack of a centralised SAM vision and Strategy
A critical success factor for ITAM is a centralized Software Asset Management (SAM) vision that has been endorsed by all stakeholders, particularly divisional decision-makers in large, multinational organizations. Without this unified approach, silos can hinder effective implementation.
3. Lack of quantifying the financial burden of being reactive
Many ITAM recommendations rely on accurate data to make informed decisions. Quantifying the financial impact of reactive processes—such as the cost of scrambling to respond to multiple audits—can often justify the investment in a structured and well-managed SAM program.
4. Lack of buy-in from cross-functional allies in Infosec and GRC
ITAM should not operate in a silo. Without collaboration from cross-functional allies, particularly in Information Security (Infosec) and Governance, Risk, and Compliance (GRC), ITAM programs may miss opportunities for broader organizational alignment. As discussed in the post SAM in the Age of AI the visibility provided by SAM tools can be invaluable to these departments.
Secondary Factors to Consider
1. Selecting the “wrong” SAM Tool
While tools are essential for streamlining ITAM processes, selecting a solution that is either too complex or poorly integrated with existing systems can overwhelm teams. It’s important to match the tool’s complexity and capabilities to the organization’s maturity level, ensuring that it enhances, rather than hinders, efficiency.
2. Skills Gap
Effective ITAM requires specialized knowledge across multiple disciplines, including SAM, ITAM, and FinOps. Many organizations underestimate the depth of expertise required and face challenges in upskilling their internal teams. Outsourcing certain specialized functions to external experts can be a cost-effective and practical solution.
3. Short-Term Focus
ITAM is often viewed as a cost-cutting initiative, leading organizations to prioritize short-term savings over long-term process improvements. While short-term gains may be appealing, a strategic, long-term focus is essential to creating sustainable ITAM improvements that will provide continued value.
To ensure that your organization is prepared for real ITAM change, it’s important to address these challenges head-on. By gaining executive buy-in, developing a clear SAM strategy, and investing in the right tools and skills, your organization can move from reactive to proactive ITAM management—delivering both immediate and lasting benefits.
Recent Posts:
Why User Engagement, Training, and Awareness are Key in Choosing the Right SaaS Management Solution
