Put IT value on trial: Evidence first, theatre last

We convene the boardroom court: IT value is on trial; the accused is narrative − stories offered instead of evidence. The charge: theatre masquerading as business outcomes.

Every year, boards approve millions in IT investment. usually with a toolset name attached. Yet the promised business value remains elusive. Too often, tools come first and value is justified later. Dashboards glow; business outcomes stay flat. Enough. Put IT value on trial: evidence first, theatre last.

This isn’t about new dashboards − it’s about discipline. Every IT ask must start with a business result, not a technology. Value must be testable, anchored to outcomes like EBITDA or churn, and investment should follow proof, not promises. That’s where value architecting comes in: a repeatable process forcing boards and CEOs to govern IT value by evidence, not enthusiasm. Here’s the prosecution playbook.

Boards and CEOs need discipline to govern IT value. Start with strategy, then move to testable propositions, gather evidence and make decisions. Define the business outcome first − technology comes later. Value architecting targets specific value nodes, using solid evidence in short cycles.

Step one: Aim at one business result not a tool
Input: A 12-month slice of the three- to five-year strategy.
Action: Choose the strategic pillar and the exact value node to move (revenue, margin, churn, cost-to-serve, cycle time, etc).
Output: One board-level target outcome.
Artefact: A concise strategy brief.

Step two: Map value nodes and set guardrails
Input: The named business outcome.
Action: For each node, record KPI, owner, baseline, target and timeframe. Tie these to risk appetite, thresholds and decision rights.
Output: A governable value map with boundaries.
Artefact: Value map + decision-rights register.

Step three: Frame the hypothesis and the decision rule
Input: Value map and guardrails.
Action: Write a testable statement: “If we do X, then Y (node) moves by Z within T.” Specify the proof method (A/B, matched before–after, stepped rollout). Set the decision rule: scale if inside appetite; pause or kill if not.
Output: A decision-ready hypothesis.
Artefact: Hypothesis card (method + decision rule).

Step four: Expose assumptions and design the evidence plan
Input: Hypothesis card.
Action: List dependencies − adoption, behaviour, scale, data quality, integration. Turn each into a test with an owner, a ≤90-day window, sample and success criteria; assign an evidence ID.
Output: A 90-day evidence plan that can fail fast or earn scale.
Artefact: 90-day plan entry (owner • window • method • evidence ID)

Step five: Run the quarterly cadence and make the call
Input: 90-day plan entries in flight.
Action: Execute. At quarter close, record the decision (fund, kill, scale, pause) and reassign capacity per the rule; refresh priorities by risk-adjusted value.
Output: A portfolio of bets with named owners, tests and public decisions.
Artefacts: Decision and assumption ledger (the call, assumptions proved/disproved, capacity moved). Board/CEO scorecard with targeted aggregated value outcomes and proven versus assumed split.

Aggregated value outcomes can track progress across initiatives, but they often lack the clarity and accountability boards need for decisive governance. But aggregated outcomes can mask real impact. Boards need one clear signal: is IT delivering measurable value?

This is where value architecting comes in: a repeatable process forcing boards and CEOs to govern IT value by evidence, not enthusiasm.

The Value Realisation Index (VRI) provides this, using only decision-grade evidence − proof of movement on key value nodes, with clear causality and timeframes. IT investments are judged on results, not theatre.

As boards and CEOs demand greater accountability from IT investments, clarity becomes paramount. The VRI distils complex data into a single, actionable score − the boardroom’s standard of proof.

Only evidence of causal impact on targeted outcomes, within agreed timeframes, is admitted. VRI only admits what the board can act on; these five dimensions convert activity into decision-grade evidence:

Strategic alignment (15%): Are IT investments directly mapped to core business drivers − like EBITDA and key levers for growth?

Value-tree strength (15%): Are you tackling the material nodes that move the needle − margin, churn, cost-to-serve, cycle time − across the enterprise?

Assumption discipline (20%): Are the most critical assumptions being owned and tested within 90 days, rather than left to chance?

Evidence quality (25%): Is there decision-grade proof that outcomes are being achieved, with clear methods and timed KPI shifts?

Risk-adjusted outcomes (25%): Are you seeing real uplift, with confidence, across the portfolio − not just activity, but impact?

Each quarter, the VRI gives you a single score and a simple band:

Green: IT is delivering value.

Amber: Progress, but with caution − dig deeper.

Red: Value is not being realised − act now.

If the VRI is improving while customer or P&L outcomes are flat, that’s a red flag −evidence quality must be challenged until the link is proven.

Importantly, the VRI is fully traceable and aligned to King IV principles, ensuring IT value measurement supports sound governance, transparency and accountability at board level.

VRI represents the value of IT to your business − not as maths, but as accountability: every investment justified by real, measurable impact.

Discipline and measurement need action. A simple, repeatable cadence keeps the board and CEO focused on evidence − not theatre. Each quarter is the court calendar − scorecard, 90-day plan, ledger − where motions are heard and the record is set in daylight. This rhythm drives accountability and keeps value at the centre of every decision.

Board/CEO scorecard: The VRI (0–100) with its band and quarter-on-quarter trend; the top value drivers with their baseline → target → delta; and a clear proven vs assumed split.

90-day plan: Every HOLD or weak spot becomes a named test, with an owner, timeframe and method (A/B, before–after, stepped rollout).

Decision and assumption ledger: Every fund, kill, scale, or pause decision is recorded, along with the assumptions tested − each tied back to the VRI components. Spend is traceable to evidence.

The cadence is simple: Scorecard → 90-day plan → ledger → repeat. The CEO opens; the board holds the line on evidence.

At every meeting, hold three rules at the table:

Specificity: Which value node are we moving, and what is the baseline → target → delta this quarter?

Evidence: What proof method did we agree, who owns it, and when does the evidence ID land on the scorecard?

Assumptions: Which adoption, behaviour, or scale assumptions could break the case, and where are their ≤90-day tests in the plan?

Everything else is theatre. With the calendar set, the CEO’s questions determine what scales, what stops and what is tested next.

What is the value of IT to your business − today? Measure it via the VRI: give the number, name which VRI component is dragging, and state what you will do next quarter to improve that score.

Which assumptions could invalidate or erode value in your largest in-flight initiative? Name the value node and the baseline → target → delta. List the top three assumptions that could break the case and the falsification tests you’ll run in ≤90 days.

Which platform or tool storyline is blinding you to outcomes? Identify the one platform you’re most excited about, the node and KPI it claims to move, and the causal proof required before further funding. Back-filled value doesn’t count.

Bottom line: Evidence first, theatre last. Define the business outcome, agree how you’ll measure it − the VRI with board-agreed weightings − and declare the proof method. Then run the one-page cadence so investment follows proof and IT value becomes unavoidable. Because in the end, what gets measured gets moved − and what gets proven, gets funded. In the boardroom’s court, it’s always the strength of evidence − not theatre − that wins the case.