An international energy group faced continuous growth in IT and technical infrastructure spending, driven by digital transformation and increased cybersecurity needs.

Shared costs were allocated to business units using manual allocation methods, lacking transparency and clear governance. The Finance and IT departments lacked visibility into the actual distribution of IT costs, and their ability to prioritize investments was limited.

Before implementing any tools, a thorough review of management strategies and the structuring of IT cost governance were essential.

‍

The major challenge was transparency in IT cost allocation: how to move from an opaque distribution of shared costs, a source of tension between the IT department and business units, to a transparent allocation model enabling informed decisions on technology investments?

Without visibility into the actual allocation of IT costs, business units contested chargebacks, the IT department struggled to justify its budgets, and investment decisions were made without reliable cost-benefit analyses.

The objective was to build a system that would:

• allocate IT costs by business unit, by project, and by type of expenditure using transparent criteria,

• automate allocations according to validated and documented rules,

• inform investment decisions through a comprehensive cost analysis per service provided.

‍

The project began amidst tensions between the IT department and business units, the latter contesting the recharged amounts without receiving a detailed explanation. We acted as a mediator, working with both parties to define allocation rules accepted by all.

Our intervention focused on:

• detailed mapping of IT costs (run, build, projects) and defining allocation keys reflecting each business unit's actual service consumption;

• building an IT service catalog with transparent unit costs, enabling business units to understand what they are "buying" from the IT department;

• implementing IT investment governance with an arbitration process involving business units in prioritization decisions.

Tensions have significantly decreased, as each party now has factual information to discuss costs and priorities.

‍