Using and validating the strategic alignment model avison
This is called an attempt to transform the concept of alignment into a practical method, incorporating both management and design components.This model can help in understanding the complex world of business and IT, and more specific, to understand the role of informationmanagement.
One definition on these two types of organizational alignment – vertical and horizontal – is found in [Kathuria et al, 2007].The extra column is introduced to split the use of information from the technology side.In later work Maes extended this model to a so-called Unified Framework [Maes et al, 2000].According to a recent publication of Abcouwer and Goense, this model is often used in a different and wrong way. This model enables discussions on the topic of business and IT alignment, but it doesn’t provide information on how organisations can actually improve the way they cooperate. W., Maes, R., Truijens, J.: The Strategic Alignment Model (SAM) of Henderson and Venkatraman  is widely used as the base of Business/IT Alignment theories.The key message of this model, as well as that of many other studies, is that to become a successfull company, one should make sure that the IT strategy is fully aligned with business strategy.Good alignment alone is not enough, and even worse, can distract the IT department from a high IT performance. Another interesting view can be found in the work of Hinssen [Hinssen, 2009].
He sees Alignment as a model to optimize existing relationships, but it will not help in establishing an optimal relationship between business and IT.
Posted: December 21, 2010 in Alignment, Alignment model, Horizontal Alignment, Operational Alignment, Strategic Alignment, Tactical Alignment, Vertical Alignment Tags: Alignment, Business/IT alignment, It projects, Operational alignment, Strategic management, Tactical alignment Alignment is expected to improve business performance, by aligning Business and IT Strategy. According to Boar [1994, in Grant, 2003], effective alignment is predicated on the combination of prescient planning and the effective execution of those plans.
The execution of a strategy is almost always realized via the tactical and operational levels of an organization.
Horizontal alignment is primarily driven by cooperation between Business and IT on integrating the strategy, on developing and agreeing on performance measures and on sharing responsibilities.
Benbya and Mc Kelvey came up with a model which highlights the relevance of analysing the relationship between Business and IT (Horizontal Alignment) but also the need to reconcile the views at different levels of analysis (Vertical Alignment). Further, they redefine alignment as follows: “Alignment is a continous coevulutionary process that reconciles top-down ‘rational designs’ and bottom-up ‘emergent processes’ of consiously and coherently interrelating all components of Business/IS relationships at three levels of analysis (strategic, operational and individual) in order to contribute to an organisation’s performance over time”. Coevolutionary IS Alignment [Benbya and Mc Kelvey, 2006] Gutierrez et al  confirm the need for expanding research to the tactical and operational level.
They extended the original SAM model with an extra row and an extra column.