Overcoming ISP format limitations… Institutionalizing ‘ISMP’
Ministry of Economy and Finance Revised NIA Common Guide
Increase specificity to reflect scale and complexity
Aim to address development backlogs and overlapping investments
Possibility to choose the base
The ‘Information System Master Plan (ISMP)’ has been institutionalized.
The objective is to improve the use of information systems, avoid construction duplication and ensure the effectiveness of investments beyond the rigid format limits of the “Information Strategy Plan (ISP) “.
The Ministry of Economy and Finance and the National Information Society Agency (NIA) have distributed the “Common Guide for Establishing ISPs and ISMPs (6th Edition)”. It contains procedures and standards for relevant agencies to follow when establishing ISPs or ISMPs, based on the “Detailed Guidelines for Developing Budget Proposals and Preparing Funds Management Plans” of the Ministry of Economy and Finance.
The biggest difference between the “Common Guide for Establishing ISPs (5th Edition)” distributed last year is that the recently revised guide now includes ISMPs as well as ISPs. Accordingly, computerization companies must in principle establish an “ISP or ISMP” and request a budget. The common guide should be referred to when setting up an ISP and an ISMP.
ISPs and ISMPs are the same in that their objective is to achieve computerization by setting up an information system. However, while ISPs focus on designing a target model for requirements-based systems development within the organization, ISMPs differ in that they derive functional, technical, and not functional.
ISMPs are established when the understanding of the building system is high and the scale and complexity of the project can be accurately calculated. Unlike ISPs, which rewrite a request for proposal (RFP) after securing budgets, ISMPs aim to establish a specific business plan with the RFP.
Securing detailed tenders at the planning stage can reduce unreasonable job changes and overlapping investments due to identical function and system construction. It can also avoid delays in the analysis and design phases and reduce development schedules.
The common guide specifically specified considerations for each item of comparison and review between ISPs and ISMPs, basic composition of ISPs and ISMPs, and detailed implementation methods for each major activity. Organizations can select an ISP or ISMP after checking whether the system is new or rebuilt, and the level of readiness in advance.
An NIA official said, “ISMPs can design an information system with detailed functions for the specified system,” further adding, “You can choose between an ISP or an ISMP depending on the understanding of the system or readiness of each institution”.
In addition to the institutionalization of ISMPs, the “Common Guide to Establishing ISPs and ISMPs (6th Edition)” includes revisions such as receiving ISP and ISMP results throughout the year, excluding the establishment of ISPs and ISMPs for private investment software projects and prioritizing the introduction and conversion of digital services such as cloud computing.
In the past, ISP and ISMP results were received in the first semester (January to May) and the second semester (September to December). This has now been converted to a year-round application, so both ISP and ISMP times are secure enough.
Private investment type SW projects, in which the private sector invests more than 50% of the project budget and participates in it, allow the project to start requesting a budget without an ISP or ISMP. In the past, only businesses such as simple system development and simple purchase of goods could be exempted from ISPs. It is expected that the duration of the project will be shortened by one to two years, which will be an opportunity for private investment software companies to develop.
By Staff Reporter Ho-cheon Ahn [email protected]