Kestrel Assurance: when the corporate strategy and the IT plan tell different stories
Kestrel Assurance is a Nigerian life insurer with 610,000 policyholders and ₦38bn annual premium income. Its 2025–2027 corporate strategy commits to moving retail business from 18% to 34% of gross written premium, mainly through an agent-assisted digital channel. The IT strategic plan, approved two years earlier, still centres on replacing the ageing data centre. Current indicators: 64% of the ₦2.1bn IT budget is absorbed by run-and-maintain contracts; the CIO reports to the CFO and is not on the executive committee; the IT steering committee has met twice in twelve months and its decisions are not minuted; marketing has procured 11 SaaS tools outside IT review, including a customer analytics platform holding policyholder data; agents need three days to produce a quote because pricing runs on an overnight batch; and the project portfolio contains 27 initiatives, 19 of which were never business-cased. The board asks why digital growth is behind plan.
1. Identify the alignment failures in this scenario and explain how each contributes to the digital growth shortfall. Recommend three governance changes, specifying the membership and decision rights needed to make each effective.
Read the worked answer
Diagnosis - trace each symptom to a strategic consequence
- Planning horizon mismatch: the IT plan predates the retail strategy, so capital is committed to a data-centre replacement that does not move quotes or agent productivity. Alignment fails at the point of investment, not at the point of delivery.
- Reporting line and status: a CIO reporting to the CFO and outside the executive committee frames technology as a cost to be controlled rather than a capability to be exploited. Business leaders therefore never own digital outcomes.
- Weak portfolio governance: 27 initiatives with 19 un-costed business cases means funding is allocated by advocacy, not value. Shadow spend (11 SaaS tools) confirms the formal process has lost credibility.
- Architecture and process constraint: overnight batch pricing makes a three-day quote structurally unavoidable; no amount of marketing spend fixes it.
- Accountability gap: no minuted decisions means no consequences and no learning.
Three governance changes
- A board-level Digital and Technology Committee, chaired by a non-executive director with technology or digital experience, meeting quarterly. Decision rights: approval of the IT strategy and transformation budget, oversight of top five technology risks, escalation of portfolio exceptions. The CIO attends as an invitee.
- An executive Technology and Change Committee chaired by the CEO, with CFO, COO, retail director, CIO and CRO. Decision rights: approve any initiative above a stated threshold (say ₦25m), enforce architecture standards, and veto non-compliant procurement. Monthly and minuted.
- A portfolio and architecture review gate, owned by the CIO under the committee's authority: every initiative carries a business case, a named business sponsor and a value metric before funding.
Without decision rights and membership at the right level, each of these becomes another meeting that nobody attends.
2. The CFO proposes cutting the IT budget by 15% to fund a retail advertising campaign. Evaluate this proposal and recommend an alternative basis for prioritising the portfolio.
Read the worked answer
Evaluate the arithmetic first
A 15% cut is about ₦315m. Roughly ₦1.34bn of the budget is contractual run-and-maintain cost, so the cut cannot fall there without breaching contracts or degrading service. It will therefore fall on discretionary change - precisely the capability the retail strategy depends on. The proposal transfers money from the constraint to the promotion of a product the organisation cannot currently quote quickly. Advertising a three-day quote process would raise acquisition cost and damage the brand.
A better basis for prioritisation
Segment the application and initiative portfolio rather than cutting across the board:
- Strategic: quoting and pricing re-platform, agent digital tooling - protect and accelerate.
- Factory: policy administration, finance - run efficiently, consolidate.
- Niche: retain only where a clear differentiator exists.
- Eliminate: duplicate or unowned tools, including the 11 shadow SaaS applications.
Score each initiative on value (premium growth, retention, cost, risk reduction) against risk and dependency, with the business sponsor accountable for the value case. Ring-fence a transformation budget so run costs cannot silently consume it, and apply stage gates so funding is released in tranches against evidence.
The CFO's objective - funding growth - is legitimate. The mechanism should be reallocation from low-value run and duplicate spend, not a flat percentage cut that damages delivery capability.
3. Draft the key messages the CIO should present to the board, including what the board itself must decide.
Read the worked answer
Messages for the board
- The strategy is not under-resourced; it is under-governed. The current IT plan delivers a data centre, not retail growth. The gap between the corporate strategy and the technology plan is a board-level oversight issue, not an IT performance issue.
- The quote process is a hard constraint. Three days to quote is caused by overnight batch pricing. Until that changes, the 34% retail target is not achievable regardless of marketing spend.
- Spend is leaking. 11 unapproved SaaS tools, some holding policyholder data, create regulatory and security exposure as well as cost.
- Portfolio discipline is absent. 19 of 27 initiatives have no business case, so the board cannot know what it is buying.
Decisions the board must take
- Approve the governance charter: committee structure, membership and decision rights.
- Ring-fence transformation funding and require reallocation from duplicate and low-value run spend.
- Require the CIO's attendance at executive committee and direct access to the board committee.
- Mandate rationalisation of the SaaS estate and a data-protection review of the analytics platform.
- Accept an explicit trade-off: either the retail target moves, or the pricing re-platform is funded and prioritised now.
A board that only receives a progress dashboard will keep asking the same question next year. The paper should end with a decision, not a status report.