Shared Understanding in Cost and Value Work
Cost Through a Different Lens
The cost side of the technology cost and value conversation asks us to look at familiar finance processes in new ways. We apply additional attributes, trace cost behavior with more granularity, and establish a baseline from which value can be evaluated. Value is often expressed through simple questions like: What am I getting for having incurred these costs? And How has the business improved as a result? We measure the answers in KPIs such as increased revenue, reduced costs elsewhere, improved customer outcomes, or shorter execution time.
Value Requires Cross Functional Integration
Reaching the value part of the equation requires more than accurate cost modeling. It requires integrating perspectives from across the organization in ways that create shared understanding without expecting everyone to become an expert in every domain. Finance, ITAM, operations, and service management teams interpret the same terms differently because they reflect how work is actually done.
The Human Side of the Work
Organizational change frameworks such as Prosci and ADKAR share the common idea that people do the work, and people need different things to feel included and supported as they move through change. The ACCMP change curve reinforces this. Individuals move through awareness, understanding, acceptance, and integration at different speeds depending on how well the message meets them where they are. Because the work of creating and sustaining a technology cost and value practice isn’t adopted in a straight line, it requires communication that is shaped for the audience.
Shaping Messages for Shared Understanding
Sometimes the conversation benefits from precise accounting terms such as deferred cost or matching principle because they anchor the discussion in logic that Finance already trusts. Other times the conversation benefits from translating those concepts into operational language so teams outside Finance can see how their work connects to the cost story. Often the most effective approach is a blend of both.
The same is true of a technology-centric conversation. Do we need to understand Kubernetes as a technology, or simply that it functions in a way that requires us to cost the contents of the cluster rather than the cluster itself?
The goal isn’t to make everyone an expert in everything, it’s to create enough shared understanding that the building blocks of the practice such as cost modeling, data quality, service definition, and value measurement can be executed without unnecessary friction.
The Practitioner’s Role in Reducing Cognitive Load
When we tailor our messages intentionally, we reduce the cognitive load required for people to participate. Shortening the distance between not understanding a term and understanding what action is required makes it easier for the organization to move through the change curve together rather than in disconnected pockets.
Technology cost and value work is cross functional human work. The frameworks and models help, but the way we communicate across domains is what ultimately determines whether the practice becomes sustainable.
