This discussion includes the exploration of the strengths and weaknesses of my organization’s circumstances and one improvement that I would make to either its structure or process.The IT governance structure and decision-making process in my organization will be a shared one. This structure entails the assigning IT governance duties to five decision-making structures. First, a Technology Architecture Committee would fall under this IT governance structure and be inherent in every operating team (Haes amp. Van Grembergen, 2014). Each of these teams would be in charge of convening the exclusive requirements of the divisions of the organization. Second, an Enterprise Architect Unit would entail a group of business division IT officials. These officials would take the responsibility of establishing organization-wide criteria for leading the advancements contributions of all functional units (Brisebois, Boyd, and Shadid, n.d.).Third, an IT Council comprised of chief technology officers and chief information officers of every operating team would be part of this governance structure. These representatives would convene monthly to discuss new inventions and methods that the organization can control (Haes amp. Van Grembergen, 2014). Fourth, a Shared Services Board would comprise of chief information officers and chief financial officers. These officials would convene to pinpoint opportunities to deliver shared IT and fiscal services to the organization. Lastly, an Investment Committee would comprise of a subsection of the executive board that offers ultimate ruling on all of the organization’s big investment plans (Hughes, 2003).Governance structures and decision-making processes echo responsibility for both decisions and contributions made exclusively to those decisions (Haes amp. Van Grembergen, 2014). This principle applies to my organization’s IT governance structure as well. Five decision-making structures should offer vision as to