During one of the keynotes at the FinOps X conference in San Diego, JR Storment, Executive Director of the FinOps Foundation, interviewed a senior executive from Salesforce. They discussed the idea of combining the roles of Head of Product and Head of Customer Success—a smart move if you want customer success values embedded directly into product development and ownership. That conversation made me think about the partnership between ITAM and FinOps.
FinOps has a real chance to rise in the minds of senior IT leaders, not just by quantifying IT value but by aligning with governance goals.
The FinOps Foundation promotes the principle of “shifting left”—getting involved earlier in the development lifecycle. The idea is to help developers choose the right metrics and platforms before deployment, rather than fixing issues afterwards. As the FinOps Foundation increases its scope beyond public cloud, the vision is they can make an apples-by-apples comparison of where best to place a workload, cloud, data centre, SaaS, and so on.
The shifting left principle is something we see in ITAM too (although it’s been far better articulated by the FinOps Foundation). A clear sign of the maturity of an ITAM practice is when the builders of things within an organisation proactively approach ITAM teams because they know it leads to better outcomes, optimised budgets, and fewer mistakes down the line. It’s not just about adding bureaucracy but making smarter decisions with less errors.
Looking ahead, FinOps has the potential to help organisations measure IT value through metrics that matter to the business. It can demonstrate how much return a company gets from its IT investments—whether in data centres or cloud platforms—while still meeting governance requirements. When ITAM and FinOps collaborate effectively, it creates a mature, holistic approach to IT management. That’s a powerful proposition.
We’ve seen this scenario before in ITSM. For example, upgrading an Oracle server to improve performance might inadvertently cross a licensing threshold, triggering an extra $1 million in renewal costs. Smart IT leaders need to evaluate changes with full awareness of risks, governance, and cost implications. A simple step in the right direction is involving ITAM in the change control process. This provides critical oversight and helps businesses avoid costly missteps. Again, a decision is made with a holistic view of the lifecycle.
Likewise, when we present FinOps data for decision making, I believe we must incorporate governance considerations directly—so they are part of the decision, not an afterthought.
In summary, FinOps and ITAM have both expanded into the data center space. A strong partnership between the two could not only increase the scope of what they can achieve but also raise their visibility with senior leadership.
For this to work, we need a common lexicon. Many IT terms differ across FinOps and ITAM, and aligning on shared language will be crucial. ITAM already has deep expertise—often hard-won—from managing datacenter assets, on premise, and subscriptions. This knowledge could be immediately valuable to FinOps practitioners.
In return, ITAM professionals can learn a great deal from how FinOps positions itself as a cultural movement—with a shared framework, common goals, and a focus on delivering measurable business value.
For the cooperation to work between the two disciplines, we need:
Together, these steps can help ITAM and FinOps work hand-in-hand for mutual benefit and greater impact.