Almost two thirds of IT chiefs at large companies do not have an accurate picture of the software being used across their business, according to a new survey released today on approaches to IT asset management.

The survey of 100 IT decision makers at companies with over 1,000 employees found that over 60 percent did not have full visibility over their IT assets with almost a third admitting they were not able to account for how many software licenses they actually own.

The study also found that the problem was more acute at larger companies with 63 percent of respondents at companies with over 3,000 staff claiming they did not have a clear picture of their software assets compared to 54 percent at companies with 1,000 to 3,000 staff.

Lisa Hammond, chief executive of IT consultancy Centrix, which commissioned the research, said that the scale of the problem was not surprising and was adding considerably to firms operational costs.

"We find through our asset management practice that the majority of firms are not aware of what assets they own," she said. "When we carry out a survey of hardware, software and people we save an average of 30 percent of their IT operational budget. Once you have a centralised register and centralised procurement with a view over what IT assets you have and what assets you use you can start to rationalise and stop paying for assets you don’t use."

The failure of many firms to keep track of their assets is rooted in the project-oriented approach to IT procurement, according to Hammond, which sees each IT project buy in its own hardware, software and contractors resulting in resource duplication. "Once firms have an integrated approach to procurement and a means of tracking assets through their lifecycle they can start to remove the duplication," she added. 

However, despite these benefits Keith Dolby of IT asset management software specialist Real Asset Management warned that it remains easy for IT chiefs to turn a blind eye to inefficient asset management practices.

"The problem is that the costs associated with poor asset management are not direct costs that are immediately obvious," he explained. "It is easy for the IT manager to turn a blind eye to higher insurance premiums, for example, and forget that there is a benefit to keeping track of every piece of kit they have. It is only when it becomes a board level issue and executives realise you are buying a lot of products you don't need to that it becomes a priority."