|
| Home RSS Directory F.A.Q Suggest A Feed Try Custom Feed Sonneries Portable |
Latest Flows from this sub-category: random selection from this sub-category: |
What IT may consider a triumph may be a disaster according to, say, human resources. It all depends on perspective. The world constantly presents IT with opportunities--new technologies, problems to solve and different ways to look at things. Of course, talk to the folks in human resources, sales, manufacturing and accounting, and they'll tell you their world is constantly changing too. Even when faced with the same opportunities and challenges, each department's experiences and needs nudge them toward different outcomes or solutions. For example:
Our different perspectives also influence how we judge a project's success. We in IT may think that the project was a success if we got the process and data right; HR may think the project is successful if the department had a good training program; and so on. That means that a project in which IT does everything right--from IT's perspective--can nonetheless flop when measured along different axes. As with the five blind men in the old South Asian parable, we only get the true understanding of the elephant if we consider all perspectives. A successful project depends on more than just programming and process design. We have to get all of the elements right: the training and change management, the usability, the reports--all of them. Though this may seem obvious, we consistently see projects implemented without clear commitment to training and change management, without a clear definition of what the objective is, without clear understanding of what the next steps are. Too often we fall prey to the "just get it done now" syndrome. The urgency of doing something overtakes the concept of doing it right. Shame on IT for allowing this to happen. I'm not suggesting "analysis paralysis," but, rather, that we encourage other departments to share ownership of the project and actively work with us in making it successful. Sometimes we in IT exacerbate the problem by overestimating our understanding of the business, thinking we can do it better without the involvement of the business process owners. Giving a project to IT and walking away until it's completed just doesn't work. Sometimes it is better to not do a project than to implement one destined to fail. If we engage with business owners and work with them in a true partnership, we can get the combined perspective to see the whole elephant. This goes beyond traditional requirements and represents a change for both IT and the business. To do this we need to try such things as:
What do you do to make sure that you view your projects from all perspectives?
"The blinds are touching the elephant" photo by homo_sapiens If this topic was of interest, you might also like these:
I'm sure everyone in IT will grimace at the "Yesbut we're different." line as we've all heard it many times in many forms. Before we get ourselved out of sorts about this keep in mind that IT may be just as guilty. Ever heard the following from your IT group?
Often IT is more of an yesbutter than a whynotter. Oh, I know that standards exist for a purpose and I know that we can not always do things that our users want but perhaps we can change our perspective just a bit.
Maybe with a change in attitude and perspective we can figure out way to make things happen and solve problems and still be seen as a help rather than an annoyance. All of this brings me to my favorite quote:
Are you a yesbutter or a whynotter? "Why Not?" photo by daryl_mitchell If this topic was of interest, you might also like these:
Although as Schneier points out some TSA employees do steal, there are dishonest people everywhere. I believe that people are basically honest and will try to do the right thing and that includes TSA personnel taking extra effort to get lost property back to their owners including a system to track lost items. I've personally had a pleasant experience with honest folks going the extra mile to help out a stranger. A few years back I lost my BlackBerry in a cab on the way to O'Hare airport in Chicago and didn't realize it until I had gone through security and was at the boarding gate. The cab driver found it after dropping me off, returned to the airport, and gave it to the TSA people at security. The TSA personnel figured out who it belonged to by looking at the "owner" information and called my office. About that time I discovered that I had lost my BlackBerry and called my office to report it and to have them disable it when they informed me that the TSA was on the other line and that I could pick it up at security. What a relief! Because of this I believe that if you accidentally leave your PC behind at airport security or some other place many people will try to get it back to you. So let's make it easy for them to help us. We routinely put luggage tags on all our luggage but put nothing on those laptops with all that valuable company information. So for the tip: Make it easy for people to reunite you with your lost laptop by taping your business card to the PC. That's it, plain and simple, but effective. Sometimes the best solutions are low-tech or even no-tech. There is no guarantee that this will get your laptop back but without any identifying information on it the you know its not going to happen. If you are in charge of PCs you may want to get someone's business card when you give them a new PC and tape it on for them. Who know it may save you a lot of trouble recreating their data for them when it is lost. Thanks to Vinnie Mirchandani for the link on screener's system to track lost items. "Luggage Tag" photo - Microsoft clip art
Since she was going to be there for a while, she naturally brought her PC along. After we checked into the hotel, I asked if she had brought her Ethernet cable with her. That's when I got "the look." All of you fathers know the look I'm talking about. It's the one that tells you've said something incredibly stupid. Despite her look, she politely said, "Why do I need a cable? Don't they have wireless?'" Having spent the last two years in an academic environment, she simply could not comprehend wireless not being available. Later that day, when we returned from our sightseeing, we asked the hotel desk clerk about wireless. He informed me that, yes, they had wireless, and gave us the login information. I then asked if there was a charge--and that's when I learned that, apparently, French hotel clerks and young American women learn non-verbal communication at the same place. The clerk also gave me "the look," and politely informed me, "It is free." Again, in their worlds, Internet access is always wireless and free. The point in all this is that there is a new generation of potential employees and customers that are accustomed to a variety of technologies being available, and they expect to see and use them in the corporate world. Whether and how we deploy these technologies likely will have an impact on our ability to attract new talent to our companies and to find and retain customers. Here's a sampling of these technologies:
Some people may look at these technologies as interesting for personal use, but assume they offer nothing for the corporate world. Before we dismiss these out of hand, we should think about the possibilities:
Think this can't be done? Think again. Take a look at online retailer Zappos; this article and an accompanying YouTube video talk about its use of Twitter. So rather than dismissing these technologies right out of the gate, let's figure out how to best use them the right way. Like it or not, our employees and customers--not to mention our competitors--are using these technologies now and will soon be expecting you to provide them, too. Don't do it and you may find yourself at a competitive disadvantage. What are you doing about using these technologies inside your company?
"Eiffel Tower, Gargoyle and Alli" photo by Mike Schaffner If this topic was of interest, you might also like these:
Apple is now set to launch its 3G iPhone and is taking aim squarely at the corporate user, no doubt hoping to displace the corporate standard BlackBerry. The 3G, which stands for "third generation" and promises the latest in high-speed Internet access for your phone, has certainly edged closer to meeting corporate needs. But is it enough? On July 11, when Apple starts shipping the iPhone, will we find hoards of colleagues at our door, demanding iPhones? The biggest obstacle to the iPhone was e-mail. According to Apple's Web site, 3G provides "support for Microsoft Exchange ActiveSync and industry-standard corporate security standards allows IT professionals to seamlessly integrate iPhone into their corporate environments." Taking Apple at its word, I'll give them credit for e-mail and check that box off. However, as Brian Caulfield points out in his article "Seven iPhone Disappointments", there are numerous other shortfalls compared to the BlackBerry that may keep people from switching. Apple is primarily a music player and phone that can now also do e-mail. BlackBerry has from the start focused primarily on providing the business user with an e-mail device that also works as a phone. A subtle difference perhaps, but it would appear to have a resulted in significantly different outcomes. Consumers have loved the iPhone's display and its "soft" keyboard. But heavy e-mail users will find that interface cumbersome compared to BlackBerry's separate keys. Is it a showstopper? People may indeed adapt to using the soft keyboard. Over time we may see the thinking on this change as people get used to the new keyboard. So, no, the "soft" keyboard may not kill enthusiasm in the corporation for the iPhone--but it could certainly slow it down. Another factor: The second iPhone isn't as cool as the first. It simply can't be. Cool is having something new and different that no one else has. The 3G phone is an evolution and not a revolution. Millions of people already have iPhones--and Apple's competitors are scrambling to come out with competing phones with similar features. As a result, the iPhone has been downgraded from "cool" to "interesting"--again, a trend that could temper corporate users' demand. So here's my second-generation iPhone prediction: Corporate IT managers shouldn't lose sleep over this one. I don't think we will have a sudden demand to connect the iPhone 3G to our corporate e-mail systems although there will no doubt be some movement in this direction. Corporate IT had to adapt to the BlackBerry, and we'll have to adapt to the iPhone too. But echoing my conclusions from last year, there's still enough time to get out in front of this and figure out how to use it correctly rather than being forced into supporting a device we're not prepared for. The iPhone represents neither Armageddon nor The Rapture. In the end, we may find it to be ... just a phone. What are your plans regarding the iPhone and your corporate e-mail system?
"iPhone" photo by sparktography
Shield Bearer offers counseling by therapists licensed in the state of Texas but more importantly they are people that care about helping other people. As a 501c3 nonprofit charitable organization they turn no one away; services are offered on a sliding scale based on ability to pay. Shield Bearer currently sees people who struggle with:
In addition, Shield Bearer provides several community and school based programs. This past Spring, over 650 high school students completed the Date Rape and Dating Violence Prevention Programs. Schools of Poverty receive the Strong Fathers Strong Families increasing student academic performance, school safety and parent involvement. Conflict resolution and community building are also available to businesses, teams and community organizations. Shield-Bearer is an approved referral source for Cy-Fair Independent School District, the third largest ISD in the state of Texas. Shield Bearer is an approved training site for graduate counseling students including Master’s level students from the University of Texas at Austin School of Social Work. If you are in the Houston area and know someone needing any of these excellent services, please contact Shield Bearer.
In software, we’re spending more on customizable applications. We’ve seen a shift away from the large, one-size-fits-all mainframe programs to PC- and Web-based applications that can be customized. Even enterprise-class programs now have more user-controlled features and customizations than just a few years ago. In addition, we now want integration in our applications. Sales systems need to integrate to accounting systems, which need to integrate to production and purchasing systems, and so on. Over the past few years there has been a lot of talk about software-as-a-service, or SaaS, where software applications are hosted by a service provider and made available to customers over the Internet. With the notable exception of Salesforce.com, we have yet to see SaaS live up to the hype. I believe that the demand for customization and integration has overtaken the economics of SaaS and that it will difficult for SaaS to become a significant part of IT budgets. Time will tell. Infrastructure costs have come down. For a while it seemed that hardware costs would be cut by half each year as performance doubled. At the same time, our network costs have similarly decreased. These cost reductions have made IT services more affordable and increased demand for them. It is not uncommon to hear a CIO state that infrastructure cost is no longer a limiting factor in determining what we do. With the shift toward end-user applications, we also have the opportunity to add infrastructure incrementally as we need it. Need a new module? Add a new server. Given the ready availability of infrastructure, I’m somewhat surprised we don’t see more of infrastructure-as-a-service, or IaaS, where we pay for storage or bandwidth as we use it and our costs go up or down depending on our usage patterns. Oh, I know there are options for this such as “burstable T1,” a service that lets companies pay only for the amount of bandwith they use, but I’m just not seeing this catch on as a major trend. Arguably, data center outsourcing is a form of this but even here it is typically not truly demand driven. We buy computing power, bandwidth and storage in lumps and approve every major addition. Perhaps there is still a lot of risk aversion on both our part and that of the infrastructure vendors to allow this to become commonplace. The shift in spending for personnel has taken two forms. The first is outsourcing of both data center and applications development. As a result, personnel costs are now a vendor cost, not a direct cost. The second is in the type of employees. Changes in technology have reduced the number of people we need to run data centers because automation has replaced a lot of these tasks. At the same time, companies have increased headcount in PC support and help desks. On the application end we’ve seen a growth in business analysts, a position which didn’t exist to any great extent 10 years ago, to help work with end users to develop the applications businesses need. I’ve always said, working in IT may not always be fun, but it is never boring. Managing budgets are a big part of a CIO’s job but it is more than cost control. As conditions change, we have to not only determine how much we need to spend but what we spend it on. How do you see your IT budget changing? What do you think IT budgets will be like in the future?
"Money" photo by TW Collins If this topic was of interest, you might also like these:
IT managers perform a constant balancing act between providing exceptional service to our users and being efficient by keeping costs low. We really do want to provide the best possible service to our users. We'd love to have a battalion of resources at the beck and call of our customers--everyone from the business analysts and developers to the PC and system support people. The catch is that there are practical limits to what we can provide. Budget pressures limit the personnel and systems resources we can provide. We are constantly being pressured to do more with less. In this sense our goal is to be as "efficient" as possible. Realistically we have to balance these goals so we deliver value--the right amount of service at the right cost. Here's where the balancing game gets dangerous: We can be "efficiently ineffective," keeping our costs down but ultimately not really providing the service our customers need. Or "inefficiently effective," where we provide first-class service but at champagne prices that our company can't pay. Of course, our destination is to be "efficiently effective"--but reality suggests most of us start on one side or the other of that Mount Everest of goals. Happily, we do have some degree of control over whether we begin our ascent from the "efficient ineffectiveness" or "inefficient effective" side of the mountain. Those of us who tend toward efficient ineffectiveness typically overemphasize efficiency and standardization. We write air-tight policies, enforce standardization without exception, provide automated service instead of personal service and make our users adjust to what is most efficient for IT. Admittedly there is some hyperbole in that last statement and some of these actions actually benefit our customers in addition to making IT more efficient. However, no matter how you look at it, we in IT are very good at making our operations efficient. Perhaps we focus so much on efficiency is because it is easier than being effective. We have more internal control over the factors involved. It doesn't get as messy as those situations where many other groups of users have a role. There is, however, a downside to this approach: As we become more efficient, we may not have the opportunity to try to become effective. Imagine trying to convince a CEO to fund a major expenditure for a new systems project when your reputation is for managing IT in a way that is low cost but, candidly, burdensome for your customers. Your CEO's first thought: "Why should I believe that you can properly manage this project, get it done on time and on budget and deliver the requirements I need, when it takes you a week to fix my PC?" It's hard to refute a reputation like that. Conversely, if you have shown you get the job done effectively--even if your budgets are not always picture perfect--your boss will be leaning on you to cut costs but more likely to hear you out when you propose a project that could genuinely improve company operations. People tend to be less upset with overpaying for good service than they are about getting poor service even at a low cost. So err on the side of doing an effective job even with some inefficiencies, even if you have to face the ire of the budget warriors. It is the harder path--but you'll have a clearer line of sight to the summit. Do you agree? Where do you come down on the efficiency-effectiveness divide?
"Get the Balance Right" photo by Marquette La If this topic was of interest, you might also like these:
On my last night in Singapore before returning to Houston I returned from dinner around 10:00 PM and since my shuttle to the airport was to pick me up at 3:30 AM I thought I would stay up all night and sleep later on the plane to start my adjustment to a new time zone. During this time I got on the Internet to catch up on emails and other work. Unfortunately around 11:30 the Internet stopped working. I waited about 15 minutes thinking it might be a temporary problem. When it didn't come back I called the front desk. They indicated that they would have the Internet company call back which they did a few minutes later. The Internet company indicated he network was down for maintenance and that it would be available in about an hour. The service came back as promised and worked fine although this unannounced outage was frustrating. Obviously since providing Internet service is not a core competency of the hotel they logically outsourced it to another company. This apparently planned but unannounced maintenance period provides two learning opportunities; one for the Internet provider and one for the hotel, i.e. the company doing the outsourcing. Maintenance downtime is a fact of life. Unless you are able to provide redundant services you will have to take some downtime for maintenance. When you do have to take downtime you want to do it at a time when it is the least inconvenient for your customers. Late Friday night seems like a logical choice. Although you have to take downtime there is no excuse for not announcing it to your user. Although you cannot eliminate the problem you can at least minimize the aggravation. Some things they easily could have done include:
These options are easy and nearly no-cost ways to serve their ultimate customers. Although they had the capability to do this they apparently didn't have the proper customer service attitude to implement a simple solution. They didn't see things from the customer's perspective. When the hotel outsourced Internet service to another company it doesn't relieve them of responsibility. Like it or not our customers hold us for what we do or don't do and this also applies to what our outsourcing partners do on our behalf. Although the outsourcing company is responsible for providing the service we retain the responsibility for managing them to provide the type of customer service we want. When we outsource services we also outsource our reputation along with it. Choose wisely and manage accordingly. What steps do you take to protect your reputation when you outsource? If this topic was of interest, you might also like these:
Yesterday I talked about IT needing to talk about value rather than just cost reduction. In a guest post at Deal Architect, Jackie Bassett makes a good case of why we need to need to focus on value. As she says "We need to stop focusing on emergencies and efficiencies or we become the very definition of a cost center." Take a look at her post "The Real Deal: Jackie Bassett - Stop educating the CEO about the business value of technology", I think you'll like it.
Now before you go to your CFO and suggest this let me make it clear that I'm not suggesting that we forget about cost reduction, rather I'm suggesting we change our focus. Managing cost is a big deal for IT and for any CFO. Due to the economics of technology we've seen continual decreases in hardware and network expenses. So much so that reducing costs, year over year, has been easy. Couple this trend with increased performance for the same hardware that costs less and we have looked like heroes. The downside to this happy story is that it has lulled us into focusing primarily on cost. When we talk about our accomplishments we tout how much we've reduced cost and talk about future cost reductions. Not surprisingly our audience, the leadership of the company, starts to think of IT in terms of cost. Now the hardware and network cost curve is flattening out a bit. And that leaves us facing the prospect of trying to push down costs further when the best lever we have is cutting personnel expenses. That's when you start hearing not-so-subtle suggestions from your CFO and CEO about outsourcing data centers and programming staff. Rather than just talking about cost, technologists have to start talking about value. Value is the benefit received relative to its cost. Simply stated:
Cost is an element in this equation but so is the benefit, a factor we don't always give the attention it deserves. We can increase value by increasing the benefit or by reducing the cost. Why not do both? Talk to your company's salespeople about "value or value-added selling" versus selling based on price ("cost" to the buyer). They'll tell you that trying to compete on price/cost is a race to the bottom. Emphasizing the value from the customer's standpoint generates premium pricing. The reality is that there is tremendous value in the services we provide. We've made our companies more efficient, provided new and better services to our customers and provided timely and accurate information to management. However, perception is also reality. Management won't give us credit for benefits they don't recognize. Like our sales force we have to sell the value. The first step is to determine the benefits of the projects we work on. This includes not only true IT projects such as calculating the cost savings of using more energy efficient hardware in the data center, but also the business projects. Technology improvements such as a new system to help reduce the order-to-cash cycle can have tremendous returns on investment. However, because the benefits of these types of projects may be intuitively understood or seem obvious to all, business project may often proceed without the rigor of a project justification. When there is no formal understanding of the project's value, it is easy for the project scope to continually expand and the value to be silently eroded with each new scope expansion. Part of our job is to make sure we deliver the value we promised. For us to claim value we need to make sure that we go through the process of determining and documenting the project's value and then to make sure that value is realized. Documenting the value will also help in keeping everyone's "eyes on the prize" and help minimize non-value added changes in project scope. The second step in selling value is to change the discussion. We need to steer the discussion to focus on the project's benefits and value. Just as our sale team has learned, value selling can reap rewards. Talk value--and add in costs only as it relates to the benefits of the project. Until we change the dynamics of the discussion the leadership of the company will continue to think of IT as a place for minimizing costs--and our budget struggles will become increasingly more painful. Now it's up to you: How are you going to sell the value of your IT operations to your management?
"Discount" photo by quinn.anya If this topic was of interest, you might also like these:
The posts I write for Forbes. com will also be posted on this site. As always, I encourage you to participate in the discussion either at Beyond Blinking Lights & Acronyms or at Forbes. com. I'll include a statement at the end of the posts along with the Forbes.com logo on the posts that appear in both locations. |
  |
contact |
All rss from this site
Print this article
Webmasters ! Get this feed on your site
