The CIO Assistant's Blog

In a previous post, I asked the question: “What Business Would IT Align To?” to highlight the fact that Business is a generic term used indiscriminately for different entities in different contexts. So when a divisional head was not happy with the services provided by the central IT group, it could be called a Business-IT mis-alignment. In this post, I like to ask the reverse question: “Which IT Needs Business Alignment?” for a similar reason. There are many services provided by a typical IT organization and not all business persons or groups received all of them. By understanding the multiple facets of Business and IT, we would be a step closer to the elusive goal of Alignment between them.

A Quick View of IT Evolution

IT, or Information Technology, has also become a generic term lately. It started over half a century ago, in the 50’s or even earlier, as EDP (Electronic Data Processing), evolved to IS (Information Systems) then expanded into MIS (Management Information Systems) in the 70’s, added the Technology part in the 80’s to become IS/IT, then dropped the IS part to become simply IT in the 90’s (1). Many great data and information-related technologies and concepts have been introduced during these decades. Some reinforced the value of IT, others threatened its existence. Remember End-User Computing or Office Automation? They were not much different than today’s Business Intelligence or Social Media. Each new technology arrived on the scene with a promise of transforming the way IT deliver its services to support Business. Many purportedly putting the power of processing in the hand of the business users and making IT obsolete in the process: no more mainframe, no more COBOL programmers, no more legacy systems. Yet the enterprise still needs great processing power to run mission-critical applications, huge and reliable repositories of data to feed a variety of business needs and smart programmers to build new applications and interfaces to old ones.

If we consider the evolution of IT as a Darwinian process, we would see that IT has a remarkable survival instinct. But just like the homo sapiens in nature, IT life in business is a constant display of adaptability. To survive and grow, it needs to develop new capabilities while shedding obsolete ones. It needs to leverage certain capabilities that are better developed than those of other corporate species. Finally, it needs to create a safe and nurturing habitat, hence the need for business alignment.

The Many Faces of IT

Without going into a detailed list of all potential IT services, I would classify them into 3 categories: those that IT is traditionally good at delivering but have no distinct value today; those that IT is not so good at but hold promise; and those that are new to IT but of high value to business.

1. IT Services with no distinct value - It may vary from organization to organization, but in general, these IT services include infrastructure management, application maintenance, or any services that a third-party service provider can do just as well. A highly aligned IT organization would not fight to retain these capabilities in-house, but rather proactively find the way to keep the cost of their provision to a minimum. It would act as a general contractor on behalf of corporate business users for common IT needs (e.g. desktop support). If not already existed, it would start developing new capabilities in vendor relationship management, contract management, or related skills to ensure that the organization will get “value for money”.

2. IT Services with promising value - These IT services include security management, service management, support of regulatory compliance, or any services that are “Must-Have” by business but sensitive enough to be controlled by a third-party service provider. A highly aligned IT organization would step up to the plate, assuming full responsibility (even if the accountability rests elsewhere) and providing assurance that no unpleasant surprises or negative press would ever occur under its watch. A good example is the assurance of fully implemented and auditable IT Controls for Sarbanes-Oxley requirements. It (IT) would need to put in place strong IT governance and management frameworks such as COBIT (Control Objectives for Information and related Technology). It would start developing new capabilities in process engineering, risk management, or portfolio management, to name a few.

3. IT Services with high value - These IT services include business strategy planning, business intelligence, transition management, or any services that have a big and long-lasting impact on business, where corporate management cannot afford to make mistake. A highly aligned IT organization would “be there” all the time, in “top of the mind” of corporate executives the very moment that a major decision is entertained in the boardroom: merger and acquisition, divestiture, diversification, major organization restructuring. Just like the U.S. Marine Corps presence  for any newly developed situation of conflict. In order to get there (i.e. to reach that trusted position), IT needs to develop new capabilities in leading changes, effectively working in a coalition of both friends and foes, achieving results with speed and efficiency, etc. In fact, the list is rather long and it may take years to get there.

As you can see, different types of IT service have different perceived values. And for different perceived values, there are different levels of expectation from Business. Understanding them, sharing them with key players on the business side and reaching a mutual agreement with them about how to keep score of the IT performance will guarantee a better Business-IT Alignment.

In the next post, I will elaborate on the types of metrics that reflect better the goal of Business-IT Alignment.

[Update: I added a link to the phrase "be there" after coming across a wonderful post from Mike Schaffner on Guiding IT Principles. Go there and see what I mean.]

          alignment, business, CIO, IT, leadership

 “It’s more a Zen state of mind that you have to constantly be changing and morphing along with the business.”

Holly Morris, CIO at Thrivent Financial for Lutherans, a faith-based, non-profit insurance provider (1).

I like this quote very much because it demonstrates the willingness and the capability of IT to serve different business interests with a quiet determination, a Zen state of mind so to speak. Yet I keep hearing from time to time a one-sided argument that it’s the fault of IT for not being aligned with “Business”. If I were a CIO, I would be very wary in participating in such debate. Why? Because in such debate, “Business” is portrayed as a monolithic entity that can be either aligned to or not; while in reality, Business can be different things to different people at different times and in different contexts.

I know that people mean well when they talk about the issue of Business-IT Alignment, but I can’t help but wondering aloud: What “Business” are we talking about here? Is it the entire organization? A divisional unit? A functional department such as Marketing? A financial analyst in the Accounting department? A C-level executive? All of the above?

If you were an IT Leader, you may encounter in the course of the same day conflicting requests for IT services. Some are straight forward, others less so because they may have a profound impact on the organization. Some are easily accepted, others may be rejected after due consideration. Some would be promptly addressed, others would take longer time. At the end of the day, it’s inevitable that some are pleased and others not.

Smart CIO’s have all established an IT Governance structure with membership from all key players and a transparent prioritization process. It helps mitigate the decision-making process, but never manages to shut down the grumbles from disappointed parties. Maybe it’s time for the CIO’s to create Alignment metrics with some definable targets so that the notion of Alignment is reflected by a range of acceptable Gray shades instead of the current Black or White perception. By then, we may say with some quiet satisfaction that IT is 100% aligned here and 70% there, in various aspects of Business.

By the way, when you read the next time about yet another case of IT failing to align with Business, take it with a grain of salt and ask yourself: What Business are we talking here?

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

(1) Quote extracted from an interview with CIO Insight, May 2009 issue.

          alignment, business, CIO, governance, IT, metrics

“The mass of IT Leaders lead a corporate life of quiet frustration.” 

This was the thought that crossed my mind when I read recent press articles on the CIO crisis. This quote is a paraphrase of Henri David Thoreau who has said “The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation” more than 150 years ago (1). The articles were from the magazine CIO Insight in its May 2009 issue. In the first article, The CIO in Crisis Mode, Brian Watson wrote:

If CIO Insight decided to get in the mix [of choosing word of the year] this year, the early front-runner in the IT leadership arena would have to be “crisis.”

This so-called crisis certainly does not happen overnight. Nicholas Carr has thrown down the gauntlet 6 years ago with the Harvard Business Review article “IT Doesn’t Matter“. But why it takes so long to resurface? I believe that there are 3 reasons:

1. IT people are a quiet lot

IT people are proud of their profession and their contribution to the success of their business organizations. But they don’t run ad campaigns to tout about that.

IT people are the only few in the organization who preoccupy with “doing the right thing” and who talked constantly about “guiding principles”. Notions that non-IT professionals found “weird” in the face of expediency and quick fixes.

IT people are the only few in the organization who proffered a “structured and disciplined” approach to their work, who cared for a high “maturity level” of their tasks and activities.

In short, they live a monk-like corporate existence and make others either nervous or jealous in the process.

2. IT people let others get away with murder

People talked about the Communication Gap between IT and business people. They talked about the tendency of IT people to talk in jargons, as if other functions in business are devoid of gibberish terms. They made fun of IT people with labels such as “geek”, “dork”, or “nerd” which are supposed to be worse than “bean counter” or “used car salesman”.

People talked about Business-IT Alignment as a one-sided issue, that it was the entire fault of IT for not being able to align, because of its lack of business acumen. Nobody considered that “business” is also about IT as much as Marketing or Engineering for that effect. Nobody dared to challenge the people representing “business” that they too have failed utterly in understanding the value of IT or the willingness of IT people to cooperate and to serve. Nobody observed that Business is constantly changing, and other functions such as Marketing have a hell of a time adjusting themselves. Business-Marketing (Mis)Alignment anyone?

People talked about the lack of Performance by IT Leadership because they can’t put a dollar sign to the value of IT systems and infrastructures that run their “business” day in day out. They talked about how the CIOs were preoccupied too much with their investment portfolio and little with the revenues. Nobody considered the impact of NOT making any investment as if the revenues will keep coming undisturbed from the continued use of legacy systems and obsolete facilities.

Every few years (or every 18 months if we believe in Moore’s Law), there is a new business technology concept born. Each time, there was always an attempt to break free from the IT fold by the proponents of the new concept. Right after the 9-11 event, there was a surge of Chief Security Officers, Chief Business Continuity Officers, then Chief Compliance Officers (after Enron and Sarbanes-Oxley), and now Chief Social Media Officers. In between, we have seen Chief Enterprise Architects, Chief Business Intelligence Officers, to name a few. All these attempts have a cumulative erosion effect on the legitimacy of the IT function and its leadership role of the CIO.

A Call to arms

We want to say “Enough is Enough”. It’s time for all IT Leaders to stand up and make our voices count.

For too long, we let the ignorant rules the day.

For too long, we keep toiling in the shadow of anonymity

For the sake of business and of organizational growth, we say: These days of quiet frustration are over.

We are the quiet force of progress, the same way that “hard work and honesty, courage and fair play, tolerance and curiosity, loyalty and patriotism (…) are the quiet force of progress throughout our history“ (2).

We have the quiet determination to bring innovation and creativity, efficiency and effectiveness, structure and discipline to bear on the organization, regardless of our ranks and our titles.

We challenge each and everyone who would dissociate themselves from IT to look into the mirror and say with conviction that they deserve our respect because they too have consciously and positively contribute to the progress of business as we do.

For further reading on related topics, here is a 3-part series entitled “CIO: How Do You Stay Relevant To Business?”: Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

(1) Walden (1854)

(2) U.S. President Barack Obama, Inaugural speech, January 2009.

          alignment, business, CIO, IT, leadership, manifesto, quiet force