The Disconnect Between Management and the Value of IT

DavidHumus writes "According to a Wall St. Journal article top executives at most companies fail to recognize the value of IT, having a tendency to think of information technology as a basic utility, like plumbing or telephone service. The article lists five primary reasons for 'the wall' between IT and business: 'mind-set differences between management staff and IT staff, language differences, social influences, flaws in IT governance (defined as the specification and control of IT decision rights), and the difficulty of managing rapidly changing technology.' Does this fully explain the extreme lack of understanding of IT at high executive levels? The article is even-handed in apportioning blame but touches on a few good points. In particular, how '[m]ost top executives ... think of IT as an expensive headache that they'd rather not deal with.'"

Comments

If only we were treated as well as utilities

[Cerberus7]

Where I work, our Facilities department gets whatever it wants. They take care of the generators, the lights, the A/C, etc. All things this place needs to keep running. We IT people get shafted at every opportunity because we "cost money," yet we take care of the servers and applications that keep this place running. Turn our stuff off, and it's as detrimental to the business as turning off all the lights. I can only dream of what being treated like a utility would be like. It must be nice.

Re:If only we were treated as well as utilities

[Cerberus7]

You maybe are being sarcastic, but the average salary of our maintenance staff is the same as the average salary of our IT staff.

I guess I'm Lucky

[techpawn]

The CEO was once an IT grunt back in the old days. So, yes the tech has changed but he still sees the world through the IT "filter" as it where. Many decisions he has to defend to the board and rest of management because they make sense from the business side for IT (such as hot swap backup equipment). The other managers see it as expense, luckily the CEO sees it our way (yes, it's a cost now, but downtime mean more cost later)

That is not IT department's fault.

[jotaeleemeese]

That is auditors or security departments fault.

IT only allows what other people them is allowed. And normally the people saying the last word are auditors of some kind or another.

But is it really a fault?

You see it as obstructionist, but do you have the legal know how to know if the application you want installed is legitimate? Are you going to vouch for its security? (I have seen badly programmed applications, including FOSS ones, bring down complete networks due toe unintended denial of service attacks. Will you take responsibility it the tool you need does such thing?). WIll you put your hands in fire for your application in regards to viruses, trojans and any other nasties?

The obstructionist attitude has a purpose which is to protect the assets and reputation of your company. If that pisses you off, though.

Re:Maintaining the pretence of superiority

[Linker3000]

or in my case...

Me: "I have fleshed out our draft spec for the new Web site through a series of phone calls and emails over the last few weeks and the developers say they will be able to meet perhaps 80-90% of what you want by the tight deadline you have set and then they will roll out the remaining features over the next couple of weeks."

Director: "I am really concerned that the developers are so far away in another country"

Me: "Distance is not really a problem these days - and in any case, I have sounded out several of their customers and UK contacts and they have all recommended this team. Overall, they can do the job for a very good fee + offer the after-sales support."

Director: "I will think about it"

Email from Director 3 days later at 8pm one night:

"I have spoken to a friend and he has recommended a local company he knows so I have given them the contract."

So, for 3x the cost and over 8 months late we got a half-assed, closed-sourse site with bits still missing.

Boy do I feel valued round here. Thinking of moving? Funny you should say that...

Re:It's not just management

[Maxo-Texas]

Because IT can show you which sales people (who are treated like gods) are creating territories full of non-profitable customers.

Because IT can not only allow- but make the customers eager to- enter their own orders- saving you customer service costs and allow you to do the same work with a lot less people.

Because IT can take a 4 week manual process which sometimes completely failed and turn it into a 2-3 day process which is fully accountable.

Because unlike electricity or water, IT changes constantly-- every single day-- and if your company doesn't keep up, the next thing you know you are a year behind your competitors and their costs are 10% lower than yours and you are hemorrhaging customers.

IT is a lump of clay that can be sculpted into anything.

---

We recently found out that one of the other non-IT departments basically wrote a "system by spreadsheet" which requires over a dozen people to maintain. Their director is protecting them from being automated by IT because he would lose most of those people. So don't come talking to me about "IT COSTS". I think it is really a battle for headcount among the departments.