9 Reasons Why Developers Think the CIO Is Clueless

Esther Schindler writes "Finally, a Forrester analyst who understands the attitudes of software developers. Mike Gualtieri identifies nine behaviors managers need to steer clear of or risk being labeled 'clueless' — from control freak tendencies to being a vendor puppet. My favorite, however, is point #8: 'the CIO collaborates to death,' in which Gualtieri opines, 'And, if you never watched Star Trek then you shouldn't even be a CIO.'"

Comments

Even the job title is clueless

[Ed Avis]

If you are called a 'CIO' then you are pretty much guaranteed to be an idiot. WTF is an 'Information Officer' anyway, and how can you be the chief one if there are no others? What is wrong with being head of the IT department? It doesn't sound as swanky, which is surely a good thing, reminding you that IT is there to serve the rest of the business.

Re:Even the job title is clueless

[plover]

It's not at all clueless. It's an "officer" level position, which has real meaning in the business world. It means that you have top level input. An ordinary manager (or even a Senior Vice President) doesn't have the same level of influence.

As CIO, you are not there just to serve the rest of the business, but to drive it in the technological direction, or to steer it in the direction that best matches your technical capabilities. A "manager" level or "head of IT" person is in only a reactive position, having influence only over his or her pyramid, and does not rise to the corporate executive level.

Bad Assumptions

[grizdog]

The article begins by saying that a CIO doesn't want to be labeled as clueless by his or her subordinates, but I think some of them may wear it as a badge of honor. They don't want to be labeled as clueless by their superiors, but I think they want to identify themselves as executives, rather than nerds.

Also, point 4 in the article is going to be interpreted by any CIOs who do care as "be sure to stay current with all the hot buzzwords". Developers will see through most attempts at this instantly.

CIO role

[Amarok.Org]

The problem is, in many companies, the role of the CIO is pretty nebulous.

It gets further confusing when you have both a CIO and a CTO. When you don't, the CIO has to fill both roles, which are often at odds.

The way I see it...

The CTO is responsible for understanding, predicting, and planning technology.

The CIO is responsible for ensuring that the technology in use by and acquired for the company is in the best interests of the company (and its shareholders, if applicable).

CIOs are typically from a financial background, as at the end of the day their primary responsibility is to the business units that fund the technology. It isn't about the latest, flashiest, or even best gadgets - it's about meeting the needs of the business units while spending the least amount of money to do so. Unfortunately, this often leaves us (the geeks) on the short end of the stick. And perhaps worse, with the financial focus of the average CIO, they often fail to understand where a reasonable investment in technology can save them money over time. Since the typical CIO is only in their position for a few years, they don't have a lot of time for investments to pay off. Cut costs today, and let the next guy fix the mess they've made.