This Blog
Syndication
Recent Posts
Tags
Calendar
Archives
The IT Governance Evangelist
November 2007 - Posts
-
How CIOs Should Spend Their Time--Oversimplified
Is simplifying always a good thing? I recently read a Forrester report entitled "How CIOs Should Spend Their Day" describing a formula for how CIOs should allocate time among their various constituencies. In short, Forrester invokes its 30-30-30-10 model to force "disciplined balance across constituents, which are classified into four groups: above, across, below, and yourself." Forrester goes on to say, "This time model will keep IT front-of-mind in the business and allow CIOs to do what they do best: proving and delivering IT value to the enterprise."
Though I agree with the principles of the article and the articulation of the constituents on which a CIO should focus, the model used to allocate time to each is oversimplified. Yes, each constituent requires the CIO's attention, but I believe the amount of time devoted to any one constituent is dependent on the following critical variables:
- The nature of the business and resulting IT archetype
- Current strategic goals and objectives
- Tactical and operational necessity
It is easy to see how different conditions and circumstances associated with the variables listed above should influence how much time a CIO devotes to the four constituents Forrester describes.
Again, I agree with the Forrester article in principle, but I think it suggests an over-simplified solution to a complex problem. I concur with the notion of a disciplined balance of time allocation across constituents but I don't believe a set formula should be prescribed for all CIOs. It is incumbent on the CIO to consider and assess the state of the variables above. This will enable them to appropriately determine how much time they allocate on each constituent, ultimately optimizing their time. Is this difficult? Yes. Is there a simple formula? No.
So this article left me with more evidence of our unending desire to come up with simple answers in a world that is increasingly complex. I think we want to make things simpler than they actually are. This thought stopped me in my tracks.
Our message at CA is Unify and Simplify. Was I in defiance of this message? From its inception, I had always agreed with the Unify and Simplify message as its implied benefits were so obvious it was easy for me to immediately advocate and support. Did my response to this article put me at odds with a key goal of my company?
A light bulb came on. At CA, we are not trying to make complex things simple, thus defying their complex nature. We're trying to help enterprises simplify aspects of their Information Technology capability that are unnecessarily or needlessly complex. Our solutions reduce or eliminate complexity so they can unify and simplify IT management and decision-making.
Phew! That was a close one!
-
Educating the Technology Leaders of the Future through IT Governance
I recently was asked how we should teach future IT leaders, and I couldn't hold my ITG tongue for long. This is what happened:
I was recently invited to attend the Board meeting for the Center for Electronic Business, which is sponsored by San Francisco State University. The mission of the CEB is "to promote interaction among students, faculty and practitioners that results in the sharing of knowledge, experience, and expertise in electronically-based business activities, and to foster cooperation and collaboration among participants through joint applied research, sharing of best practices, student internships and related programs."
One of the agenda items was a general discussion on curriculum content for the university's MBA Information Systems Program. The vastness of technology related information coupled with the incredible rate of change creates a significant challenge for academic institutions. What should they be teaching graduate students who want to lead our information technology enterprises and organizations of the future?
The list of required and elective courses currently offered at the graduate school includes the following:
- Building Advanced Business Applications with Java...C+...COBOL (!)
- Internet and World Wide Web Business Applications
- Business Application Design and Development with .NET
- Object-oriented Business Applications Development
- Information Systems Projects
- Software Testing for Quality Assurance
- Information Security and Governance
Members shared ideas on what was being offered today versus what should be offered in the future. The discussion focused largely on specific areas of technology, frameworks and theories. Their greatest challenge is ensuring the curriculum is relevant and stimulating while preparing graduate students for the challenges that lie ahead.
Being new to the forum, I wanted to observe and absorb before offering opinion. I was especially hesitant due to the significance of the question being raised: What do we teach? I did my best to listen intently and focus on the points being made. I say I did my best because I had a very immediate response to their quandary.
My good friend Mike Nelson, President of SecureNet Technologies, saw me struggling to hold my tongue. Mike has known and worked with me for almost 20 years and had sponsored my invitation to attend the meeting because he thought it was a great fit and was intrigued at what I might offer.
The other members of the Board noticed Mike's attempts to prod me into speaking up. As the group's attention turned to me I quickly voiced my reluctance and begged their pardon. I was new to the group and this was a meaty subject at the heart of their purpose. I was sharing a forum with academic leaders and participating in their field on their turf. Though I was not intimidated, I was very respectful.
The Board is comprised of an intelligent, affable and unpretentious group of people who are inquisitive and genuinely open to new ideas. They encouraged me to share my thoughts.
I told them I found myself responding to the question of "What to teach" with the same reply I give to people in IT who ask, "What should we do?" My answer is the same--IT Governance.
My rationale is based on the reality that technology, frameworks, methodologies and approaches will constantly and forever change. What does not change are the IT Governance processes they enable:
- Integrated Business & IT Planning
- IT Investment Assessment, Prioritization, Funding & Benefits Realization Accountability
- IT Financial & Resource Allocation
- Project Prioritization and Decision-making
- Emerging Technology Evaluation & Adoption
- Client Relationship Management
- Building & Maintaining Applications & Infrastructure
- Provisioning of IT Services
- Outsourcing Services
- Audit & Risk Management
- Architecture Management--Standards and Review
I contend that everything we do in IT falls under one or more of these IT Governance processes. I also believe these are the processes that all IT concerns should execute to meet the five principles of IT Governance articulated by the IT Governance Institute (ITGI), which I have written about previously in this blog:
- Ensure IT is aligned with the business
- Ensure IT delivers value to the business
- Ensure IT manages risk
- Ensure IT manages resources
- Ensure IT manages performance
So my reasoning was if they taught these subjects, their curriculum foundation would never need to change. The content and subject matter would change as technology, frameworks, methodologies, etc. changed, but the class titles would remain the same.
They were intrigued by my ideas and we adjourned shortly thereafter. That evening I received a note expressing appreciation for my involvement and inviting me to join the Board as one of their Industry Members.
I am very excited at the prospect of evangelizing IT Governance to the technology leaders of the future.
-
Viva Processo
I recently spoke at an Executive Leadership Conference CA sponsored in Los Cabos, Mexico. The opportunity to visit such a wonderful destination was enticing, but it was the prospect of presenting my ideas about IT Governance (ITG) to a room full of CIOs that provided the greatest thrill.
I talked about the value of IT Governance and how Project and Portfolio Management (PPM) is a good place to start when approaching ITG. I provided a brief overview of each of the ITG processes to demonstrate the ubiquitous nature of the discipline. I then went into more detail on PPM processes to substantiate why PPM is a good place to initiate their journey into IT Governance. As in all of my ITG presentations, I stressed the processes required and the importance of great process management discipline.
Jose Mora, CA Product Marketing Director, joined me to give a CA Clarity presentation. All went well despite the language barrier. (Yes, surnames aside, Steve Romero and Jose Mora both spoke in English to a fortunately bilingual audience.) Little did I know that I would soon go from being pleased to being outright delighted with the conference.
The final items on the day's agenda were the roundtable discussions focused on Governance, Management or Security (following CA's three Enterprise IT Management pillars of Govern, Manage and Secure). Of the 38 conference participants, 16 chose the Governance roundtable.
I insisted they speak in their native tongue, which I knew would make their conversations more productive. I was content to stand by for any questions they might have or insights they may have wanted me to share. They wasted little time getting started; passionate and animated exchanges quickly ensued. Their level of enthusiasm would have been gratifying enough, but what pleased me the most was a word I heard repeated again and again--processo.
It began as a smattering of the word here and there, but by the mid-point of the forum, it was constant--processo, processo, processo in almost every sentence!
I am an IT Governance Evangelist because I believe in what IT Governance enables an enterprise to achieve. I am passionate about it and I love sharing that passion. I am even more passionate about process management.
I know process management is all about an acute and unyielding focus on the customer - and delighting that customer. I know good processes and good process management result in making work possible and practical. I know process management executed correctly is enabling, empowering and even liberating for people participating in the process. So hearing processo again and again was joyful for me. But it gets better.
The long day was followed by a magnificent dinner on the beach. It was a great way to conclude the event and it provided me the opportunity to have one-on-one conversations with some of the participants.
One of the CIOs sought me out because he wanted to talk to me about process management. At the end of our conversation he told me he was going to meet with his CEO and ask for funding to staff a Process Consulting group. Somehow I expressed my endorsement without jumping up and down and hugging him.
I ran an IT Process Consulting Group as part of my IT Governance organization in a previous position. It was a task force formally and primarily dedicated to IT Governance and Process Management - the product of my passion and a very forward-thinking CIO. Though I suspect they must be out there, I have yet to personally encounter another organization with an internal staff dedicated to providing process management consulting services to their enterprise.
Our systems and solutions are nothing if not accompanied by good processes. Without good process management, our processes are barely worth the paper on which they are printed. I know how critical the discipline of process management is, and I believe every organization should have people dedicated to providing process management expertise and ultimately ensuring process success.
I was overjoyed to witness this CIO's conviction to convince his leadership to invest in the discipline of process management. I bid the CIO good luck and managed to express my sincere desire that he succeed while barely maintaining a professional demeanor. Inside, I was delirious.
Viva Processo!
Print
Email
Rate