Published: July 20 2009, 10:55 AM | 2 Comment(s)
by Steve Romero

For years, I have argued there is no such thing as an IT project. Instead, I contend all projects are "business projects" that may or may not involve information technology. (Though these days, in almost every enterprise and organization you would be hard-pressed to find a project that does not include a technology component.)

Before I state my case, let me acknowledge that this has not always been the case. I started working in IT over 30 years ago, before many companies even had IT organizations, or computers for that matter. When information technology was first introduced there was a chasm between the business and "those computer guys."  There was no confusion as to what constituted a business project and what constituted a data processing (remember that term?) project.

I am certain I don't have to convince you things are much different today. Technology has become ubiquitous if not unavoidable. And though it permeates every aspect of our lives, I still encounter organization after organization insisting there is a line or demarcation between IT and the business.

This issue is raised almost every time I deliver my Project and Portfolio Management presentation. I describe the most fundamental criteria for project selection and prioritization - its connection and contribution to business strategy. I tell my audiences if the project or investment request is not directly linked to strategy, don't do it! Somebody in the audience inevitably raises their hand and asks, "What about IT projects." I then tell them there is no such thing because all projects are business projects. The person will almost always immediately counter, "What about IT infrastructure projects?" They mention how their IT organizations find it near impossible to convince the business units they serve to undertake this upgrade or that conversion in the interest of staying current or avoiding obsolescence.  Even when faced with the loss of vendor support or spare parts availability they can't get the business to invest in the required upgrade or replacement.

This is my favorite example, because it gets to the heart of my contention. The "fault" in this example does not lie with the business' inability to understand and realize the need. That fault lies with IT's inability or neglect in regard to describing the need for and value of technology in business terms. Many if not most IT organizations cannot draw direct correlations between the technology they deploy and support and the business need it serves as well as the business value it delivers. To make matters even worse, many IT organizations can't adequately describe the lifecycle cost of their technologies, which make the latter problem practically impossible to solve.

Let's walk through a hypothetical scenario (that I would bet is not hypothetical at all):

IT is operating and maintaining hardware components that are about to become manufacturer discontinued.  The vendor has notified IT and given them their "drop-dead" date for support. (Let's set aside the fact that IT should have seen this coming and solved it before this circumstance arose. We will leave that to another post.) Almost every IT organization I know would either fund the required hardware migration with "IT dollars/budget" or attempt to get the business to fund the "IT infrastructure upgrade." Instead, the following should occur:

IT, understanding the correlation between the antiquated hardware and the services said technology provides to the business, identifies all affected Service Level Agreements (SLAs). IT then conducts the analysis to enable the following conversation with each of the affected business units/users:

"Here is your current SLA and associated service cost. If you don't invest in upgrade X, here is a timeline describing the degradation of your service, or, here is how much your service cost will increase over time to maintain your current SLA."

IT would then present the alternative to the inevitable service degradation or increase in service cost:

"Here is the cost of the new technology (implementation as well as full lifecycle) and the resulting new SLA(s)."

Now the ball is in the business' court and they have a business decision in regard to whether or not they should invest in new technology. They simply need to determine the business value of staying on the antiquated technology infrastructure or investing in the upgrade to maintain and in some cases improve their SLA. This is a business decision, ergo business project.

So why doesn't this type of conversation take place? Because very few IT organizations have the capability to put these technology discussions into business terms. They lack the systematic processes in place to collect, integrate, analyze and disseminate the data required to make these business decisions.

Now if every enterprise had sound IT Investment Governance and the associated IT Investment Portfolio Management, they would be able to obtain the decision-making data from their:

• IT Asset Portfolio
• IT Application Portfolio
• IT Resource Portfolio
• IT Demand Portfolio
• Enterprise Project and Program Portfolio
• IT Service Portfolio and associated SLAs
• IT Configuration Management Database

It is these governance mechanisms and constructs that enable enterprises to make direct and accurate correlations and associations between the technology they deploy and the business capability it enables, as well as the business value it provides. Until this in place, technology is left to dangle off to the side of the business because the data is not available to create the direct linkage to enable reasoned and rational decision-making in the use of said technology - business decisions. Without this governance and the data it provides, IT organizations will continue the struggle to acquire the funding required to do what they intuitively know is right because they can't produce the information to enable the business to make the right decision - for themselves.

So what do you think? Can you come up with an example of something that is truly an "IT project?"

Steve Romero, IT Governance Evangelist

Share this post:  Email

Share

Published: July 09 2009, 10:18 PM | no comments
by Steve Romero

I just took a quick look at an article posted on Twitter by @DDubie offering advice for pursuing IT entry-level certifications http://bit.ly/8M9Hh. Though the recommendations were for folks at the beginning of their IT careers I was interested because I hold a number of certifications. I was a little surprised that none of mine were listed. Upon reflection, I can understand why. The article is about technical certifications, something a graduating student would pursue to increase their chances of breaking in to an IT organization. In comparison, my certifications are more IT-general than technology specific - save one. In fact, my one non-IT-specific certification is the inspiration for this post because it is the one I most cherish. It's the one I love.

I received my first IT-related certification in the mid 1980's, shortly after joining a Data Communications Planning organization in a regional telephone company. It was the still little-known Certified Computing Professional (CCP) certificate from the Institute for Certification of Computer Professionals (ICCP) http://www.iccp.org/ . It was a 3-part test, a 200-question Information Systems Core examination and two 100-question specialty examinations. I passed the two specialty exams on the first try but I had to take the Core exam a second time. It was a tough test requiring a comprehensive knowledge of IT. I still have yet to meet one other person (outside of direct dealings with ICCP) who has the certification or has even heard of it.

My second certification was my Project Management Professional (PMP) from the Project Management Institute (PMI) http://www.pmi.org/Pages/default.aspx . I took the time to prepare and take the test after my entire group was laid off from Charles Schwab at the end of 2002 (their 3^rd layoff following the Internet bust of 2000). There were so many of us looking for work in Silicon Valley that companies began purchasing resume screening apps in HR. If yours did not have the right keywords it was never touched by human hands. I had been managing projects and leading other project managers for years but I needed those 3 letters to even get somebody to talk to me.

I received my third certification in 2003. My best friend Michael Nelson easily convinced me that Information Security would be critical in the aftermath of 9/11. Though neither of us had worked in a dedicated security group, our 20+ years in IT easily provided the experience to fulfill the prerequisites to take the International Information Systems Security Certification Consortium (ISC2) http://www.isc2.org/ Certified Information Systems Security Professional (CISSP) exam. It was much more difficult than the PMP exam and we both thought we had failed. To our surprise we both passed on the first try. Mike has become @mrfisma, having immersed himself entirely in the Information Security profession. I have since used the indispensible knowledge immeasurably due the ubiquitous and critical nature of security in IT.

My 4^th certification, if you can call it that, is the one of which I am most proud - Certified Process Master (CPM). I did not expect to see this one in the article because it is not sponsored by a professional association or institute. It did not require any prerequisite experience and I did not have to take a test. Basically, I bought it.

The Certified Process Master title is earned by taking three courses through Hammer and Company http://www.hammerandco.com/ . The three courses make up the process management curriculum based on Michael Hammers' decades of research in business processes and on the accumulated experiences of hundreds of companies. Michael passed away late last year to the shock of many of us. He was only 62 and he will be sorely missed. I considered him the Godfather of Process Management and I consider myself fortunate to have known and worked with him. (I participated as a Phoenix Consortium member in his development of his process maturity model.)

It was becoming a Certified Process Master that most influenced me professionally, more than my other three certifications combined. Michael's theories and insights into process management had a profound effect on me. The courses I took with Michael answered so many of the questions and addressed countless challenges I had faced over my career. Of all of the acronyms that follow my signature, CPM (Certified Process Master) means the most to me. If there was only one thing I could talk about for the rest of my career, it would be about the power and promise of process management. I love process management.

Which brings me back to the article I cited at the beginning of this post, advice for folks deciding on which IT certification to pursue. Of all of the recommendations in the article, I believe the following is most critical:

• Pick one and own it!
• Your level of interest - your passion for a topic

The second bullet is the most important to me. Choose something about which you feel passionate. Having passion for something makes all of the difference in the world. It will get you out of bed in the morning and give you the best chance of overcoming the challenges of the day. It will energize you and energize those around you.

So when considering your next certification or career path, or offering advice to somebody who is, answer one question: "Do I have passion for this?" The rest will come easily, if you choose the one you love.

Steve Romero, IT Governance Evangelist

P.S. I am also ITIL Foundation Certified, circa 2006 - a must for everyone working in IT, especially considering it requires only a day or two of study and an easy test. Though the time and effort is minimal, the resulting perspective change from a system-centric to service-centric view of IT is indispensible.

Share this post:  Email

Share

Published: July 02 2009, 09:22 AM | 1 Comment(s)
by Steve Romero

I have written a number of posts discussing the rate of IT project failure. According to every study I have seen over the past 10 years, at least half of all IT projects fail. I believe there are many factors that contribute to this trend but during a recent interview with SearchCIO http://bit.ly/3w5S3, Kristen Caretta asked me to choose one. Whenever I am asked this question I always cite the lack of sound Project and Portfolio Management (PPM). I have seen few organizations that have the appropriate decision-making processes and relationships to ensure their IT investments are reasoned and rational.

Sound PPM enables enterprises to determine the optimal mix and sequencing of proposed programs and projects to best achieve the organization's overall goals. PPM enables investments to be expressed in terms of hard economic measures, aligned to business strategy goals, while honoring constraints imposed by management or external real-world factors. Without this capability, I argue many projects are doomed before they begin.

My discussion with Kristen reminded me of a recent visit I had with a CIO who is in the beginning stages of revamping an IT organization for a major insurance provider. We talked about many things in our two hours together, including IT investment governance in his organization. In our conversation, he offered a much simpler explanation for the rate of IT project failures. He contended enterprises are "Happy with crappy." He said so with a mischievous grin and I couldn't help but laugh.

I am sure you have heard that there is an element of truth in every joke, and his clever comment caused me pause. In the past, I have theorized that our inability to correct this disturbing trend was partially due to a complacency born of a belief that technology projects inherently:

• Take longer than we plan
• Cost more than we anticipate
• Don't usually deliver what the user wants - the first time (for a variety of rationalized reasons)

Did his comment provide more insight into my theory? Are we happy with crappy based on our rationalization that technology projects are inherently difficult to estimate and deliver successfully? Let me know what you think.

Steve Romero, IT Governance Evangelist

Share this post:  Email

Share