InformationWeek

Ask The Secret CIO

By Herbert W. Lovelace
Issue date: July 29, 1996

Your letters to my print column and this online forum ask some serious questions about managing IT in today's world. But since today's world is essentially absurd, my serious responses may sometimes sound a little whimsical, and my occasional whimsical one, serious. In any case, if you want to participate, write to me at secret@cmp.com . I'll respond to tho se letters that I can. I reserve the right to edit for size and content. Just sign your E-mail the way you want it to appear online.

Herb,

I really enjoy your articles in InformationWeek . I aspire to hold the rank of CIO someday, yet I see so many differences between the "workers" and the managers. Is it really more of an art to being a CIO, with specific knowledge about the systems being unimportant, and general knowledge and tact being of utmost importance? I know this is a "deep" question, but it is almost Thursday and my mind is reaching the "peak" thinking part of the week. Thanks, and by the way, I like the plaid jacket and shoes.

James Gaston
Project Analyst
Arkansas Children's Hospital
Little Rock, Ark.

Dear James,

Thanks for your letter. Actually, I don't own a plaid jacket, and I try to avoid pointy shoes, but I think the artist does a great job anyway. You see, real CIOs try to dress better than their bosses. The idea is to give the imp ression that you don't need the job for the money and that in any case you have good social presence. The latter is not expected of a CIO and thus is very important.

Anyway, your question is a great one. I had dinner recently with a fellow CIO who confessed that he had no idea of what model computer his group was buying to implement SAP for a business unit, but that he was hand-in-glove with the general manager of the unit on strategy and goals. He felt happy, and rightfully so. In fact, he even bought a particularly good Cabernet Sauvignon with dinner--that's how successful he felt his day was. The bottom line is that while technical skills are necessary (you do have to know whether buying that particular machine is or is not a mistake), if you don't have the confidence of the business people, you lose before the game begins.

Herb:

Couldn't agree more with your article in InformationWeek on " Understanding Each Other ." It is amazing how often I am accused of being too technical by Finance personnel; in particular, when I have used few, if any, technical terms in an explanation that they have requested. I think the real key to your thesis is the comment in the fourth paragraph about "things they didn't learn about 30 years ago at Yale." It really is not any more difficult understanding IT than it is understanding a set of complicated financial statements. All you have to do is take a little time to listen, read, and learn! But, then, learning actually has always been WORK!

John Adams
Title and Company Unknown

Dear John,

What you say is true, but keep in mind that if they acted differently, we would have less to talk about over coffee with our colleagues.

Dear Herb:

Is it really that simple?

In your InformationWeek article dated March 18 , you said "the only partnerships of value to us were those that enhance quick decisions and implementation. The compan ies with the fastest response to unanticipated challenges would be the survivors."

I would like to know more about how you perceive application software suppliers. I have been selling application software for more than 10 years and have recently adopted the philosophy you stated in your article. However, not all the people I sell to agree with your statement. Any thoughts or words of wisdom?

Craig Jones
Title and Company Unknown

Dear Craig,

You've got a solid product (of course there are a lot of solid products in the marketplace) and you are selling flexibility (along with a lot of other vendors). Not everyone wants to pay for future flexibility at the expense of today's functions or dollars. My suggestion is to stop calling on them and instead visit other potential customers for about six to nine months, then go back and try selling to their successors. Some managers are indeed smart enough to know exactly where their businesses are going, but they are in the minor ity.

Herb:

Just read your article on " Partners" (March 18) and agree with you entirely. As a former CIO and technology executive I've learned that dealing with vendors like IBM and AT&T requires a set of common definitions before you can have a conversation. In this case "Partnership" is defined as follows:

Vendor: How can we get more of your money in our pocket with less work and a higher profit margin?

Customer: Someone who shares the rewards of success and penalty of failure in equal measure.

A real partner understands that they don't succeed if the others in the partnership don't. It must always be a "win-win." However, the worst offenders may not be the vendors like IBM and AT&T who actually provide some hard resources, but the consulting firms who often make more for delivering less, and then tell you how lucky you were to have them.

Keep up the good work,
Arthur Przybyl
Title and Company Unknown

Dear Arthur,

You obviously understand the relationship between a vendor and a customer in many so-called partnerships. While it can be rewarding, it also can occasionally approximate a marriage where each spouse feels the other should contribute 75 percent as their half of the relationship.

Herb,

I just read your article in InformationWeek (May 27). As a Project Manager dealing with the Year 2000 assessment at my company, I am questioning how effective it will be to have your staff dealing with things as they 'come up,' rather than finding them and correcting them now. It seems that fixing things in the heat of the moment makes for poor fixes that cause problems later. Could you explain to me how this is going to allow your organization to make it through the 2-digit problem, when it is possible that you will have so many problems coming to your support staff at once that there will not be time to correct all of the problems in a timely manner?

I'm not trying to be critical, but it seems a bit shortsighted and I would like to be enlightened.

Thanks,
Mark Francis
Project Manager
Airborne Express
Seattle, Wash.

Dear Mark,

You have asked the same important question that Phil Whitehead, the president of the company, asks in the column. What Phil hears is that his IS people are:

1) Fixing what they know about,
2) Checking the most used programs,
3) Leaving alone what did not impact the business�such as dates on order-entry screens
4) Spending money to strengthen the response capability

I think we all know that spending money to find bugs (except in hospitals and air-traffic control systems) can quickly reach the point of diminishing returns. The key point is that the president knows that some of the money saved will be used to improve the staff's ability to react. In this sense, the Year 2000 provides an opportunity to help fund the ongoing IS problem of slow reaction time to operational problems. Providing quick response�and manag ing expectations�are critical parts of the CIO job. On Jan. 2, 2000, imagine how many CEOs will say something like, "I let you spend $20 million and our mortgage program is wrong!" Consultants have yet to begin discussing this fun scenario.

Herb,

I've just read your column in InformationWeek , and I find myself in the position to ask your advice. I work for a large healthcare system, and our CIO is leaving. I'm sorry to see him go. I am applying for the vacant job, but I'm sure I'll be faced with your issue from " Understanding Each Other ."

How do I convince the CEO that he needs a technology person who understands business, not a business person who thinks they understand technology?

Thanks,
Larry Nisenoff
Title and Company Unknown

Dear Larry,

I know this is going to sound rough, but you cannot. If the CEO doesn't think he needs a technology person who understands business, the last person from whom he will accept a contrary opinion is a technology person. Whether they come from the business side or the technology side, CIOs today need to have a solid strategic and operational grasp of both business and technical issues; that's what makes the job so interesting. If you feel you have the business knowledge he wants, discuss that with him; if you do not, ask to serve on committees or task forces so that you can get it and go for the job the next time around.

Dear Herb:

I've encouraged my staff to use the term 'customer' instead of 'user'. The term 'user' implies that our clients use drugs, and while that often may be the case (an impression based upon behavior), it is poor form to point it out to them.

Over the years I've become weary of technical people who are uncooperative and ethnocentric. Without sales and production, MIS wouldn't exist! The attitude within our field toward our 'users' is generally condescending. This translates into very poor service, as the technoids filter the requests and decide what to give to whom.

With the advent of outsourcing, MIS needs to become a service oriented internal organization�or they'll end up as independent contractors! We need to learn the business (Who are our competitors? What products do we sell? Who are the external customers? Why are we better or worse than other players in this market? Where do we need to improve? How can we gain market share?). We need to just say "yes" when asked for support, and we need to treat our users as customers.

I love your column. Keep up the great work! And take a customer to lunch!

Ed Delaporte
Title and Company Unknown

Dear Ed,

You make several good points. To take them a step further, it is fair to say that mutual dependencies are a fact of life because of the importance of technology. In other words, you are correct that without sales and marketing, MIS would not exist. However, I think that some people forget that in today's wired world the converse is also true. We all need each other, and problems occur whenever any organization thinks it has all the answers.

Dear Herb:

If one assumes the CIO's value and success is a function of the business value he/she delivers to the company, doesn't it seem hopeless for the next few years? If we've generally been delivering too little, too late for the last few years, it only stands to reason that the next few years will only be worse. So many labor hours will be redirected fixing date logic that results in little, if any, added business value.

It seems like there ought to be a way we could measure the value of avoiding disaster. Most CEO and CFOs I encounter seem unwilling to step up to the investment to avoid the impending application software disaster. Maybe they are too short-term oriented. Will everybody change jobs in 1999 or 2000 so they can blame the problems on the previous regime?

James Ray
Executive VP
McCready Manigold Ray & Co. Inc.
Seminole, Fla.

Dear James,

Not to worry. Don't be so pessimistic. The problem frequently is not the quantity of resources, but the direction in which they are aimed. Business and technical people need to prioritize and put their money where they think it will do the most good. The interesting thing is that people will rarely invest in what they do not understand, and that's where the CIO can help.

Got a question for The Secret CIO? Just send an e-mail .

http://www.informationweek.com