InformationWeek

Before I ask my question, a brief bit of background: I'm in a co-operative education program, so every four months I get to work for a new company (usually we stick with these companies for two of these four-month terms).

A few years ago, essentially my career goal was to work my way up the IS department ladder to become a CIO. So, I joined the IT department of a financial-services company in Toronto for my first two co-op terms. I really liked the dreamy notion of being able to help a business grow with the help of technology, and was very much a believer of the notion that "communication will solve your problems--if you're a good communicator, you'll be a good manager, and a good CIO, because people will listen to you."

Well, after experiencing IS management politics and infighting (I was assigned to some projects that gave me exposure to it) and after reading your column, I sort of got disillusioned with the CIO dream. It's a thankless job. It is often not a job in which you have significant influence over the top management team, and communication is a two-way street: How often do vice presidents actually LISTEN to you?

Now, I'm looking more at staying on the technical side, and perhaps moving into project management--I'm working my co-op terms in Silicon Valley at a software-hardware consulting firm.

So my question is: Why are you a CIO? Why do you stay in your job? What's the reward? The risks are huge (CIO tenures are usually so short), and with all the childish executive behavior you have to put up with, what reward really can make this better? I'm sincerely interested, because I have tremendous respect for you being able to stick at your job despite fighting an uphill battle.

Thanks,
Stuart C.

Dear Stuart:
I appreciate your thoughtful letter. As you are seeing firsthand, a major value of co-operative education programs is the ability to evaluate your career path as experience is gained in the workplace. It exposes a person to many situations and, I suspect, leads to the conclusion that there are positives and negatives to all jobs. With that in mind, I would suggest that you should not let one bad experience overly influence you.

When I write, I try to give people a realistic view of what you are faced with as a CIO in a large company--the good, the boring, and the frustrating. From the letters I have received, I have learned that my personal experiences are not all that different from many of our readers. Certainly, when I speak to other CIOs over cocktails at professional meetings, I almost always walk away with the conviction that we share many of the same circumstances.

I suppose there are as many answers to why a CIO stays in her or his job as there are CIOs. You are correct that there can be quite a bit of infighting and rather poor behavior at a company's management levels. There is no question that I find that part of the job to be debilitating, at best. It is not pleasant for me to have to deal with situations in which all the petty jealousies and self-serving interests of individuals are foremost in the decision-making process.

On the other hand, there are certain satisfactions in the job. Of course, there is the professional pride. For me, it is knowing that I am doing work that is difficult, but if done properly will make life easier for my co-workers in the company as well as advance the business goals of the company for which I work. Those factors may not sound like much, but I do get a sense of pride from being able to think that I have achieved results that not everyone else could have obtained.

I suppose my most valued moments--and perhaps the ones that keep me going--are those in which I feel that I have helped others grow in their careers where otherwise they might have stumbled. Re-reading what I have written, I suspect it doesn't sound like a good reason, but for what it's worth, that's what keeps me getting up in the morning and going into a place where I sometimes really dislike what I have to do. For me, the balance is positive. On the other hand, it's my personality to remember and cherish the good parts of the job while discounting the unpleasant ones you so aptly cite.

Your comments or, in fact, practical experience?

Ahsan

Dear Ahsan:
Phil, our CEO, is very concerned about the bottom line of the company and what the earnings will be next quarter. In that respect, I think he has many counterparts in executive suites throughout the world. Had I gone to him and complained about Kratmeyer's behavior, I would have heard words of sympathy, but the conversation would have turned quickly to the importance of getting the job done.

Other than soothing myself with the conviction that I had done my best for the people, nothing would have been accomplished. The people would still have to integrate the new business into our systems and meet the time-frame already agreed upon by Kratmeyer.

First, I don't quite understand the situation you faced. If I were you, I would just accept what Kratmeyer said and feel very angry about the whole thing because I didn't have any power to stop this from happening. But if you just accept his actions, it will be hard for you because the situation will get worse and your co-workers or troops will blame you. Please tell me what you will do or what you decided to do.

Thank you for your attention.

Sincerely,
Sheba H.

Dear Sheba:
Anger doesn't help. What I did was reset the priorities of the organization to achieve the targets he had so graciously negotiated without our involvement. While our staff had to work hard to do everything on time and on budget, at least I was able to make the task a little less onerous for them by delaying some of their previously scheduled work. I then made sure that all of the other executives whose work was being delayed knew that Kratmeyer's project had the highest priority because of the tight time frame.

My next action was to go to Phil after the project was well under way and tell him of the great job the people were doing and said that while I had money for some nice lunches for them and maybe a party or two in the office to celebrate the milestones, I did not have enough for bonuses. Since he saw that the team was going to help his bottom line and he felt we should encourage them to stay around for the next crisis, he was gracious enough to let me spend a few dollars that were not in the budget for some extra awards.

For a little bit of an explanation as to why I did things the way I did, take a look at the next letter.

Thank you for your time.

So-Youn

Dear So-Youn:
Hmm. I am starting to see a pattern here in the letters on "The Useless Estimate." Do I sense a class assignment?

In any case, here are the reasons I handled things the way I did.

Regardless of how unreasonable Kratmeyer was, he is still in a predicament. He made a decision to integrate an acquisition into our company within 90 days without checking with us as to the complexity of doing so. He is paying money for service fees that will not go away until their systems are merged with ours. Knowing that, it is useless for me to try to get him to change the dates--and talking about what he should have done will only infuriate him. In general, people will forgive you for many things. Being right and telling them so is not one of them.

Going to Phil is also useless. He is as concerned as Kratmeyer, if not more so, with the success of the acquisition. The one place a CEO gets to shine is when buying or selling a business.

By shifting our priorities ("rip up their schedules") to get the job done, I satisfied Kratmeyer and Phil while at the same time lightening the burden somewhat on my staff. I demonstrated that we could be counted on to do our job. At the same time, by getting a wee angry with Kratmeyer and showing it, I got his attention that what he was asking for could have been accomplished with less risk--which is frankly all he cares about--than we were taking.

The key was to let every other executive know that Kratmeyer's project suddenly had top priority and that their own pet projects would probably slip from their original schedules. None of them could argue that his acquisition was not a top priority, but they could--and several did--grumble quietly that he should have planned better. He was not unaware of the noise that his actions had caused. While there is no guarantee that he will not pull the same stunt again, there is no doubt in my mind that he will think more carefully before he does.

By accomplishing the integration of the new business under difficult circumstances and a chorus of mumbling from the other executives about the impact of this unplanned activity, we helped Phil become more receptive than he might otherwise have been to letting a little money flow to the IT professionals who made it happen. While the funds do not compensate for the extra hard work the staff did, it helped. In addition, and perhaps even more important, the people exhibited a great sense of pride and achievement in being successful with a project that was important to the well-being of the company.