InformationWeek

Susan

Dear Susan:
Not by providing us with more fonts to use with our PowerPoint presentations, that's for sure!

I smiled when I first read your question, thinking its answer was obvious. But the more I thought about it, the more I realized that the subject is not as simple as I had initially assumed. First of all, it's necessary to define productivity. For example, sitting in the office and sending lots of copies of my E-mails with a touch of a button to people who just delete them with equal speed just doesn't seem to me to qualify as a productivity improvement.

Figuring, however, that I might be too harsh in my attitude, I checked my favorite dictionary. It said that productivity is the rate at which a company produces goods or services, in relation to the amount of materials and number of employees needed. But that definition sounds much too formal to suit me, and I wasn't sure it captured the real value of information technology.

It's pretty easy to see how the tractor has increased productivity in agriculture: More food is produced with fewer farmers than before. However, it gets a little blurry when we are talking about determining the increase in productivity (if any) in an office that winds up with the same number of secretaries and corporate staff after a few million dollars of personal computers are installed.

Basically, the conundrum is resolved by the fact that the traditional definition of productivity (that's the one in my dictionary) doesn't capture doing things better or differently because of technology; for example, keeping clients happy--and retaining them as clients--because of a more thorough or personalized analysis of their needs. So how about if we just say that when the ratio of useful output to input goes up, so does productivity.

Using this new definition, the answer to your question expands. Technology can improve productivity in three ways: increasing the ratio of what is produced to what it costs to do it; changing processes to lower error rates and improve customer satisfaction; and providing new products and services that would not be possible or economically warranted otherwise.

We are all familiar with justifying an IT project based on reducing costs and thus improving productivity. In the last few years, businesses have begun to understand that the other aspects of productivity--lower error rates, improved customer satisfaction, and providing new products and services--yield the most meaningful measurement of all: increased profitability.

Working full time coupled with a full load at school is beginning to wear me down. I am considering cutting back my school schedule to ease some of my stress. Is this the right move? Or should I consider cutting my work hours and continue with the larger course load? I really enjoy my job and am get loads of on-the-job experience. But is it better to get school out of the way? I have about two and a half years left, and if I cut back it will take up to five years. Will this really affect me?

Thanks,
Stressed Student

Dear Stressed:
Jobs come and go. Education is forever.

It is unlikely that you are getting everything you can from your schooling while you are burning the candle at both ends. Besides, it sounds as if you have no time for anything other than work and school, which is not a very happy situation. You are to be commended, however, for recognizing that you are probably trying to do too much at one time.

Since I don't know your financial situation, your career goals, or your growth potential with your company, it is difficult to give you an opinion as to what you should do. Actually, if I had all of that information, I more than likely still would not give you any advice other than to suggest you review these factors and decide what has to give. If you don't cut back, you may wind up not completing either your education or performing your job to your satisfaction. Think about what you want to achieve and make your decision, accordingly. Don't hesitate to talk to your supervisor at work and your advisor at school to see if each can offer some help in lightening your load.

Good luck and let me know your progress.

We know who the experts are, but how do we explain it to HR?

Thanks,
John

Dear John:
You are not alone in recognizing that not all good technical people want to become managers and that, indeed, some of them would not be very good at it. It is a rather common problem. How do you reward and retain the best and brightest when they have no desire to take the supervisory track?

Fortunately, if you have good people in your human-resources department, they will be more than familiar with this type of situation. The HR establishment has plenty of material and sample job descriptions that cover information technology as well as the research and development community, in which the problem first surfaced many years ago. I suggest that rather than trying to figure out how to convince HR to go along with the idea of a technical career ladder for your staff, you instead go to your human resources director and solicit her help. My sense is that you will find her group will be more than willing to work with you on the issue. If not, which would surprise me, then your best bet is to search human-resource Web sites to build up a case that supports your point of view. The HR people will find it far more difficult to argue with what experts in their own field have written than with what individuals who have IT backgrounds have to say.

Like yourself, I am a passionate consumer of books, both online and off the shelf. It was a natural to compare the giants of Amazon.com and Barnes & Noble to see each company's strengths and weaknesses and the opportunities for the maximal shopping/profit experience that each offers. Like yourself ("Barnes & Noble: Hit Back!") the conclusion was that Barnes & Noble had a major potential advantage in the marketplace by being able to offer the best of both worlds--online ordering with in-store support. Therefore, B&N should meld and maximize both sides of its operations just as you described.

Our conclusions and recommendations were sent off to Barnes & Noble, but, alas, not so much as an acknowledgment was received in reply. Perhaps your saying the same thing with a louder, more public voice may have better results. As a consumer and book lover, I can but hope so.

Craig D.

Dear Craig:
It may give you some comfort to know that you are not alone. I have not received any requests, either, from Len Riggio and crew to sit down with them and discuss my ideas.

I remain surprised that Barnes & Noble has not taken advantage of its strength by doing just what you and your class have determined--offering all combinations of the Web and the store experience. Just imagine the beauty of being able to order online and pick up the book at the store, or while browsing in the store, ordering from a kiosk a book that is not in stock. My guess is that a lot more books and cappuccinos would be sold if this approach were taken.

The argument that I've heard against such a product offering is that doing so would subject the purchases to local sales tax, which, of course, is not charged to most customers on a Web site. I'm not sure at all, though, that this argument makes sense if the customer were to have the option of eliminating the shipping charges by going to the store. Such an option would be highly desirable for all concerned, especially if the book can be taken by the store sales staff from inventory and be ready and waiting for the customer. So far as existing differential pricing between the Internet and the stores, this situation has to be dealt with anyway, otherwise the Web will critically hurt the store sales.

It seems to me that businesses are starting to come around to our point of view. I am seeing many more companies beginning to explore just what you propose. If they do not, they run the risk of serious trouble. Recently I wrote "Merging Clicks And Bricks," which addresses what I think will happen if enterprises don't leverage the strengths of their existing business model with the new opportunities afforded them by the existence of the Internet. I certainly hope that Barnes & Noble starts to take heed. I'd hate to have to put in a bid to buy my latte from a Priceline.com machine at what used to be my friendly local bookstore.

Herbert W. Lovelace shares his experiences (changing most names, including his own, to protect the guilty) as CIO of a multibillion-dollar international company. Send him E-mail at lovelace@home.com.