InformationWeek

Please help.

Thanks and regards,
Isabel

Dear Isabel:
I suspect that practically every manager has been in your situation at one time or another. I know that I have. My biggest fault was that I would rationalize that the person's productivity wasn't really all that bad. I remember how I would look at every minor improvement as an indication of a major change in attitude and performance. Unfortunately, in the vast majority of cases, I was just fooling myself, hoping against hope that the individual would become an adequate performer so that I would be spared the unpleasant duty of telling him that he no longer fit into the organization. After a number of years, I realized that it was my dislike of telling a person bad news that made me continue to try to rescue a situation that I knew would not get better, so I forced myself to modify my approach. Now, I always ask myself the question, "Would I hire this person?" The answer invariably guides my actions.

It is my painful duty to advise you that in practically all instances of people performing at less than expectations, we refuse to admit to ourselves that the situation is not going to improve. If we can be honest with ourselves, we have several choices. The first is to accept the level of performance that we see. The second is to transfer the person to another group so that the problem is no longer ours. The third is to fire the person and get someone in the job who doesn't disappoint us.

Accepting a level of performance that frustrates us is, in the long-term, a bad idea. What do you do when it comes time to give out raises? What about the impact on the motivation of co-workers who frequently are called upon to redo the work of the low-performer? What happens to the attitude and reputation of the company if less than high-quality work is tolerated?

As a matter of managerial competence, I reject the second alternative, transferring the problem to someone else. If you're like most people, you've always disliked managers who took this path, so I'm sure that you don't want to be lumped in with them. I know that I don't want to be.

I would suggest, instead, that you sit down with the individual and firmly explain the performance issues. Use specific examples. Don't hypothesize as to why he or she is not meeting expectations --just talk about the criteria of the job and what you are seeing that's not up to requirements. This part of the task may not be as difficult as it might seem. While some people will argue with you, I have found that people often are just as tired of not performing up to expectations as we are with putting up with sub-par work. As a result of your conversation, don't be surprised if the employee decides to leave for greener pastures. If so, do everything you can to make the parting a pleasant one for all concerned.

If the person accepts what you are saying, then he needs to convince you he wants to perform better. If he does, then develop a timetable of goals and expected results. Ensure that any needed training or remedial education is identified. Put it in writing for both of you. Make sure that you meet periodically to go over progress. Stick to the plan. Ensure that performance improves or take action to sever the person from the job. In the long run, you are doing both of you a favor.

What if the person argues with you during your performance discussion? Listen carefully to what he or she has to say. On the off chance that you have been missing something important, accept what you hear if it makes sense (Have you been expecting too much? Did you misunderstand the complexity of the project you assigned?) and make mutual plans to improve performance and the measurement of it. If, on the other hand, you're still convinced the person is underperforming and is now denying it, then take the next logical step. Fire the employee. You owe it to the company to make sure that overall group performance is not dragged down, or everyone will suffer because of the poor showing of a single individual.

What role does ethics play in their position?

Frankly, I'm stumped. I don't know any good CIOs to interview and I'm having trouble finding printed information on the subject. I would really appreciate your opinion.

Thanking you in advance,
Tom

Dear Tom:
The role and responsibilities of a CIO vary depending on the company, the particular problems faced by it, and the strengths of the respective members of the management team. In general, however, it's safe to say that the overall job of the CIO is to ensure that the systems results and business direction of the company are in sync. The desirable traits of a CIO also vary according to the needs of the business, but people have the most chance of success as a CIO if they are able to learn quickly, can get along with others, understand technology and business direction, communicate well, and are capable of being viewed as a leader by the IT people.

Ethics plays a very strong role in being a successful CIO. As a CIO, you'll find yourself in situations in which people have to trust your judgment because you'll be recommending courses of actions that they may not fully understand. Without trust in you as a person, there can be no trust in your technical judgment. Without visible ethical standards, no one knows if they can trust you as a person. Without trust, you can't be effective.

While the vast majority of CIOs I know have great integrity, there are some who are, shall we say, ethically challenged. I know of one CIO who deliberately didn't put in a low-cost patch to one of his major applications so that he could convince management that the company needed to spend millions to replace the system. When I asked him how he could do such a thing (he was bragging to me at the time about how he was going to be on the leading edge of technology in his industry), he told me his move was "a strategic decision," as if his lack of honesty was somehow forgivable by the use of the word "strategic." I have a feeling that his CEO would not be amused to find out that he had just spent a small fortune that might have been eliminated or delayed. And sooner or later, he will be exposed. In any case, his peers have little use for him and if he's ever looking for a job, I doubt he'll get much help from those of us who know him.

To make your class assignment a little easier for you, let me share with you a simple rule that I've used over the years to discern ethical behavior from inappropriate behavior. If I would not like my family to read a headline in tomorrow's paper saying that I just took a particular action, chances are it doesn't meet the requisite ethical standard.

(Editor's Note: For more information about some of the leading CIOs, read InformationWeek's CIO of the Year package. http://www.informationweek.com/764/chief.htm)

I have four to five years' experience in IT, mainly as a LAN-WAN administrator. I am looking at going back to school to get my MBA in addition to continuing to stay abreast of industry certifications (I am currently an MCSE and a CCNA). I would also like to boost my project-management skills.

Any suggestions, advice, etc., would be greatly appreciated. My goal is to become a more complete employee by focusing on my strengths and weaknesses.

Jeff W.

Dear Jeff:
No problem; glad to be of assistance, if I can.

CIOs are hired primarily because they have the ability to understand both business problems and technical options and to relate one to the other. Their job is to make sure the best technical solutions are used to solve business problems while at the same time ensuring that the business direction of the company reflects the opportunities opened up by the technology.

To improve the odds of being considered for a CIO position, volunteer for assignments that give you a breadth of experience in different areas of the company. Do more than is required in each job; self-motivation is an important asset. Make sure you're supportive of your peers and staff. They need to respect you and trust you if you ever intend to be their leader. Study the business of the company and develop relationships with people in the business units. Along with your formal education, what you learn from the people with whom you work will be invaluable to you.

Good luck in your career plans.

I propose that major donations be obtained from the very companies that are now the driving force behind Internet development. Each donor organization would have a place on the organization's board of directors. Through virtual conferences, annual meetings would develop the giving goals of the organization. The CEO would then solicit proposals from groups that meet the giving goals. A skeletal administrative staff would do preliminary screening, and the finalist applications would be reviewed "blind" by a small group of board members. Finalists would have funds transferred electronically to them from the giving organization.

Additionally, rather than elaborate communitywide fund-raising, which is extremely expensive, the Internet community could be very inexpensively covered for donations from individual sponsors. I await your input. Thank you in advance for your thoughts.

Michael

Dear Michael:
While your goals are worthy, I'm not sure whether the Internet can make a significant difference in the overall process of charitable giving. There are three major functions within a charity: fund-raising, funds allocation, and administration. If my memory is correct, administrative costs are less than 6% in most well-functioning charities. Certainly, the Internet could help by lowering administrative costs, just as it can in many businesses, but it's unlikely to yield massive amounts of money for the charity.

I'm even less certain about funds allocation. Civic boards (and I have been on some) require face-to-face interaction and the associated give-and-take to build the unity necessary to reach decisions on who gets the money and who does not. Finally, while one would think that fund-raising could be improved by just using E-mail, etc., there's no question that successful fund-raising is an art and the campaigns designed to encourage donations are very successful. It's possible that the Internet could help here, but the major (and expensive) fund-raising task is building donor awareness of the worthiness of the charity.

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.