http://www.informationweek.comInformationWeeken-usCopyright 2012, UBM LLC.2012-12-27T08:36:00ZEmail overload is a symptom of larger management dysfunctions. Why are your employees spending so much time covering themselves for every little thing? http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/email-overload-disease-or-symptom/240145180?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authors<!-- Image Aligning right --><!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --><div class="inlineStoryImage inlineStoryImageRight"><a href="http://www.informationweek.com/thebrainyard/news/galleries/social_networking_consumer/240007253"><img src="http://twimgs.com/informationweek/galleries/automated/867/Google-Plus,-1st-screen_full.PNG" alt="10 Best Business Tools In Google+" title="10 Best Business Tools In Google+" class="img175" /></a><br /><div class="storyImageTitle">10 Best Business Tools In Google+</div><span class="inlinelargerView">(click image for larger view and for slideshow)</span></div><!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --><!-- / Image Aligning right -->We all <em>say</em> we want <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/all-i-want-for-christmas-is-less-email/240144227">less email</a>. But, do we really mean it? I think we're saying: I want less irrelevance in my life. Much in the same way we complain about time-wasting meetings -- instead of focusing on creating fantastic and nimble work sessions -- I'm not sure we're focusing on the right problem. <P> Readers of my recent column on email overload noted that advances in technology and social media can fix the email glut problem. <em>InformationWeek</em> executive editor Lorna Garey points out that until social media gets federated, we'll continue to rely on email as a common ground for collaborators. Other readers also acknowledged that there are significant cultural changes needed beyond just turning off email notifications on social media platforms. <P> Vendors helpfully let me know about their inbox products, and they're impressive. For example, I'm pretty sure that I will start using <a href="http://www.sanebox.com">SaneBox</a> soon -- it is "importance-filtering" for the 21st century, taking the "priority inbox" one step further, with follow-up reminders, antispam-like mail summaries, and a system for deferring less important emails. <P> <strong>[ Read <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/software/productivity-applications/google-releases-gmail-20-for-ios/240143781?itc=edit_in_body_cross">Google Releases Gmail 2.0 For iOS</a>. ]</strong> <P> <a href="http://www.mailboxapp.com">Mailbox App</a>, with its organization and deferral system, also offers features that I want, because I yearn for its "inbox zero, daily." <P> This is all great stuff. But the most telling discussion point came from <em>InformationWeek</em>'s John Foley, who wrote a cover story 10 years ago about personal information glut, the biggest culprit of which was, you guessed it, email. It's 10 years later and we're losing the struggle between incoming information and ways to handle that information. <P> Can we agree to stop the madness and train employees to reduce email burden? Well, we can, but it's distressing to see the sorts of draconian <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/smb/network/8-modest-proposals-for-reducing-email/240144547">solutions that are proposed</a>. No saying "thank you" over email! Days or specific times when email is prohibited! Have an email sent-item quota! Create an email perp wall! It smacks of the time I took a job and at least five employees told me of the "no laughing" rule of the old boss. <P> <!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --><!-- GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --><div style="margin:0; padding:0 0 10px 15px; width:244px; float:right;"><div style="margin:0; border-top:1px solid black; border-bottom:1px solid black; padding:6px;"><a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/"><img src="http://twimgs.com/infoweek/1217/217ID_GlobalCIO_75.jpg" width="75" height="75" border="0" align="right" alt="Global CIO" style="margin:0 0 6px 6px;"></a><div style="margin:0 0 6px 0; font-size:1.3em; font-weight:bold; color:#113e53;">Global CIOs: A Site Just For You</div><span style="font-size:.9em; font-weight:bold;">Visit <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/">InformationWeek's Global CIO</a> -- our online community and information resource for CIOs operating in the global economy.</span></div> </div> <!-- /GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <P> I think email overload is simply a symptom of the larger dysfunctions in our organizations, the factory-like, "scientific" management touted by Max Weber that sounded good in the late 1800s. That management has allowed us to create larger and larger organizations. But now we need to ask whether huge organizations are in fact a desirable thing, and how we expect people to act human when we ask them to specialize like insects. These huge organizations create pain that create many bad things, including email burden. <P> Why do people send so many darn emails? They feel like they can grab attention. Even if their jobs are meaningless, they're creating something permanent when they create an email. They cover their butts by documenting every little thing. (The latest trend of folks CC'ing themselves makes me shudder every time I see it.) <P> Here's a thought experiment for you. Consider two people in the same room, one of whom works for a large multinational corporation, and one of whom works for a startup, and think about who has a higher email burden per capita, and why. "Stupid bureaucracy" is what most people came up with, as I played through this experiment with a number of folks. <P> Trevor Lohrbeer, a startup and decision support consultant and blogger, noted that CYA -- cover your a** -- doesn't happen at startups, because, "if you're a startup with less than 50 people, and someone's not working out, they get fired." <P> I'm not saying that we shouldn't provide guidance. IT has a key role in providing guidance. But we should provide guidance that addresses the problem, not exacerbates it. Let's invite employees at large organizations to be a part of the solution. I mostly like the guidance that is given at <a href="http://www.emailcharter.org">Email Charter</a>: Respect recipients' time; slow or short is not rude; celebrate clarity; quash open-ended questions; slash surplus CCs; tighten the thread (meaning, get rid of the trail and summarize, or pick up the phone); let people know that they don't need to respond; and choose to spend less time doing email (which is very different from a quota). <P> But we also need to remember that we are treating symptoms, not the causes. To treat the cause of disengagement, which breeds the lonely "I'm here!" emails, leaders need to make employee engagement and meaningful work a priority, instead of simply enacting edicts about what types of behaviors and outcomes are needed. <P> To treat the root cause of CYA, focus more on learning how to create the <em>right</em> outcomes, and less on punishments for the <em>wrong</em> outcomes. To cut down on irrelevant email chatter, have more focused in-person interactions. To encourage thoughtful documentation of an agreed-upon plan instead of off-the-cuff emails, create more time in the project lifecycle instead of everything being "hurry up and wait." <P> Is this possible, or will we be having this same conversation again in another 10 years? The answer: Unless we reinvent the large organization, I think we will.2012-12-13T00:27:00Zhttp://reports.informationweek.com/abstract/166/9116/Professional+Development+and+Salary+Data/research-2012-enterprise-architect-staffing-survey.html?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authors2012-12-12T09:06:00ZWhen it comes to managing the email onslaught, we have met the enemy, and he is us. Needed now: Willpower.http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/all-i-want-for-christmas-is-less-email/240144227?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authors<!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --><div class="inlineStoryImage inlineStoryImageRight"><a href="http://www.informationweek.com/windows/operating-systems/windows-goofs-and-gaffes/240009646"><img src="http://twimgs.com/informationweek/galleries/automated/888/01_clippy_tn.jpg" alt="Windows: Goofs And Gaffes " title="Windows: Goofs And Gaffes " class="img175" /></a><br /> <div class="storyImageTitle">Windows: Goofs And Gaffes </div> <span class="inlinelargerView">(click image for larger view and for slideshow)</span></div> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE -->If you told your colleagues that, as a holiday gift, you could guarantee them 30% less email, would they welcome the extra time back in their professional and personal lives? Of course they would. But the solution comes with the same requirement for avoiding that 15-pound holiday weight gain: <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/byte/personal-tech/smart-phones/companies-to-employees-dont-check-email/240007800">willpower</a>. <P> Spam is no longer the enemy; we've all but licked that one. When it comes to managing the email onslaught, we have met the enemy, and he is us. <P> Let's consider the simple example of communications around the potluck holiday party for an office staff of 20, where someone coordinates who is bringing what. In the old days, the party organizer would post a signup sheet in a break area. Today, the organizer shoots out an email to all 20 people, and then <em>everyone replies to all</em>. The one communication in the break room has now turned into 20-plus communications. <P> Even if folks are disciplined enough to not reply to all, there still will be, "Awesome, thanks for doing that!" types of emails, or "Please, Wanda, bring your wonderful fruit salad!" Some of these emails, inevitably, will be directed to the whole list. This case on a larger scale creates a funnel effect. The more indirect reports you have, especially in today's open, collaborative workplaces where there isn't as much chain of command as there used to be, the more "friendly fire" email you'll get. Our most highly compensated employees are those whose <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/thebrainyard/news/social_networking_consumer/240005844/social-media-vs-water-cooler-time-sink-showdown">time we waste</a> the most. <P> <strong>[ Read <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/thebrainyard/news/email/240010877/how-to-keep-email-from-driving-you-crazy?itc=edit_in_body_cross">How To Keep Email From Driving You Crazy </a>. ]</strong> <P> IT professionals, once serial under-communicators, might be overcompensating. Does <em>everyone</em> in the organization really need to know about the change that's going to affect only one floor or one system? And miming Twitter's "your Tweet was retweeted!" email notification, some enterprise apps now let you know, in email, about something that might or might not require your attention. If you have a social platform such as Jive, prepare for your email volume to double as every frivolous comment on the platform gets spoon fed to you in email alerts. <P> You can't blame the enterprise app people. IT tries to get people to regularly check their invoice approvals. They don't, but they do check email. So, hello email! <P> There's also a sense among end users that if they poke a document or a status update into a non-email system -- whether it's a project management system or a contract management system -- it's not good enough. They want everyone to know what their edits to the contract were. So they push them to email. <P> <!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --><!-- GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --><div style="margin:0; padding:0 0 10px 15px; width:244px; float:right;"><div style="margin:0; border-top:1px solid black; border-bottom:1px solid black; padding:6px;"><a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/"><img src="http://twimgs.com/infoweek/1217/217ID_GlobalCIO_75.jpg" width="75" height="75" border="0" align="right" alt="Global CIO" style="margin:0 0 6px 6px;"></a><div style="margin:0 0 6px 0; font-size:1.3em; font-weight:bold; color:#113e53;">Global CIOs: A Site Just For You</div><span style="font-size:.9em; font-weight:bold;">Visit <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/">InformationWeek's Global CIO</a> -- our online community and information resource for CIOs operating in the global economy.</span></div> </div> <!-- /GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <P> Three main things are going on here. One, people are generating ever-more noise emails. Two, even the apps that we thought loved us are generating time-wasting emails. Three, we don't have the intestinal fortitude or executive mandate to wean ourselves off email. <P> The solutions all boil down to willpower. <P> First, and perhaps hardest, we must stop writing so many darned emails and stop ccing people who don't need to be copied. For many things, a two-minute phone conversation or personal chat will save five or more email exchanges. I'm not saying don't write emails or don't cc people, but as the yoga people would say, at least be mindful and purposeful about it. <P> Second, we must help fellow employees find comfort in using all of those other tools that we've provided. For instance, people need to know that project conversations should be had in the project management system, not in email. This reconditioning requires both training and an executive mandate. <P> Third, we must take the time to learn and use the management tools built into our email clients. For example, I have a rule in my email software that redirects any "notification" type of email to a separate folder. I also have rules that separate my email into classifications of "those who report to me," "those who I report to," and everyone else. IT organizations should consider reaching out to executives and their assistants with pointers or training. <P> Willpower doesn't yield returns in the short run. When we avoid eating just one more Christmas cookie, and then another one, the pounds don't evaporate. But the choices we make on a continual and disciplined basis have big aggregate consequences in the long run.2012-12-06T09:02:00ZWhen your CEO or CFO asks you to be a rainmaker, it's a call for help. Wrap it all in context and respond in a holistic way.http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/cios-as-rainmakers-the-new-meme-deconstr/240143880?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authors<!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <div class="inlineStoryImage inlineStoryImageRight"><a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/20-great-ideas-to-steal/240006553"><img src="http://twimgs.com/informationweek/galleries/automated/860/01_Intro_tn.jpg" alt="20 Great Ideas To Steal" title="20 Great Ideas To Steal" class="img175" /></a><br /> <div class="storyImageTitle">20 Great Ideas To Steal</div> <span class="inlinelargerView">(click image for larger view and for slideshow)</span></div> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> IT is the new moneymaker! I keep reading <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/oracle/2012/12/03/the-cio-as-revenue-rainmaker-7-excellent-examples/">variations on this meme</a>, but if IT's new role is to generate revenue and profits on its own, I have a couple of snarky questions: <P> What do the old revenue generators do? Does HR now have to make money as well? Does IT have to be good at IT anymore? Business leaders keep finding new things for IT leaders to run, so do we get to lay off the people they're replacing? <P> The consumerization of IT, the rise of the tech savvy CMO and the Hollywood-like yearning to take complex situations and simplify them into 15-second sound bites all mean that CIOs will come under fire by the ignorant. <P> Obviously, there are bad IT organizations and bad CIOs. But that doesn't mean that IT needs to go sing for its supper. Plenty of good CIOs have been engaging in this money-making activity for years -- in partnership with those people whose primary job it is. <P> Pundits called that practice "aligning IT with the business" until, starved for new material, they decided that this was no longer enough. Trust me: The "new rainmaker" will also fall out of fashion. But moving in concert with the business and helping sales, marketing and other departments achieve objectives like making money -- also known as helping the organization achieve critical goals -- will never fall out of fashion. <P> Reality is more complex than paper cutout Hollywood CIOs with big, cash-eating grins. Some days, good CIOs do help their organizations make money. Other days, they minimize loss. Or make an operation more efficient. Or delight a set of customers so that they want to keep coming back. None of these things can ever be accomplished without IT partnerships with business units. <P> I drill this into my staff's heads until I hear them quoting it to others: "There are no technology projects; there are only business projects with technology components." IT should be pervasive in everything that modern companies do. That doesn't mean that CIOs are all of a sudden in charge of everything a modern organization does. Nor does it mean there are CIOs out there who singlehandedly have created revenue for their companies. I've helped my organization generate more revenue, but I would never dream of taking sole credit for it. <P> <!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <!-- GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <div style="margin:0; padding:0 0 10px 15px; width:244px; float:right;"> <div style="margin:0; border-top:1px solid black; border-bottom:1px solid black; padding:6px;"> <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/"><img src="http://twimgs.com/infoweek/1217/217ID_GlobalCIO_75.jpg" width="75" height="75" border="0" align="right" alt="Global CIO" style="margin:0 0 6px 6px;"></a> <div style="margin:0 0 6px 0; font-size:1.3em; font-weight:bold; color:#113e53;">Global CIOs: A Site Just For You</div> <span style="font-size:.9em; font-weight:bold;">Visit <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/">InformationWeek's Global CIO</a> -- our online community and information resource for CIOs operating in the global economy.</span> </div> </div> <!-- /GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <P> My regular advice to my staff helps me answer my snarky questions. In a world where there's a renewed focus on IT pros assisting with revenue generation, those old revenue generators had better be at the table, or IT will fail. HR and other departments may not be in the same spotlight as IT -- as far as you know -- but believe me, the CEO is looking at them using the same "helpful/not helpful" detector. <P> IT pros do have to be amazingly good at IT, because nobody else is qualified to do it right. As <em>InformationWeek</em> editor in chief Rob Preston pointed out recently, <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/are-we-giving-cios-an-inferiority-comple/240012735">CIOs should be proud of their technical acumen</a>, without apology, just as it would be unthinkable for the medical director of a hospital to feel defensive for being medically astute. <P> There's no question that change will continue to be the one constant in the wild and wooly world of business technology. I'd even say that <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/5-ways-to-survive-the-coming-it-apocalyp/240044401">an IT apocalypse is underway</a>. But technologists are more at home with change than just about any profession -- name another field where the state of the art shifts so radically during a career! So rather than get worked up about the latest "IT should run everything while we sit home eating bonbons" motif, let's just consider it a cry for help. <P> So when your CEO or CFO asks you to be a rainmaker like all of those beautiful people profiled in <em>Forbes</em>, wrap it all in context and respond to the call for help in a holistic way. Bottom line: IT continues to be and always will be a helping profession. Boiling down wild assertions into actionable requests for help should be nothing new to us.2012-11-27T14:10:00ZCompeting vendors who come at CIOs with a "more secure" file sync solution are missing the point.http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/is-there-a-case-for-ditching-dropbox/240142655?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authors<!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <div class="inlineStoryImage inlineStoryImageRight"><a href="http://www.informationweek.com/cloud-computing/infrastructure/7-cheap-cloud-storage-options/240134947"><img src="http://twimgs.com/informationweek/galleries/automated/905/01_Cloud_tn.jpg" alt="7 Cheap Cloud Storage Options" title="7 Cheap Cloud Storage Options" class="img175" /></a><br /><div class="storyImageTitle">7 Cheap Cloud Storage Options</div><span class="inlinelargerView">(click image for larger view and for slideshow)</span></div> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE -->Accurate file sync across many devices, which used to be a heinously complicated process, is now essentially a commodity product. <a href="https://www.dropbox.com/">Dropbox</a> and its cloud competitors have been so successful both at attracting customers and building developer ecosystems that people no longer wonder if they should use them, but why their IT organizations don't support them. <P> The day of reckoning is here. User communities are now pushing their CIOs to offer or allow <i>something</i> other than the shared drives of yesterday. It's a huge opportunity for the file sync vendors -- if their strategy is something other than "catch up with Dropbox." <P> Cloud-based file sync is much more convenient and mobile than yesterday's G: drive, and judging from conversations I've had with adopters, it's also more reliable. Users of the venerable "premises-only" file server shares got tired of accessing company files remotely over a VPN and slow broadband. When they started to ask their IT organizations for something similar to their consumer experience with Dropbox, the air raid sirens started to blare at IT HQ: "Here comes change!" <P> <strong>[ On the road again? These cloud tools help you keep current and stay productive. See <a href=" http://www.informationweek.com/cloud-computing/software/8-cloud-tools-for-road-warriors/240142591?itc=edit_in_body_cross">8 Cloud Tools For Road Warriors</a>. ]</strong> <P> Vendors, ever tuned in to career IT workers (and to their Google searches for "secure Dropbox alternatives"), tried to step in: <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/secure-cloud-file-sync-is-the-wrong-move/240005685">"Let's offer secure cloud sync!"</a> But as a point product, it's the wrong move. Here's why. <P> As an IT service provider, don't try to solve a stated user problem (slow, awkward and non-mobile file access) with a solution optimized for <i>your</i> problem (security). <P> And what do users want? Completely transparent file sync that works all the time, as well as simple usability. I've argued before that a robust developer ecosystem -- an area where Dropbox is the strongest among cloud file sync vendors -- is incredibly important. That's because files in themselves are useless. What people need are great apps to operate on those always-synchronized files. <P> That ecosystem is important on both an enterprise and personal level. A few weeks ago, my dad, an iPhone-toting octogenarian who's still in the workforce, wanted an iPhone app to share voice recordings. I set him up with one that supports Dropbox. My dad's best buddy has a daughter, Laura Yecies, who happens to be the CEO of <a href="https://www.sugarsync.com/">SugarSync</a>. "How come we can't use SugarSync?" my father asked. Well, Dad, because no apps support it for what you want. <P> SugarSync has done a lot better of late with <a href="https://www.sugarsync.com/partners/">app partnerships</a> -- the biggest mobile Office players, for example, now support it -- but when developers for the next random app think "cloud file sync," they're still thinking the big D. <P> <em>InformationWeek</em> editorial director Fritz Nelson <a href="http://twb.io/tSlMCm">will interview SugarSync's Yecies</a> Wednesday on <em>InformationWeek</em>'s Valley View show, and Fritz and I chatted briefly about enterprise topics he could discuss with her. One overarching question: How can Dropbox's competitors differentiate themselves in the push toward enterprise file sync? <P> <!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <!-- GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <div style="margin:0; padding:0 0 10px 15px; width:244px; float:right;"> <div style="margin:0; border-top:1px solid black; border-bottom:1px solid black; padding:6px;"> <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/"><img src="http://twimgs.com/infoweek/1217/217ID_GlobalCIO_75.jpg" width="75" height="75" border="0" align="right" alt="Global CIO" style="margin:0 0 6px 6px;"></a> <div style="margin:0 0 6px 0; font-size:1.3em; font-weight:bold; color:#113e53;">Global CIOs: A Site Just For You</div> <span style="font-size:.9em; font-weight:bold;">Visit <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/">InformationWeek's Global CIO</a> -- our online community and information resource for CIOs operating in the global economy.</span> </div> </div> <!-- /GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <P> I told Fritz about a conversation I had with Ryan Kalember, chief product officer for <a href="https://www2.watchdox.com/">WatchDox</a>. Kalember raised an important point: if you solve the usability problem by offering enterprise-provided apps to employees, you can sidestep the ecosystem problem. WatchDox, he said, offers great replacements for Office document editing, PDF annotation, and most of the other tools that folks would actually want in order to do something with their files. <P> Point taken -- but if and only if WatchDox offers a great user experience and all the apps a user might want, along with a high grade of security. A tall order, for sure. <P> WatchDox has consolidated three product categories into one: mobile device management, file sync and mobile office apps. We've seen other point products consolidate with other products after the point product matures. We all remember when routers didn't offer access control lists -- you had to get a firewall to do that. <P> As enterprises consider file sync products, it will be important for their IT leaders to evaluate vendor strategy. File sync vendors can go down two main roads: they can offer additional value (WatchDox) that lets enterprise customers preserve consumer-like usability, or they can get acquired by a vendor that will offer additional value. <P> I've said before that enterprises <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/5-ways-to-survive-the-coming-it-apocalyp/240044401">should consider startups</a> as part of doing a risk-benefit analysis. But in a crowded and newly commoditized product space, CIOs who can't or won't use the leader must have a clear, value-based reason for picking someone else. <P> <i><a href="http://www.cloudconnectevent.com/santaclara/?_mc=DIWEEK">Cloud Connect</a> returns to Silicon Valley, April 2-5, 2013, for four days of lectures, panels, tutorials and roundtable discussions on a comprehensive selection of cloud topics taught by leading industry experts. Use priority code DIWEEK by Jan. 1 to save up to $700 with Super Early Bird Savings. Join us in Silicon Valley to see new products, keep up-to-date on industry trends and create and strengthen professional relationships. Register for <a href="http://www.cloudconnectevent.com/santaclara/?_mc=DIWEEK">Cloud Connect</a> now. </i>2012-11-16T01:58:00Zhttp://reports.informationweek.com/abstract/83/9089/IT-Business-Strategy/research-2013-it-budget-outlook.html?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authors2012-11-08T12:19:00ZThe risks of starting a PMO have never been greater, new research shows. After years of observing project management, I agree.http://www.informationweek.com/news/240062641?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authors<!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --><div class="inlineStoryImage inlineStoryImageRight"> <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/galleries/global-cio/interviews/232700109"><img src="http://twimgs.com/informationweek/galleries/automated/765/01_CEO_Logos_tn.gif" alt="8 CEOs Speak: IT Projects That Matter Most" title="8 CEOs Speak: IT Projects That Matter Most" class="img175" /></a><br /> <div class="storyImageTitle">8 CEOs Speak: IT Projects That Matter Most</div> <span class="inlinelargerView">(click image for larger view and for slideshow)</span></div> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE -->Will most companies that implement a project management office take on higher IT costs without improving performance? <P> That's the bold headline of a Hackett Group study of more than 200 organizations. It's not just hype: I happen to agree that the risks of a disastrous PMO implementation have never been greater. <P> Don't get me wrong: PMOs can be incredibly valuable when they manage the right projects through to business-focused completion and kill the projects that don't measure up. Trouble is, PMOs aren't right for every organization, and every organization won't match the intent with the follow-through. Creating a PMO under the wrong circumstances is likely to produce nothing but more project overhead. <P> <strong>[ Read <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/thebrainyard/news/project_management/240004844/social-project-management-gets-big-picture-view?itc=edit_in_body_cross">Social Project Management Gets Big Picture View</a>. ]</strong> <P> Hackett Group, an operations improvement firm, found that PMO use for companies of every stripe grew from 2007 through 2009 but steadily declined thereafter. Its research backed up some of the findings in <em>InformationWeek</em>'s 2012 <a href="http://reports.informationweek.com/abstract/83/8656/it-business-strategy/research-2012-enterprise-project-management.html ">Enterprise Project Management survey</a>, which also traced a reduction in PMOs and formal PMO skill sets over time. <P> The Hackett bombshell: In some cases, the IT organization's performance actually improved once the PMO was eliminated. <P> Hackett also found that more PMO oversight doesn't necessarily improve business results. "In a weak PMO, poor management of time, resources, requirements or customer expectations encourages shortcuts that increase design weaknesses that drive higher maintenance and support costs," the Hackett report concludes. "Failure to properly identify and manage risk associated with poor technical decisions can also lead to complexity. Even the selection of projects for the portfolio can influence complexity if the PMO does not understand the long-term tradeoffs associated with certain kinds of technically risky projects." <P> <!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --><!-- GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --><div style="margin:0; padding:0 0 10px 15px; width:244px; float:right;"><div style="margin:0; border-top:1px solid black; border-bottom:1px solid black; padding:6px;"><a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/"><img src="http://twimgs.com/infoweek/1217/217ID_GlobalCIO_75.jpg" width="75" height="75" border="0" align="right" alt="Global CIO" style="margin:0 0 6px 6px;"></a><div style="margin:0 0 6px 0; font-size:1.3em; font-weight:bold; color:#113e53;">Global CIOs: A Site Just For You</div><span style="font-size:.9em; font-weight:bold;">Visit <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/">InformationWeek's Global CIO</a> -- our online community and information resource for CIOs operating in the global economy.</span></div> </div> <!-- /GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <P> Many of the PMOs of poorer-performing organizations have employees with Project Management Institute and other formal certifications, Hackett found. The problem is that those employees often lack a working knowledge of the business or its technology infrastructure, and their main functions are as task-list keepers and process cops. Most of us wouldn't want to provision a whole business unit full of those kinds of people, yet I've seen it happen, mostly because management doesn't want to pay extra for business leadership. <P> In successful organizations, Hackett found four key practices: Centralized IT demand management, accountability for business benefits, standardization of processes and architecture, and program and project reviews. OK, let's translate that consultant speak into English. Their PMOs work with business units to review and set priorities for the IT services they use. They're responsible for results, not allowed to point fingers and say: "Well, you didn't listen to me!" They revisit projects after they're completed to assess lessons and adjust practices. <P> Yet those key practices might still not be enough to justify a PMO. In some cases, Hackett says, agile development and collaboration methodologies such as <a href="http://scrum.org/Resources/What-is-Scrum ">Scrum</a> can eliminate the need for heavyweight PMOs. <P> I don't think the PMO is dead, but given the research findings and my own experiences, proceed with caution. Watch out for career builders who prioritize padding their resumes ("I built a PMO!") over delivering organizational benefits. Be minimalist: Anything that gets implemented should have a plain-English reason. <P> Above all, ensure that the executive team is committed to the PMO. After many years of observing projects and project management, I know this: A PMO that gets just lip service from the C suite won't get the resources or executive attention it needs to succeed. The PMO will then linger on, both for project managers and the business units it's inflicted upon, for year after year before it's put out of its misery. Bottom line: while the benefits are there, the risks have never been greater.2012-11-05T09:47:00ZWe IT leaders say we believe in the new ways. But we won't survive if our actions don't match our words.http://www.informationweek.com/news/240044401?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authorsHurricane Preparation 101 dictates that, among other things, you make sure that your gas tank is full BEFORE the storm creates supply problems. Yet it appears that a lot of folks on or near the East Coast didn't tank up before Sandy, leading to <a href=&#8221; http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/02/storm-sandy-gasoline-idUSL1E8M259A20121102&#8221;>panic buying and miles-long gas lines</a>. <P> Similarly, IT leaders know that massive IT storms, among them <a href=&#8221; http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/consumerization-of-it-is-no-fad/230800081&#8221;>consumerization and cloud</a>, are heading their way. Yet it appears that most of them are ignoring the warnings, continuing to do business as usual, which begs the question: Will we survive the coming IT apocalypse? Survival will be hard. Even those of us who know better keep reverting to old practices. I've been guilty of it myself. <P> On a small scale, just last week I found myself admitting to staff that I messed up with the software we had picked to replace our department's outdated, magnet-sliding in/out board. I had allowed our team to bypass our normal analysis process: Define the business benefit, identify key stakeholders and requirements, and so on. What a mistake. <P> A systems administrator went ahead and installed the clunky software on our Exchange server and client workstations. Win64 problems crashed Outlook. The software didn't allow sign-in or sign-out remotely unless, in a grotesque workaround, users sent themselves an email with text commands to sign in or out. Mobility was limited. And we were perpetuating the high-maintenance IT practices of the early 2000s, if not the '90s. <P> After we went through this pain, a quick business analysis revealed another path: We could have simply subscribed to inexpensive software-as-a-service that not only was hosted by a third party, but also allowed for mobile access and came with an easy-to-use, modern Web interface. Doh! <P> We can't continue to be our own worst enemy. Our mouths say we believe in the new ways, but we won't survive if our actions don't match our words. Most IT organizations are under intense pressure to do more with fewer people, so if we want to survive, we must take at least five steps. <P> <strong>1. Make the IT organization live by the same IT rules business units must live by.</strong> My main failure in the in/out automation debacle was to let staff proceed without a business analysis and justification. Sometimes such analyses show that the proposed action is a waste of time and resources. I'm not saying that everything requires a stultifying process that stifles innovation; a quick but thoughtful assessment can keep you from running off the rails. <P> <strong>2. Embrace software-as-a-service.</strong> For certain kinds of applications -- where there's little downside to downtime, for instance, or where the data is temporary in nature -- it makes no sense to waste staff time on installation and maintenance. In/out boards are one example. Project management is another. Help desk SaaS such as ZenDesk and FrontRange is providing rich benefits for customers, yet IT organizations continue to buy on-premises help desk software -- provision a server, patch it, occupy a switch port, add it to the portfolio of monitored systems, add virus protection, install management software, and troubleshoot it when something breaks&#8230;instead of paying a few bucks a month? <P> <strong>3. Take a risk on a startup vendor.</strong> It's a question of risk management. Startups, hungry and eager to grow, can provide incredible value. Measure that value against the vendor viability risks and make a decision. CIOs who take no risks reap no rewards. <P> <!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <!-- GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <div style="margin:0; padding:0 0 10px 15px; width:244px; float:right;"> <div style="margin:0; border-top:1px solid black; border-bottom:1px solid black; padding:6px;"> <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/"><img src="http://twimgs.com/infoweek/1217/217ID_GlobalCIO_75.jpg" width="75" height="75" border="0" align="right" alt="Global CIO" style="margin:0 0 6px 6px;"></a> <div style="margin:0 0 6px 0; font-size:1.3em; font-weight:bold; color:#113e53;">Global CIOs: A Site Just For You</div> <span style="font-size:.9em; font-weight:bold;">Visit <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/">InformationWeek's Global CIO</a> -- our online community and information resource for CIOs operating in the global economy.</span> </div> </div> <!-- /GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <P> <strong>4. Move beyond the PC.</strong> When you default to doing what you've always done, there are cost implications. Instead of deploying our public in/out board display on a PC, with the associated costs of a Windows license, mini-tower and monitor, we could use a Wi-Fi-only iPad as a smartboard. This options cuts costs and lets employees interact with the app without a keyboard or mouse. At scale, decisions like this one will make a big difference. <P> <strong>5. Welcome selective sourcing.</strong> As with SaaS, sometimes it doesn't make sense to do something internally. But I see a xenophobia among my IT leader peers when it comes to outsourcing. The arguments? "We can do it better." "We don't have enough control over a contractor." "Retraining people is a pain." They're all nonsense. <P> We know there are downsides with internal staffers, too, but we don't lay everyone off. So what's the right mix? In my experience, there are core competencies -- typically high-frequency, high-value activities -- that staffers are really good at. Everything else is at least a candidate for selective sourcing. <P> If we want to survive the coming IT apocalypse, we'd better focus less on control and more on letting go of old school IT practices and belief systems. <P>2012-10-29T09:06:00ZThose in the spy business know that people in financial trouble are more vulnerable to blackmail and bribery. So are you.http://www.informationweek.com/news/240010602?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authorsI coach a lot of IT leaders, both new CIOs and up-and-coming supervisors. I don't know if it's because of the massive spin on both sides of the political aisle or because of all the kingmaker and puppet master talk I'm hearing, but I'm having more and more discussions about ethical dilemmas and how to avoid becoming ethically compromised. <P> Allow me to frame what I mean by "ethically compromised." Without going into the nuances of moral relativism or absolutism, let's agree there are things you generally know you shouldn't do, like faking audit results and doctoring resumes. <P> As I've pointed out before, the "little things" can contribute to a person being more ethically vulnerable. A small lie here and there, combined with what Duke professor <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/personnel/dishonesty-flourishes-because-we-enable/240004189">Dan Ariely calls</a> the "what the hell factor" and "altruistic cheating," can snowball into something much worse. <P> But the big things are a big deal as well. Self-preservation is a huge factor in becoming ethically compromised. Generally, this translates to several aspects of personal finance: your personal debt/equity ratio, your ability to find a new job if you lose your current one, and how much of a rainy day fund you've set aside. Put in plain terms, when the boss asks you to do something that you think is ethically wrong, the less able you are to withstand the financial downside of losing your job, the less likely you are to push back. <P> <strong>[ What do you do when the CEO expects more but the CFO provides less? See <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/it-has-changed-but-it-budgets-havent/240009244?itc=edit_in_body_cross">IT Has Changed, But IT Budgets Haven't</a>. ]</strong> <P> While corporate employers don't pay attention to debt/equity ratio, maybe they should. Those in the spy business know that people with a high personal debt/equity ratio are <a href="http://www.federaltimes.com/article/20111114/DEPARTMENTS01/111140301/Personal-debt-sinks-more-clearances">more vulnerable to blackmail and bribery</a> than those with low ratios. Famed <a href="http://www.dhra.mil/perserec/adr/financesaffluence/affluenceframeset.htm">double agent Aldrich Ames</a>, who worked for the CIA and later sold to the Soviets, was a classic case of how high personal debt can lead to compromise. <P> But you don't need huge debt to get compromised. All you have to do is spend as much as you make. <P> In my coaching I chat with lots of people who have recently received big promotions. They usually come to me to discuss IT strategy, customer management, professional development, but I always inject this question: "So what are you planning to do with that big raise?" There's usually a big goofy grin, followed by variations on bigger house, nicer car, better vacations. Then I say: "No, you're not. You're going to save at least some substantial portion of that raise so that you won't have to worry about what happens if you get fired." Fired? The goofy grin usually goes away. <P> Here's the problem most new IT managers and executives don't see. There are fewer and fewer job openings the higher and higher you go up the ladder. When you were a Django/Python superstar, other jobs were plentiful. When you're head of application development, not as much. <P> CIO roles are even tougher to find, no matter how good you are. Among the more than 400 unemployed CIOs polled by outplacement firm <a href="http://www.challengergray.com">Challenger, Gray & Christmas</a> earlier this year, almost half had been out of work for more than a year. Being out of work that long is scary, and scared people who haven't saved for a rainy day are more prone to engage in wrongdoing. <P> And now we're expecting--correctly, I think--that the total number of <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/why-the-cio-position-is-in-jeopardy/240001607">CIO jobs will decline</a> over the next few years. Not every organization will need a CIO, or at least the same level of highly compensated CIO. <P> The temptation, when you don't have a cash cushion to see you through a six- to 12-month job search, is to go along to get along while you're employed. But when you're not worried about how to pay the rent if you lose your job, you're much more likely to push back if something smells wrong.2012-10-24T08:00:00ZIT's role is shifting to focus more on innovation and driving revenue. So why are budgeting practices so stuck in the past?http://www.informationweek.com/news/240009244?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authors The demands on IT departments keep changing, but their budgeting processes aren't keeping pace. </p> <P> Those that succeed have this in common: a relentless drive to increase business productivity and cut costs, but also the creativity and agility to drive new business opportunities and revenue. The expectation for IT to drive revenue is new at many companies. In this year's Society for Information Management survey, for example, "revenue-generating IT innovations" is among the top five priorities, in fourth place, for the almost 200 respondents for the first time in the 14 consecutive years of the survey. Two years ago, it was 17th on the priority list.</p> <P> Yet the IT budgeting process at most companies still looks like the same old exercise in containing IT costs. Need to take on an unexpected expense? Just one-fourth of the 351 respondents to our own IT Budget Survey have a formal process to deal with such changes, while one-third rely on "ask the CEO." How about setting the future direction for this critical spending? Just 22% of respondents to our survey say their IT governance board has a major influence on the IT budget. Another 35% say it has some influence, which isn't bad. But 43% say they don't have an IT governance board at all, or it has little influence on spending. "The budgeting process is crucial, yet as these are prepared so far in advance of the fiscal year, they tend to change significantly based on business and/or IT requirements or initiatives," laments one IT pro in our survey. "... A common concern shared in our IT groups is the resemblance--or lack thereof--of the forecast with actual spend."</p> <P> And it's more than IT's new place in business innovation and revenue generation that's putting new demands on the budget process. Forces such as IT consumerization, cloud computing, and the rise of marketing-initiated IT spending have some people thinking that centralized IT is dead. Good-bye, IT control freaks; hello, business unit freedom! Is the answer to just push all of those budgeted IT dollars out into lines of business? Our data suggests central IT budgets are in fact far from dead--eight out of 10 still centralize most IT spending, and for good reasons.</p> <P> IT organizations aren't on a starvation diet during this time of change: 47% of respondents to our survey expect to get an increase in IT spending next year, and just 18% expect a cut. That's similar to our last survey, in October 2010, but the levels appear up--only 18% say their IT spending is less than 3% of the total operating budget, compared with 43% in 2010. </p> <P> Look at the technology areas that are getting funding outside of the IT budget, and you see that many of them are poised to grow: cloud software as well as mobile and Web app development, for example. IT budgeting hasn't changed much to account for these trends, but don't expect it to stay stagnant for long. </p> <P> <!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <div id="analytics_briefsPromoContainer"> <div id="analytics_briefsPromo"> <div class="analytics_briefsInner"> <a href="http://reports.informationweek.com/abstract/83/9089/IT-Business-Strategy/research-2013-it-budget-outlook.html?cid=pub_analyt__iwk_20120709" target="_blank">Get the full-length IT budget report</a> </div> <div class="analytics_briefsBottom"><strong>&gt;&gt; <a href="http://reports.informationweeks.com" class="analytics_link">See all of our reports</a> &lt;&lt;</strong></div> </div> </div> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <P> <strong>Death Of Centralized IT? Hardly</strong> </p> <P> You'd be forgiven for thinking centralized IT budgets are dying because business units are taking their technology spending into their own hands. The argument goes something like this: Consumerization of technology and cloud software make it possible for non-IT employees to provision their own technology. As technology becomes more critical to lines of business, it makes sense for them to buy and run more of it. Look at the rise of cloud-based marketing software for digital campaigns and customer analytics, and consider the oft-cited Gartner prediction that the CMO will control more tech spending than the CIO within several years (see "<a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/6-it-trends-tight-budgets-wont-kill/240009322">6 IT Trends Tight Budgets Won't Kill</a>").</p> <P> Our data doesn't suggest a drop in centralized IT spending just yet. About eight of 10 companies represented in our survey have centralized 60% or more of their IT spending--up from two-thirds of companies two years ago. The share of companies with 80% or more of their IT spending centralized has held steady, at around half. But the share of survey respondents whose companies have centralized less than 40% of their IT spending is down to 12%, from 23% two years ago (see chart <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/it-has-changed-but-it-budgets-havent/240009244?pgno=2#budgetchart">on next page</a>).</p> <P> Still, our data does show the tension around business units buying more technology. While 37% of survey respondents say outside-of-IT tech spending is decreasing as they get their arms around "shadow" buying, another 24% say their tech spending outside of the IT organization is on the rise. Bring-your-own device efforts, cloud software, and application development are each cited by at least one-fourth of survey respondents as getting funding outside of IT (see chart below). And three-fourths of the IT pros we surveyed say there's either official or suspected unofficial technology budgets that exist outside of IT. </p> <P> <center><img src="http://twimgs.com/informationweek/1348/348CS_BudgetSurvey_chart3.jpg" width="585" height="456" alt="chart What types of technology spending occur outside of your centralized budget?" hspace="0" vspace="0" border="0" style="margin-bottom:7px;" /><br /></center></p><strong>Mobile, Cloud, And Marketing</strong> </p> <P> As business units start buying or bringing in their own cloud services and mobile devices, it's easy to get caught up in the hype and predict the end of centralized IT. Most everyone can buy from Amazon Web Services without IT intervention, so why should our next enterprise app need IT support? Best Buy and 4G hotspots for everyone!</p> <P> Consumerization, cloud, and social and mobile marketing are all incredibly important trends that are creating chaos for IT, but a little bit of critical thinking is in order. Just because there's some business unit funding for these efforts doesn't mean that all funding tied to them gets decentralized. For example: </p> <P> <strong>&gt;&gt; Consumerization:</strong> Yes, 31% say business units have some BYOD funding, such as stipends for phones and tablets. But does anybody really think the marketing and finance folks are going to figure out how to implement such devices in a secure manner that satisfies company confidentiality, integrity, and availability standards? BYOD causes enough security problems without turning responsibility for it over to amateurs. Business units may control device stipends and choices, but they won't control the overarching security and wireless infrastructure, as well as their companion technology, mobile device management. </p> <P> <strong>&gt;&gt; Software-as-a-service:</strong> Twenty- nine percent of the respondents to our survey say business units at their companies have their own funding for SaaS. But there are deeper implications when an IT organization rents, not owns, critical infrastructure, including uptime and the risk of giving up control of assets critical to the health of the company. Despite the lemming-like rush to SaaS, many critical applications will stay on premises because of long-term ownership issues. </p> <P> <strong>&gt;&gt; Marketing and social media:</strong> Will marketing departments pick up and perform IT's duties? "I think it's nuts," says Tom Smith, director of operations and marketing for the U.S. subsidiary of Anua, a provider of wastewater management and other control systems. Smith has been in marketing for 30 years, and he notes that his company still relies on design, copywriting, and other third parties to do some of its core work. As the director of operations, he also supervises an outsourced IT organization, but he has no illusions that the infrastructure or security duties of a centralized IT operation can be performed by marketing folks.</p> <P> At Sears Holdings, the IT team is trying to push analytics work into the business units, giving them tools to write their own queries on data, for example, rather than have to ask IT for a report. But IT still runs the infrastructure to deliver the data, and it does the complicated architecture work to make sure data is accessible and quickly available. </p> <P> Could marketing end up spending more than the IT department on technology--or even controlling IT? There have been crazier, Dilbert-worthy fads. And perhaps it could make sense at some marketing-driven companies. But keep this notion in perspective. For a long time, IT reported to finance at most companies. Some banks now have IT report to an operations and technology executive. But that doesn't mean that central IT goes away, any more than central IT disappeared back when IT reported into finance. Someone will still need to budget centrally for "whoever" is going to handle critical internal infrastructure, security, data integration, etc., unless someone thinks it's possible to coordinate the chaos of IT staff, projects, and budgets in every business unit making its own tech decisions.</p> <P> <a name="budgetchart"></a><center><img src="http://twimgs.com/informationweek/1348/348CS_BudgetSurvey_chart1.jpg" width="585" height="366" alt="chart What percentage of IT services are budgeted in your central IT organization?" hspace="0" vspace="0" border="0" style="margin-bottom:7px;" /><br /></center></p> <P><strong>Funds For IT Innovation</strong></p> <P> The yearly IT budget remains a fixture--64% of the respondents to our survey say their company does an annual budget; only 23% do quarterly or twice-a-year budgets. But it's not necessarily the cycle that's problematic. It's that, as one technologist in our survey put it, "budget requests, approvals, and tracking are too cumbersome." Only 18% of survey respondents think their budgeting process is very flexible. </p> <P> Contrast that lack of flexibility with the expectations of IT: Be agile and innovative. "Sounds like all departments nowadays," says Anua's Smith. Fair enough, but that only means the budget process is a challenge for everyone.</p> <P> Budgeting is based on modeling the future. But your job as an IT leader is to react to reality. A piece of infrastructure dies, and maybe someone approved discretionary money to replace it, or maybe not. </p> <P> Your environment gets massively infested with malware, and the cleanup soaks up all of your contracted services funding. Or hopefully, you've come up with an idea to make IT run for less, or to make your colleagues more efficient or your products better. Good luck with any of these, and especially those last two, if you budget for subsistence IT. An essential question for IT leaders is whether their IT budgeting matches the level of tech innovation they expect. </p> <P> At Sparrow Health Systems in Michigan, healthcare IT spending is the single largest capital expenditure right now--something that's mind-boggling given the other big capital items required by a large healthcare provider. That spending decision came from an executive board that had a "Walmart moment," says Patrick Hale, Sparrow Health's CTO, referring to the strong IT systems that helped give Walmart an advantage over its competitors during its big growth years. "Better healthcare outcomes will come from technology-backed analytics, and this is reflected in our budget," he says. </p> <P> Sparrow's executive leadership intentionally and strategically raised IT spending with the goal of raising overall business excellence. "We're not spending a lot of money to be mediocre," Hale says. "We're spending a lot of money to lead in healthcare."</p> <P> Sparrow shows how the budget process reveals a company's leadership and organizational priorities. Hale's leadership prioritizes IT as a major asset--and Sparrow funds it accordingly. </p> <P> Likewise, it reveals something unflattering about IT planning generally that the No. 1 strategy IT leaders use to deal with unexpected expenses is simply to ask the organization's CEO. No. 2 is a formal process to ask the CFO or similar budget exec. </p> <P> In organizations that prioritize IT, we would think that IT would at least have a formal request process, or even better some sort of capital reserve or managed savings--let the CIO make the decision to reduce other areas without substantially affecting operations or initiatives before having to use the "mother, may I?" strategy. </p> <P> This kind of discretion isn't the same approach used by the 6% of companies in our survey that have a slush fund, where they overestimate costs or keep a reserve in their base budget. Intentionally overestimating costs is very different from adding a contingency that's acknowledged and accounted for, and such a slush fund is a sign of a dysfunctional business-IT relationship. IT is planning for a "no" from executive leadership and feels the only choice is to, well, cheat.</p> <P> Good IT governing boards must help prioritize funding for innovative projects and respond to unanticipated projects and expenses. But the governing board's role at the companies we surveyed is all over the map. Close to one-fourth of survey respondents say they have a board with major influence, about one-third have some influence, and then 21% have weak boards and 22% have none.</p> <P> Governance is a great answer--when it works right. But if it only means that the CIO goes begging to four or six people, you're better off with no governance--it's easier to just go begging to the CEO or CFO. But if governance is a shared responsibility between the CIO and line-of-business leaders, budgeting can get a whole lot smarter. </p> <P> A company like UPS shows how good governance, like budgets, can flex to changing business needs. UPS has been developing software for its drivers' mobile devices for decades, but in the past year it created a small, agile team to keep up with the blazing pace of consumer smartphones and tablets. People in IT, marketing, and communications deliver new mobile functions about every month. The team has learned many lessons, one of which is that writing software for customers isn't for the meek. "In the mobile world, in the social world, feedback is almost instantaneous," says Nick Costides, a UPS VP of IT who built the mobile team. "It has forced the developers to have some pretty tough skin." </p> <P> But they've learned something else: Governance has to move at that same pace. The group has a mobile governance committee that includes Costides and leaders of product marketing and communications. So as quickly as devices and the mobile market change, UPS can change its road map and investments. The point? You can't have a nimble governance and resource allocation process with a governance team that meets twice a year. </p> <P> <center><img src="http://twimgs.com/informationweek/1348/348CS_BudgetSurvey_chart2.jpg" width="585" height="350" alt="chart How will next fiscal year's IT budget change?" hspace="0" vspace="0" border="0" style="margin-bottom:7px;" /><br /></center></p><strong>How To Benchmark Chaos</strong></p> <P> It's easy for IT pros to feel like they're under-resourced. But are they? One part of the answer comes from benchmarking budgets against other companies. Yet three out of 10 IT organizations we surveyed don't compare their budget efficiency with other organizations'.</p> <P> That's a lost opportunity. As more business units make their own technology investments, IT could provide expert services for tracking costs and calculating ROI. </p> <P> The most popular budget efficiency metric with tech pros in our survey (cited by 37% of respondents) is IT operating budget as a percentage of the corporate operating budget, followed by IT operating budget as a percentage of revenue (31%), and cost per employee served per year (16%). </p> <P> Sadly, "IT employees as a percentage of all employees" isn't dead as a metric; 13% of survey respondents said their companies still use it. Do you want a metric that can be gamed by using contractors instead of employees?</p> <P> IT also has been doing more transaction budgeting--tracking IT costs on a per-unit basis. For example, the two big growth areas for this kind of tracking are calculating costs by work order (up 10 points to 24% of companies) and by IT personnel service hour (up eight points to 19%). Transaction-based budgeting looks here to stay: In 2010, 54% of companies said they did no budgeting that way, and this year, 37% say they do. </p> <P> The practice of chargebacks to business units for IT services is always controversial. A means to achieve accountability, or needless accounting overhead? As in 2010, about 60% of companies represented in our survey charge back or plan to charge back for some or all of their IT services. The share that charges back 100% of IT dropped from 17% to 9%. Among those doing chargebacks, the majority charge back less than 40% of their total IT costs. </p> <P> One survey respondent whose company is trying to go to a pay-for-service model says: "Some business units will disagree with this model, as they are used to receiving large amounts of data center services for 'free.'" Yes, but be careful. If you start charging per CPU hour, unless you have massive scale, you're going to get shellacked by Amazon's and Google's cheaper cloud computing rates. Hello, commodity! If internal IT's CPUs offer something those vendors can't, be ready to explain your cost premium.</p> <P> Showback--whereby IT costs are reported to business units but not billed--is less controversial but still quite effective. About half of companies in our survey use this model, and of those only 8% say it's not worth it. There's no better way to connect IT with business activities and for business unit leaders to know if they're high utilizers. Sometimes being a high utilizer is just fine, and it'll highlight a vital business unit-IT tie. Letting business units see their costs compared with others is the most-cited benefit from a showback approach. </p> <P> Unfortunately, showback and chargeback accounting are tedious to set up, and they come with an ongoing expense. Have a clear objective before going down this road. These activities are prone to misinterpretation, so have a process for discussing the results regularly with business units and acting on problems. </p> <P> Even though this kind of measurement and transparency comes with risk, IT can't shy away from it, and should in fact push for more of it. As business units such as marketing and product development start spending more on technology, these kinds of budgeting approaches should be discussed openly to make them a strategic choice. If marketing's buying and running its own servers, make sure everyone's aware of it. </p> <P> Given the budgeting changes that IT's changing priorities will require, IT looks a bit complacent: 60% are very or somewhat satisfied with their budget process. And yet four out of 10 survey respondents admit that there's tech spending outside of centralized IT that their company doesn't officially recognize. Half think their company's budget process isn't consistently flexible enough for changing business needs. Three-fourths don't have a formal way to address unforeseen expenses. And barely half think the company will add enough IT resources to meet business objectives as the needs change. </p> <P> So, how can you take all of this and create a plan of action to improve business technology budgeting at your organization? Here's a short list: </p> <P> <strong>&gt;&gt; Govern right: </strong>Build a governance model that's participative, not mother-may-I.</p> <P> <strong>&gt;&gt; Display agility:</strong> You can't ask for budgeting flexibility if IT operations and project delivery aren't flexible.</p> <P> <strong>&gt;&gt; Benchmark:</strong> Comparisons create credibility that will emphasize that budget requests are reasonable.</p> <P> <strong>&gt;&gt; Tell a story:</strong> Executives are inundated with "IT is dead, just push it to the cloud" stories. They need to hear what makes your work special--from you and the business leaders you're partnering with on projects. Ongoing communications, including quarterly reporting, focus groups with business units, and other PR-type activities, convey essential information. This effort might seem far removed from the cold, hard numbers of budgeting, but a good story is part of any business case.</p> <P> <center><img src="http://twimgs.com/informationweek/1348/348CS_BudgetSurvey_chart4.jpg" width="585" height="368" alt="chart How is your technology spending outside of the centralized IT budget changing?" hspace="0" vspace="0" border="0" style="margin-bottom:7px;" /><br /></center></p> <P> <center>Go to the sidebar:<br> <b><a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/6-it-trends-tight-budgets-wont-kill/240009322">6 IT Trends Tight Budgets Won't Kill</a></b></center></p> <P> <P> <!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <center> <div id="printfeaturePDFpromo"><div class="printfeaturePDFCover"><a href="http://reports.informationweek.com/abstract/83/9155/IT-Business-Strategy/informationweek-october-29-2012.html?k=axxe&cid=article_axxe_os"><img src="http://twimgs.com/infoweek/1348/smallcov2.jpg" alt="InformationWeek: Oct. 11, 2010 Issue" title="InformationWeek: Oct. 11, 2010 Issue" /></a></div> <div class="printfeaturePDFCopy"><strong><a href="http://reports.informationweek.com/abstract/83/9155/IT-Business-Strategy/informationweek-october-29-2012.html?k=axxe&cid=article_axxe_os">Download a free PDF of <nobr><em>InformationWeek</em> magazine</nobr></a><br /> (registration required)</strong></div> <div class="clearBoth"></div> </div> </center> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <P>2012-10-10T09:07:00ZFear of failure breeds failure. CIOs must help change this dynamic as private and public sector minds work together on unlocking government big data.http://www.informationweek.com/news/240008743?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authors<!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <div class="inlineStoryImage inlineStoryImageRight"><a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/20-great-ideas-to-steal/240006553"><img src="http://twimgs.com/informationweek/galleries/automated/860/01_Intro_tn.jpg" alt="20 Great Ideas To Steal" title="20 Great Ideas To Steal" class="img175" /></a><br /> <div class="storyImageTitle">20 Great Ideas To Steal</div> <span class="inlinelargerView">(click image for larger view and for slideshow)</span></div> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> I wrote last week that <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/unlocking-big-government-data-whose-job/240008202">open government data</a> was everyone's responsibility. You, me, not for profits, private sector, everybody. We, the people. But last week's <a href="http://cfasummit.org/">Code for America Summit</a> raised another government innovation takeaway: Government employees need to start thinking outside of their comfort zones, and, specifically, CIOs must help to bridge what I would call the gap of fear between the duties of "building data and apps," and "fixing culture and citizen engagement." In sum: fear of failure breeds failure, and that's not OK. <P> To wit, when something is massively scary, it's easy to think, "Oh, that's someone else's job." You know what I mean. That meeting where someone needs to lead the "too big to fail" project, and nobody steps forward. Or, in the case of what Tim O'Reilly and others have dubbed "Gov 2.0," the scary tasks of (a) facing your peers and telling them, "Actually, we're all a part of the problem of bloated and badly run government ... unless we start changing," and (b) facing the public and admitting that nobody knows with a 100% certainty how to deploy new citizen engagement tools without making mistakes. "We're going to fail forward" is not yet in the government lexicon, and it's certainly not in the expectation rulebook for 90% of the citizens that government serves. <P> If you're not in government, it's an interesting academic problem. Katrina. 9-11's aftermath. Afghanistan. These are all places where government made mistakes, and in some ways got crucified for it, even with the best of intentions. <P> If you're a government employee, these are not academic matters. These are matters that could affect your livelihood. Anyone who thinks that Apple's problems with the iOS 6 map application created customer furor has never experienced the fury of citizens over poor snow removal (the #1 reason why mayors fail re-election, according to one mayoral consultant that I spoke to at the summit), or the public vilification of government employees over matters like trash pickup, zoning, or city planning. At least the guys responsible for <a href="http://allthingsd.com/20120920/apple-maps-app-takes-reality-distortion-to-a-whole-new-level/">Apple's iOS map snafu</a>, while on lockdown, probably don't individually have their names in the local newspapers. If they worked for local government, the probability is pretty high that they would have been. Is it any wonder that government employees are risk averse? <P> Government transformation through technology is coming. But it's pretty obvious that government employees who welcome it early within many governments are taking a risk. As Jen Pahlka, founder of Code for America put it in her opening remarks, "the first people through the wall generally get bloodied." <P> Yet, fear of failure breeds failure. When teams are clenched up with fear, dysfunction is inevitable. Lean Startup author Eric Ries, who has previously told big private organizations <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/how-to-innovate-like-a-startup/240002067">how to innovate like a startup</a>, told summit attendees that "lean government" isn't a negative hack and slash type of thing; it should be all about being smarter at figuring out what government should be doing and building via the Lean Startup principles of learning, experimentation, and iteration. But this means that some degree of failure needs to be OK, and you need to build a culture tolerant of failure. As he pithily put it: "Telling someone that failure is not an option is an invitation for them to lie to you." Allow me to add that lies may not be the ideal foundation for the more perfect union as we seek to innovate in government. <P> <!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <!-- GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <div style="margin:0; padding:0 0 10px 15px; width:244px; float:right;"> <div style="margin:0; border-top:1px solid black; border-bottom:1px solid black; padding:6px;"> <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/"><img src="http://twimgs.com/infoweek/1217/217ID_GlobalCIO_75.jpg" width="75" height="75" border="0" align="right" alt="Global CIO" style="margin:0 0 6px 6px;"></a> <div style="margin:0 0 6px 0; font-size:1.3em; font-weight:bold; color:#113e53;">Global CIOs: A Site Just For You</div> <span style="font-size:.9em; font-weight:bold;">Visit <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/">InformationWeek's Global CIO</a> -- our online community and information resource for CIOs operating in the global economy.</span> </div> </div> <!-- /GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <P> Fear comes from many places. <a href="http://twitter.com/todd_park">Federal CTO Todd Park</a> thanked local government workers at the Code for America summit for all that they do in the face of dwindling resources and rising demands. It was a lovely and gracious moment. But, like a two-day hike that you take with a seven-year-old when you're running out of water, the dwindling resources and rising expectations play hell on your sense of well-being, and unavoidably create fear. <P> One session at the final day's "unconference" at the summit pointed out that fears about what happens when government transforms itself can be exacerbated by fear-based turf battles, too. Is it IT's role to help with government transformation and citizen engagement? Surely, but there is also a fear from business leaders in government that IT is going to somehow screw it up. <P> Technologists can be marginalized because business leaders in government make the mistake of thinking that responsibility for wires and infrastructure means, "doesn't understand business transformation" or "can't handle matters that need some level of diplomacy." In some cases, that may be true, especially in very small governments where the CIO is essentially an infrastructure supervisor. But in many other cases, it probably isn't true: Government CIOs who are allowed to stay in place tend to be good at delivering business value. One of my conclusions from the session: to reduce the level of "IT might screw it up," government CIOs need to avoid being marginalized. In addition to the standard credibility game that everyone plays, the language around business technology may also need to change. "Innovation" and "business technology" is a more natural bridge to transformation efforts than is "information technology." <P> This is important both for IT leaders and the governments they serve. As government re-invents itself--and this is coming, whether or not anybody, including government leaders, are ready--those responsible for business technology already have a natural propensity to navigate new waters. Technology implies "new ways of doing things," which means innovation. IT leaders know how to navigate changes with new ways of doing things. This is, frankly, why efforts like Code for America are leading the charge in proactive government transformation: Innovators with high emotional intelligence know how to navigate organizational change.<!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <div class="inlineStoryImage inlineStoryImageRight"><a href="http://www.informationweek.com/government/leadership/iw500-15-top-government-tech-innovators/240006582"><img src="http://twimgs.com/informationweek/galleries/automated/861/01_Intro_tn.jpg" alt="IW500: 15 Top Government Tech Innovators" title="IW500: 15 Top Government Tech Innovators" class="img175" /></a><br /> <div class="storyImageTitle">IW500: 15 Top Government Tech Innovators</div> <span class="inlinelargerView">(click image for larger view and for slideshow)</span></div> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> Putting aside fear doesn't mean that elected officials and government employees should start jumping from airplanes without parachutes. Some level of sensibility (otherwise known as risk management) is, of course, needed. But again, organizations should look to their business technology leaders as experienced risk managers, whether it's traditional information security risk management or the procurement risk/benefit conversation of "do the benefits of using an new startup that offers less expensive and more powerful technology outweigh the risks of that startup being gone in a year?" <P> Even something as obvious as "let's improve access to open data" has its share of risks. Yes, open data can create business opportunity. Yes, open data creates more transparent government. But during one of the unconference sessions, we discussed how mashups of open data can create unintended intelligence consequences, for example, thieves taking advantage of power grid data and other data sources to figure out when people aren't home and when the best times to break in are. (I'm not making this up: one attendee assured me that this was the case.) And risks aren't limited to direct harms, there are social harms. During one discussion about a municipality's crime mapping portal, it came out that during beta testing, it was possible to discover the addresses of rape victims, which is data that just about nobody would wish to be widely disseminated: What if that's one of YOUR loved ones? Yet, these types of problems can be mitigated by a public conversation about what data sets make sense to publish as part of a community's open data strategy. <P> My point: a thoughtful conversation is needed, but it doesn't happen if government employees are too afraid to start it. <P> Perhaps the MOST scary conversation of all is the "two way versus one way" conversation. That is, many government agencies feel that publishing public information is the role of government. But open data and technology-engagement champion Michael Nutter, mayor of Philadelphia, said in a keynote at the summit, "Open government means communication that is a conversation--not just TO but WITH citizens." Resourcing is one of the key reasons given by government employees who want to keep the conversation one way. But I suspect that the fear is the real reason. A two-way conversation is more nuanced and complex, and easier to screw up. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be having it. <P> One of the folks that I talked to at the conference put it like this: This "government innovation" movement is really about fixing culture and citizen engagement through technology. Whether or not it would be happening without the tech is a moot point: It IS happening. And, in the same way that cloud computing is a tech-and-paradigm-shift kind of thing, Gov 2.0 is something that's coming whether you want it to or not. If you don't embrace it in advance, it will happen TO you and you won't be prepared or get the outcome that you might want to have. <P> In the face of fear, those of us who are first through the wall can do a few things to ease the scariness, and even the bloodiness: <P> <strong>>> Establish common ground.</strong> During "the citizen experience" forum, MC Hammer (no, I am not making this up) and angel investor Ron Conway made it pretty clear that you can get started with government transformation by focusing on four letters: JOBS. Things that EVERYONE in your community can agree upon makes it easier to have the difficult conversations about change, since the goal is universally desired. <P> <strong>>> Find your posse.</strong> When you're doing something scary, it helps to know that you're not totally alone in the world. People like the ones associated with Code for America form a cadre of experience and support that can increase success and decrease fear. I don't want to use dopey jargon like "centers of excellence" or suggest that hanging out with awesome people will save the world, but, I do think that there is something extremely special about the Code for America movement. This is a community of people who are willing to take some degree of risk, people for whom improvement in government matters more than 100% job security. It's inspiring, fear-dampening, AND provides motivation and expertise. <P> <strong>>> Have an alternative.</strong> Fearful government employees would do well to heed the advice of <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/how-to-keep-your-best-talent/240005208">entrepreneur and business advisor Pam Slim</a>, who says that it's good for large organizations and for those who work for large organizations to have a life outside of work. If government employees have only one option, of course it's brutally scary to take a risk. But risks must be taken. Everyone's "life diversity" (or what Pam affectionately calls a "side hustle") is different. Maybe you're not making money with your side hustle, maybe you're just massively involved with volunteer work. Point is, you have what I call "social resiliency" on your side--you know that there are people who will be there for you if something goes wrong at work. <P> Finally, there's something to be said for framing government transformation as something of a renegade act towards the status quo. There are those in government who are deeply dissatisfied with their ability to make a difference, with how enmired they are in the quagmire of tech-disabled bureaucracy. There are those who are grateful when a door gets opened, and they'll do anything to see that the mission to improve things gets accomplished. Or as one Tweet to Code for America's founder Jen Pahlka went, "Thanks for making IT feel like punk rock."2012-10-01T10:13:00ZIt's not just a good idea for private-sector organizations to help open up the treasure trove of government big data. It's a necessity.http://www.informationweek.com/news/240008202?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authors<!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <div class="inlineStoryImage inlineStoryImageRight"> <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/galleries/software/bi/232700311"><img src="http://twimgs.com/informationweek/galleries/automated/769/01_BI-and-IM-Salaries_tn.jpg" alt="Big Data Talent War: 10 Analytics Job Trends" title="Big Data Talent War: 10 Analytics Job Trends" class="img175" /></a><br /> <div class="storyImageTitle">Big Data Talent War: 10 Analytics Job Trends</div> <span class="inlinelargerView">(click image for larger view and for slideshow)</span></div> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> As storage pundit <a href="http://www.drunkendata.com/">Jon Toigo</a> pointed out last week, "big data," like "the cloud" before it, actually meant something when the term was first coined, <a href="https://twitter.com/JonToigo/status/248860589307355136">but it's quickly becoming meaningless.</a> But I'm less concerned about imprecise definitions--that happens with all new technologies--and more concerned with making the reams of publicly owned data more widely available and easily accessible. <P> Privately owned data, such as tweets and Facebook posts, aren't under government control, so we can expect the owners of that data to make it available--but at a price, and only to select partners. That is, probably not you. In contrast, most large government datasets are open to anybody via Freedom of Information Act requests, often at a nominal processing cost. <P> The problem with public data is that it can be an excruciating exercise to actually GET it. Exceptions include <a href="http://data.gov">Data.gov on the federal level</a> and <a href="http://opendataphilly.org">Open Data Philly</a> on the city level. But in most cases it's a painful process for both government workers and the requester because the workers don't have the automated processes to categorize and extract the open data (for example, business license data) and leave out the closed data (for example, social security numbers). <P> Depending upon the volume of requests and workload, the requester can wait a long time for the data while the government employee does lots of fun manual extraction. And while many government employees cheerfully deliver what they're supposed to, a dirty little secret is that some bad apples don't want people to get the data, so they throw up roadblocks such as printing out (and charging you for) records in boxes full of dot matrix tractor paper instead of offering FTP or something cheaper and more convenient. Obviously, this all leads to a massive clog of the big data flow that could be coming out of government agencies. <P> <a href="http://opendatahandbook.org/en/why-open-data/index.html">Open data is unquestionably good for society</a>, but, assuming you're not a socialpreneur, why does this matter to you and your company? Well, as a <a href="http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2012/09/brightscope_castlight_new_businesses_built_on_open_government_data_.html">"data economy"</a> article in Slate magazine recently noted, "If big data is a strategic resource, as has been suggested, then many national and state governments have public reserves that can be tapped for the public good in this young century's version of the industrial revolution." <P> You don't think government data can be leveraged to create value for your company or community? Two words: Google Maps. Having integrated federal data with local community information and created a good user interface, Google is now dominant in mapping and location-based services. Buildfax.com aggregates building permit data, adds analysis of the data, and sells it to mortgage companies. Your organization can also make money, while also creating jobs. <P> <!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <!-- GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <div style="margin:0; padding:0 0 10px 15px; width:244px; float:right;"> <div style="margin:0; border-top:1px solid black; border-bottom:1px solid black; padding:6px;"> <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/"><img src="http://twimgs.com/infoweek/1217/217ID_GlobalCIO_75.jpg" width="75" height="75" border="0" align="right" alt="Global CIO" style="margin:0 0 6px 6px;"></a> <div style="margin:0 0 6px 0; font-size:1.3em; font-weight:bold; color:#113e53;">Global CIOs: A Site Just For You</div> <span style="font-size:.9em; font-weight:bold;">Visit <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/">InformationWeek's Global CIO</a> -- our online community and information resource for CIOs operating in the global economy.</span> </div> </div> <!-- /GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <P> So whose responsibility is it to open up this data, government employees'? Yes, to a point. <P> After a seven-year tour in government IT, where turning a sow's ear into a silk purse is standard practice, I have witnessed the inventiveness of some of the best and brightest in government IT. Some of these folks have won awards for innovating, improving customer service, saving money, you name it. They're mission-focused and want to do the right thing. But when it comes time for elected boards to choose between funding "fix the bridge," "buy new patrol cars," "hire more firefighters," and "buy tools for IT," buying tools for IT usually gets short shrift. Point is, assuming a non-hostile government IT shop, and assuming a rational elected board, there are still challenges. Government IT pros can't always do it alone. <P> That's where organizations such as Code for America come in. It's sort of a Peace Corps for programmers who want to make a difference in civic life. The Code for America Brigade appeals to all walks of life--to coders, yes, but also to <a href="http://brigade.codeforamerica.org/pages/opendata">people interested in liberating the civic data</a> necessary to power those apps. There's a reason the director of the Brigade is keynoting Oct. 16's <a href="http://facebook.com/opendataday">Open Data Day</a> in North Carolina. <P> It's also about companies that leverage open government data, like those in the media industry. Some of them understand the importance of supporting organizations such as the <a href="http://www.knightfoundation.org/about/trustees/">Knight Foundation</a>, which recently recognized developers at <a href="http://www.knightfoundation.org/press-room/press-release/six-ventures-bring-data-public-winners-knight-news/">six ventures that bring data to the public</a>, including <em>The New York Times</em> and <em>Washington Post</em>, among the winners of the Knight News Challenge. <P> I don't just think private-sector organizations getting involved in this big open government data mess is just a good idea. I think it's a necessity. It's not government that's responsible for open data--it's us. All of us. <P> <a href="http://www.ted.com/talks/jennifer_pahlka_coding_a_better_government.html">Jen Pahlka,</a> in a TED talk that generated more than half a million views on TED.com, notes that government is "this thing that we own and pay for," and if we consider it as something that's working against us, we're disempowering ourselves. <P> Amen to that.2012-09-24T09:06:00ZIf enterprise apps all become SaaS, your software investment will have a very precise lifespan and return.http://www.informationweek.com/news/240007708?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authorsWith this summer's release of Blizzard Entertainment's Diablo III--and my sons' excitement over the blockbuster game--I gained some insight into where the software world is headed. Think that conventional software licensing, whose premise is <a href="http://reports.informationweek.com/abstract/7/8254/enterprise-software/research-software-licensing.html">"you don't own the bits; you own an entitlement to use the bits"</a>, reduces your business agility? That's nothing compared to the can of whoop-de-do that's been opened with software-as-a-service. <P> The Diablo III "innovation" that caught my eye once my sons started hacking away at it was this: Although there's a DVD and PC installation, there isn't any way to play offline. I found this out because the Internet in my house cuts out at midnight. It's my sons' ex-infrastructure-guy father's way of telling them to give the online world a rest. <P> In the past, with games like StarCraft, once the Internet cut out, my sons could still play the single-player game. Not so with Diablo III. As young men do, my sons researched whether there's a way to play offline, and one of them reported back to me: "Dad, code for their game is running on the servers. You don't have the whole thing on your PC." <P> <strong>[ Would your enterprise do well to take a page from Google's book? Read <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/why-mbas-hate-google--and-you-shouldnt/240007245?itc=edit_in_body_cross">Why MBAs Hate Google&#8212;And You Shouldn't</a>. ]</strong> <P> Whether it's a bid for stronger <a href="http://www.gamedev.net/topic/625487-diablo-3-representing-the-future-of-anti-piracy/">digital rights management</a> or <a href="http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/5150758674">more control over in-game cheating,</a> this "hybrid SaaS" approach got me thinking. <P> Most old games have an incredible lifespan. My sons are still playing, through the magic of platform emulators, some video games I bought 20 years ago. Some of the games are from companies that aren't even in business anymore, and the only way to legitimately get them, if you don't already own them, is to find used versions. But if their producers had used Blizzard's method, nobody could ever play those games again. <P> That's regrettable in a small way when you're talking about video games, but it's disturbing when you're talking about business software. After all, some enterprise applications have massively long lifespans. There's a point-of-sale system that I wrote well over 20 years ago that's still in use, to the benefit of (admittedly few) customers who are still running it. I spoke just the other day to a colleague who also has a system he wrote decades ago that just won't die. This isn't a unique situation. <P> If enterprise apps all become SaaS, that changes things. Your software investment will have a very precise lifespan and return. You won't have options or flexibility in terms of running software with in-house, third-party support (for example, the support available from the likes of <a href="http://www.riministreet.com">Rimini Street</a>, which offers less-expensive ERP support for SAP, Oracle, PeopleSoft, and other enterprise applications), or buying Jonathan or Trevor a beer to run a reindex on the system that one of them wrote 20 years ago. <P> Yes, software-as-a-service provides unprecedented flexibility, in the same way that renting office space does. But like rented office space, it comes with a loss of control and an inflexible, single-party financial commitment. <P> <!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <!-- GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <div style="margin:0; padding:0 0 10px 15px; width:244px; float:right;"> <div style="margin:0; border-top:1px solid black; border-bottom:1px solid black; padding:6px;"> <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/"><img src="http://twimgs.com/infoweek/1217/217ID_GlobalCIO_75.jpg" width="75" height="75" border="0" align="right" alt="Global CIO" style="margin:0 0 6px 6px;"></a> <div style="margin:0 0 6px 0; font-size:1.3em; font-weight:bold; color:#113e53;">Global CIOs: A Site Just For You</div> <span style="font-size:.9em; font-weight:bold;">Visit <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/">InformationWeek's Global CIO</a> -- our online community and information resource for CIOs operating in the global economy.</span> </div> </div> <!-- /GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <P> My prediction? Someone, somewhere will get burned on that loss of control, and there will be at least a partial swing back to on-premises code for critical long-term systems. <P> Last week at the <a href=http://www.informationweek.com/iw500>InformationWeek 500 Conference</a>, SAP co-CEO Jim Hagemann-Snabe predicted that the future of SaaS will include the option of managing systems on premises or ceding control to the cloud. He made a case that core strategic business--the business you don't want your competition seeing--will likely remain company-controlled, and "edge" cases will be "outsourced to the cloud." <P> Though he's a biased purveyor--most of SAP's software is on premises now, though its acquisitions of SuccessFactors and Ariba are promising--I think he's right. Not all enterprises rent all of their office space, and the future of software won't be all-rental either. <P> <i>Couldn't make it to the InformationWeek 500 Conference? Join us for the <a href="https://www.techwebonlineevents.com/ars/eventregistration.do?mode=eventreg&F=1004761&K=7IK">InformationWeek 500 Virtual Event</a>, featuring the best of the conference plus all-new material. It happens Oct. 2.</i>2012-09-24T08:00:00ZAdd up what that Windows 8 upgrade really costs before committinghttp://www.informationweek.com/news/240007734?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authors<!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <!-- InformationWeek Digital Issue--> <div id="inlineGreenPromoTop"> <div class="greenBand"></div> <div class="inlineGreenPromoContent"> <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/gogreen/092412/?k=axxe&cid=article_axxe_os"><img src="http://twimgs.com/informationweek/1344/smallcov.jpg" alt="InformationWeek Green - September 24, 2012" title="InformationWeek Green - September 24, 2012" align="left" class="greenIssueImage" /></a><br /> <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/gogreen/092412/?k=axxe&cid=article_axxe_os"><img src="http://twimgs.com/infoweek/graphics_library/misc/Green_leaf_88x88.jpg" alt="InformationWeek Green" title="InformationWeek Green" align="right" class="greenLeaf" /></a> <div class="greenPromoText"> <strong><a href="http://www.informationweek.com/gogreen/092412/?k=axxe&cid=article_axxe_os">Download the entire Sept. 24, 2012, issue of <em>InformationWeek</em></a></strong>, distributed in an all-digital format as part of our Green Initiative<br /> (Registration required.)<br /> <center><div class="innerGreenPromoText" align="center">We will plant a tree for each of the first 5,000 downloads.</div></center> </div> </div> <div class="greenBand"></div> </div> <!-- / InformationWeek Digital Issue--> <br /><!-- leave as a br to not interfere w/ the insights boxes --> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <P> Recently, I begrudgingly gave in to a desktop OS upgrade on my personal laptop. Know what it bought me? Nothing. It didn't solve a problem. It didn't let me work better or faster. It merely "kept me up with the latest tech." </p> <P> That's essentially what the return on investment will be when hundreds of thousands--perhaps millions--of enterprise desktops get upgraded to Windows 8. Surely we can figure out something better to do with all that money, even if we have to move some cheese in the process.</p> <P> And that's where my inner finance child starts struggling with my tech self who's committed to keeping things rolling along. I see my staff and users happily and productively ensconced in the Windows world. I want them to be happy and productive, but I want to get rid of unnecessary ongoing expenses, too, even if it causes temporary pain.</p> <P> How much money are we talking? For a midsize company with 5,000 desktops, between $2.5 million and $3.5 million. To get that number, I set some likely conditions around our investment scenario. As a practical matter, when companies move to a new desktop OS, they almost always invest in new hardware, too. Yes, Microsoft has assured us that Windows 8 will work fine on any PC that can run Windows 7. But organizational memory says that an OS-upgraded PC is a flaky PC. Don't mess with those battle-scarred IT veterans--it's out with the old, in with the new.</p> <P> Conventional wisdom also holds that if you're going to touch the PC, you might as well give desktop users completely new workstations, probably with new monitors, as an apology for the hassle of learning a new user interface and other sundry inconveniences. Hardware is, after all, "cheap," and giving customers that virtual new-car smell is good IT PR. Assume that you can resell those retired workstations for about 20 or 30 cents on the dollar paid and that there's automation in place for deploying applications and user data. </p> <P> With assumptions out of the way, let's talk money. Say that for $500 you can get a new system that can handle word processing and accessing your ERP application via various permutations of Web and (shudder) green screen. A 20-inch monitor costs $150 and 17-inch one $100. Consider whether you're going to make your desktop customers unhappy by giving them the smaller versions just to save $50. </p> <P> Will you buy the $100 PC warranty? Many large shops do, but to be conservative, let's say that you pass. The cost of self-maintenance is probably more than $100 per workstation, but it's the same whether you replace the PC or not, so we'll leave that out. Assume that you're paying $20 per hour for either a deployment contract or labor, which is incredibly conservative if you consider the fully burdened cost (healthcare and other benefits) of an employee. Call it a conservative 30 minutes of time per fully automated deployment once you deal with the help desk calls and oddball scenarios your staff will be on the hook for. We'll consider staff time as a real cost. </p> <P> Add it all up, and we're talking in the ballpark of $610 per Windows 8 workstation, assuming everything goes right. Your 5,000 desktops have cost the company a cool $2.55 million without monitors, and $3.05 million with them. Pretend that deployment labor doesn't exist, and you're still spending $2.5 million to $3 million. That's quite a nice-size project, budget-wise.</p> <P> Now let's say that your boss just hired the <a href="http://www.ladyada.net/bio/index.html" target="_blank">Limor Fried</a> of CFOs: young, very technology savvy, and a barracuda when it comes to what she does best--which is finance. When you're a finance barracuda, you're serious about keeping expenses low and return on investment high. So the first question she's going to ask is, "Why, exactly, do we need to do this? What's the benefit to the business, and what's the risk if we don't upgrade?"</p> <P> That's exactly the conversation Microsoft doesn't want you to have. </p> <P> No business prioritizes projects that don't deliver tangible value. Most will grudgingly OK projects to keep the wheels from falling off the car--but not if there's a contrarian questioning, rightly, whether you'd be smarter ditching the car and taking public transportation.</p> <P> Your CFO may not be a tech-savvy barracuda, but someone in the C-suite eventually will (or should) ask what business value mass desktop OS change-outs actually deliver, whether the wheels are really about to fall off, and what the alternatives are given that 90% of your computer users don't do anything more taxing than browse the Web, write memos, work on spreadsheets, and use the ERP system. Do you really need a next-generation OS to do that? No. And if you as a CIO try to argue otherwise, you're risking your credibility.</p> <P> <strong>So What's Your Alternative, Smarty-Pants?</strong></p> <P> I'll admit here and now that jumping off the OS upgrade treadmill is difficult. But you'd better have some suggestions on how to start weaning users from fat, expensive Wintel hardware, because someone will eventually demand an alternative plan.</p> <P> The biggest bang for your buck will be gained by either installing a freely available Linux desktop operating system on existing hardware or, for some roles, dropping PCs altogether and going mobile.</p> <P> There are several problems here. Linux will be a bombshell for your support staff, many of whom have no idea how to deal with the OS, although it's likely you're using system management and deployment tools, like Kace's KBOX, that support Linux desktops. End user acceptance also will be a problem, although probably less of one than you think given that today's all-digital and cloud-delivered options make Linux adoption more of a training and policy question.</p> <P> Remember: End users want multimedia centers--they want to create spreadsheets and listen to music while they do so. Delivering on that is less of a problem nowadays because it's not about supporting hardware, like DVD drives, anymore. Even if Linux kills support for an optical drive on last year's crop of laptops, who cares? Media has largely moved online. Smartphone sync via USB to the workstation used to be a problem. Now we have widespread "over-the-air" sync. And mobile device management tools, like AirWatch and IronPort, that allow for app management, actually deliver value, unlike, say, a desktop OS replacement project. And, while proprietary video codecs with spotty OS support have been problematic in the past, that's not so much the case nowadays. Sites that don't offer HTML5 and Flash probably aren't sites that your organization cares about giving users access to. If you really need legacy Win32 support, thin clients or VDI are a good bet. Yes, desktop virtualization is a <a href=" http://www.informationweek.com/infrastructure/management/vdi-snake-oil-check/240004876" target="_blank">bridge technology at best</a>, but if that's what it takes to wean your end users off fat desktops, it's worth considering.</p> <P> If your company is moving to SaaS, private cloud, and Web-based ERP technologies, you don't need to be on the Microsoft and Apple desktop treadmills. All you need is a system with a reasonably up-to-date browser and the ability to push security updates. The problem is that many so-called "Web" ERP technologies actually require Microsoft-only plug-ins to run. Holy ActiveX '90s, Batman! But it appears that this problem is being solved as the lumbering wagons of ERP software production update their underlying Web technologies to be only 10 years old rather than 20.</p> <P> Your software providers had better understand that it's not a Windows world anymore. If they plan to provide business value via mobility--and if they don't, the competition will--their apps need to run on Android and iOS. Win32 and Win64 aren't the future.</p> <P> Before discussing Windows 8, regroup and have the difficult conversations about the value of operating system and PC upgrades. Look at this big expense and possible alternatives in terms of finance and business. You'll get some push-back, so enlist allies in finance and on the executive team. Swearing off Windows is a paradigm-buster to be sure. But get started. Figure out how much it will cost to evaluate your needs and create an action plan. </p> <P> I guarantee, it won't be $2.5 million. </P> <P> <center><img src="http://twimgs.com/informationweek/1344/344CSchart20.jpg" width="580" height="323" alt="chart: Has your ERP vendor revealed Windows 8 support plans?" hspace="0" vspace="0" border="0" style="margin-bottom:7px;" /><br /></center></p> <P>2012-09-19T01:23:00Zhttp://reports.informationweek.com/abstract/25/8898/Virtualization/informed-cio-vdi-snake-oil-check.html?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authors2012-09-13T11:21:00ZDoes Google really owe enterprises a five-year plan? Google's "big startup" attitude is a win for enterprises seeking agility.http://www.informationweek.com/news/240007245?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authors<!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <div class="inlineStoryImage inlineStoryImageRight"><a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/20-great-ideas-to-steal/240006553"><img src="http://twimgs.com/informationweek/galleries/automated/860/01_Intro_tn.jpg" alt="20 Great Ideas To Steal" title="20 Great Ideas To Steal" class="img175" /></a><br /> <div class="storyImageTitle">20 Great Ideas To Steal</div> <span class="inlinelargerView">(click image for larger view and for slideshow)</span></div> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> The final <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/1343">InformationWeek 500</a> keynote interview, with Michael Lock, VP, Google Enterprise, and Clay Bavor, head of product management for Google Enterprise, had some closing fireworks. As usual, my colleague Fritz Nelson asked a lot of pointed questions, but I thought that the real theme of the conference--"Throwing out the old IT rule book"--was highlighted by a conflict between traditional MBA-think and Google's lean, agile, or whatever-you-want-to-call-it attitude about building great products. <P> It started with Michael Lock talking about the enterprise product direction. He quipped, <a href="https://twitter.com/_jfeldman/status/245664457110462464">"A lot of MBAs at Google are frustrated because they want the five-year roadmap, and we're just not that way."</a> To be fair, I think he was more or less joking that the way MBAs are trained is pretty inflexible. <P> But things heated up when an audience member with an MBA said, <a href="https://twitter.com/_jfeldman/status/245665447222054912">"When I'm going to commit hundreds of millions of dollars, I really <i>do</i> want the five-year roadmap."</a> Fair enough, right? <P> Maybe. <P> Cue damage control, stage right. Bavor indicated that there's always a vision and guiding principles in place that ensure that Google continues to build great products. Not good enough. Some of the IT leaders in the audience that I spoke to afterwards rolled their eyes and said that this statement was essentially, "Trust us, we're Google. What could go wrong?" <P> <strong>[ Who are this year's InformationWeek 500 award winners? See a <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/1343?itc=edit_in_body_cross"> ranked list of our 2012 winners, profiles of top IT innovators,</a> and much more. ]</strong> <P> But cue applause: Lock made a great point with me and some other folks that I spoke to afterwards when he said, <a href="https://twitter.com/_jfeldman/status/245666147494678528">"We're trying to be careful not to become the product that we're replacing."</a> He meant that a lot of Google's success has been because the company has been nimble and hasn't spent all its efforts devoted to a five-year road map that is essentially one big guessing game anyway. <P> After all, who <i>really</i> knows what's going to happen five years down the road? Did you ever believe that RIM could have fallen so low in a period of <i>less than</i> 12 months? Nope. So do you really want to devote a huge amount of resources to trying to guess what IT is going to look like in 5 years? I sure don't. <P> As I mentioned, the theme of the conference was "Throw out the old IT rulebook," and if we IT leaders are really committed to throwing out that old rulebook, we had better be able to at least consider killing some of our sacred cows, like the holy of holies five-year product roadmap. At least one attendee (a self-proclaimed Apple fan, theoretically a sworn enemy of the GOOG) tweeted, <a href="https://twitter.com/_jfeldman/status/245666504383791104">"Google's approach though seems wonderfully nimble. I believe."</a> <P> Over and over during the conference--during our startup session, during Randy Mott's keynote interview--the notion that "you're not going to be able to get next-generation results by sticking with the old-generation vendors and playbooks" kept resonating. <P> <!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <!-- GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <div style="margin:0; padding:0 0 10px 15px; width:244px; float:right;"> <div style="margin:0; border-top:1px solid black; border-bottom:1px solid black; padding:6px;"> <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/"><img src="http://twimgs.com/infoweek/1217/217ID_GlobalCIO_75.jpg" width="75" height="75" border="0" align="right" alt="Global CIO" style="margin:0 0 6px 6px;"></a> <div style="margin:0 0 6px 0; font-size:1.3em; font-weight:bold; color:#113e53;">Global CIOs: A Site Just For You</div> <span style="font-size:.9em; font-weight:bold;">Visit <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/">InformationWeek's Global CIO</a> -- our online community and information resource for CIOs operating in the global economy.</span> </div> </div> <!-- /GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <P> Are you still doing the same-old, same-old bridge calls where everyone's either answering email (at best) or playing Solitaire and saying "Huh?" when someone asks a question? Or are you biting the bullet and spending big bucks to fly everyone in so that you can actually look them in the eye and have a real, engaged conversation? <P> Bavor says that one CEO is using <a href="https://twitter.com/_jfeldman/status/245663025225412609">Google hangouts for staff meetings, claiming something like $20K in airfare savings.</a> So my question to the MBAs in the group is: Do you really need a five-year road map for that? <P> Full disclosure: I am one of those MBA-types (specifically, an MS degree in management from Georgia Tech), but I have kept my eyes open since graduating, and as I've said before, startups--and those who use startup methodologies--have a great deal to teach those who were trained in traditional business methodologies. <P> I think Google has some work to do to be adopted in the enterprise, but it's not about the five-year roadmap or fashioning Google into a Big Enterprise Software Company. Google has work to do, for sure, but simultaneously, IT leadership has work to do, and lessons to unlearn as well. It's about playing from a new IT rulebook, but it's even bigger than that: there's a new business playbook to be learned. There are lessons about agility, stopping the overplanning (guessing) processes in our organizations, being constantly in beta, and aiming for less perfection. As IT and business leaders, we need to be on board with that if we want to continue to help our organizations succeed. <P> <i>Couldn't make it to the InformationWeek 500 Conference? Join us for the <a href="https://www.techwebonlineevents.com/ars/eventregistration.do?mode=eventreg&F=1004761&K=7IK">InformationWeek 500 Virtual Event</a>, featuring the best of the conference plus all-new material. It happens Oct. 2.</i>2012-09-10T12:04:00ZIt's all well and good to have an agenda when you go to a conference, but don't forget the bigger lessons that serendipity brings.http://www.informationweek.com/news/240006992?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authorsI'm taking some time off to attend this year's <em>InformationWeek 500</em>, an <em>InformationWeek</em> conference that serves both as an award venue for innovative companies and government agencies, and as a gathering place for hundreds of IT leaders to learn from each other and from the conference's special guests. <P> I'll admit it: I struggle a little bit with my OCD side, a leftover from my days in the data center, where the details really, really matter. In my leadership role, I sometimes have to let go a bit and let others worry about the details, but when I'm at a conference, I can indulge my check-the-box, schedule-it, wallow-in-the-details side. So here's my OCD checklist about what I'm hoping to check out at the conference, and what I'm hoping to get out of it. <P> 1. A keynote from MIT's Erik Brynjolfsson. His book <em>Race Against The Machine</em> implies that our conventional ways of implementing, using, and managing IT aren't going to work in the near future. The premise that we'll hear about Monday is that technology is evolving far faster than people can adapt. I'm not sure whether he means customers, or IT itself. Sounds a lot like consumerization to me. I'm married to one of those MIT geniuses, so you can bet I'll be listening--I'm sort of conditioned to. <P> 2. A keynote interview with Proctor and Gamble's Filippo Passerini. While this year's <em>InformationWeek 500</em> theme is "throw out the old IT rulebook," I would humbly submit that one of the subthemes is that it's all about the data: big data, open data, data collaboration. Our own Chris Murphy will be interviewing Passerini and discussing how P&G allows employees to choose the data that they want to see. I'm personally interested in this because I'm intrigued by the notion. Metrics and data are powerful medicine. I have seen more than one organization mired down in tracking 150 performance metrics, when they simply could have been tracking <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/big-data/news/big-data-analytics/240006932/soccer-wonks-learn-tough-big-data-lesson">the five that really mattered</a>. <P> <strong>[ See <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/startup-weekend-made-me-a-better-it-lead/240006541?itc=edit_in_body_cross">Startup Weekend Made Me A Better IT Leader</a>. ]</strong> <P> 3. Five hot startups. If I had to name the top five issues facing me, I'd probably name mobility, social networking, security, cloud computing, and big data. I'd bet that most of you would too. So it's going to be very cool on Tuesday when colleague John Foley and I will be hosting senior leadership of five up-and-coming startups that address these hot button CIO issues, in a format very much resembling Ignite or lightning talks. Panelists James Staten and Chenxi Wang of Forrester Research will be asking some tough questions, as will the audience of several hundred IT leaders. It should be awesome. <P> My colleagues Charlie "Cloud" Babcock, Doug "Big Data" Henschen, and Laurie "Technology Translator" McLaughlin will be covering many of these events, so if you couldn't make it to the conference, stay tuned to <a href="https://twitter.com/search/%23iw500">#iw500</a> on Twitter, and the <em><a href="https://www.facebook.com/pages/The-InformationWeek-500-Conference/12517236419">InformationWeek 500</em> page on Facebook</a>. <P> But, as usual, my biggest to-do list item is to have some off-the-record and very candid discussions about life as a provider of IT services, whether it's in the CIO or service provider role. On Sunday night during the opening reception, I had a fantastic conversation with the CEO of an outsourced IT firm and the CIO of a large private sector company about the difficulties surrounding security awareness at an organization. We all related stories that we never would have had, never COULD have had in a meeting room and less intimate setting. So, although it goes against my natural OCD tendency, to be honest, these unscheduled moments are very much on my agenda for the next couple of days.2012-08-30T12:29:00ZYou'll be amazed at what you can learn when you push outside of your comfort zone.http://www.informationweek.com/news/240006541?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authorsOne of the most worthwhile things I've done for my job recently doesn't have a lot to do with my job description. As an organizer for a Startup Weekend in my city, I confirmed what I know about enjoying work, learned more about business agility, networked with people who might help me in the future, and strengthened some of my weakest skill sets. <P> What the heck does Startup Weekend--where attendees go from idea pitch to business implementation in 54 grueling hours--have to do with being an IT leader? More than you might think. <P> In the dystopian world of large organizations, I run into "work sucks" a lot more than I'd care to. Well, work doesn't suck, and hanging out with 50 entrepreneurs on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday reminded me of that. As Startup Weekend facilitator <a href="https://twitter.com/jramphis">J. Ramphis Castro</a> pointed out at the kickoff of the event, "You guys just finished work, school, or whatever, and now you're here to work on something else. That's not normal!" <P> Among this crowd, it is normal. I can relate. When I first brought my future wife home to meet my family one Thanksgiving, she was bemused when my father and I disappeared upstairs for a few hours to repair a bathtub. Since then, she has figured out that work is how the men in my family hang out. <P> That's exactly what my organizer perspective allowed me to observe at Startup Weekend: Lots of people working hard, pushing the ball forward, but having a great time doing it. Some of the large organizations we work at have a sickness that makes people believe that work must suck. But when you spend time with people doing something meaningful, work is awesome, and whether or not those people matter to you when you begin, they will matter to you by the time that you accomplish your objective. <P> <strong>[ The startup life may be calling to your top employees. Learn <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/how-to-keep-your-best-talent/240005208?itc=edit_in_body_cross">How To Keep Your Best Talent</a>. ]</strong> <P> Startup Weekend also taught me a lesson or two about agility. It's not that I learned about building interest and group action, or when to buy instead of build to save time, or how to rapidly resolve team issues. I was exposed to those lessons last year as a <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/how-to-speed-up-key-it-projects/231902694">Startup Weekend participant</a>. As an organizer this year, I saw firsthand how the large organizations we approached to sponsor or participate were paralyzed, not because they didn't want to participate, but because they couldn't get approvals in time. I'm not talking about government organizations like mine; I'm talking about large, successful, private-sector companies. Those of us who work for large organizations must figure out why things take so long and how to fix that. <P> <!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <!-- GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <div style="margin:0; padding:0 0 10px 15px; width:244px; float:right;"> <div style="margin:0; border-top:1px solid black; border-bottom:1px solid black; padding:6px;"> <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/"><img src="http://twimgs.com/infoweek/1217/217ID_GlobalCIO_75.jpg" width="75" height="75" border="0" align="right" alt="Global CIO" style="margin:0 0 6px 6px;"></a> <div style="margin:0 0 6px 0; font-size:1.3em; font-weight:bold; color:#113e53;">Global CIOs: A Site Just For You</div> <span style="font-size:.9em; font-weight:bold;">Visit <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/">InformationWeek's Global CIO</a> -- our online community and information resource for CIOs operating in the global economy.</span> </div> </div> <!-- /GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> One way might be to expose yourself and your people to startups and how they operate. At the <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/conference"><em>InformationWeek 500</em> Conference</a> Sept. 9 to 11, the CEOs and founders of five hot startups (Appthority, CliQr Technologies, CrowdStrike, Hearsay Social, and Platfora) will take center stage to give the CIOs and other IT executives in the audience a lesson in agility--if those audience members are willing to get jostled outside of their comfort zones. <P> As a Startup Weekend organizer, I pushed myself out of mine. I offered home hospitality to our facilitator; Startup Weekend is a not-for-profit event, and paying for an expensive hotel room isn't in the budget. Who knew if he'd be a wild man or not! But it was an amazing experience to meet and spend a lot of time with this Puerto Rican entrepreneur, take him around town, and bring him to a business meeting before the event kickoff (where, by the way, he helped to solve a problem). <P> I pushed myself to acquire sponsorships for the next Startup Weekend in my city, something that I'm frankly terrible at. But I got better. Will that experience help in my role as an IT leader? Probably. If I'm honest about it, I'm just as terrible at asking for budget dollars as I am at acquiring outside sponsors. I need to get better at both. <P> Entrepreneur Jason Fried recently suggested that companies introduce change, like seasons, into their workplaces. His software company, 37signals, designated the month of June as "work on whatever you want" month. He says it was incredibly productive. (If you read no other book this year, read his <a href="http://37signals.com/rework"><em>Rework</em></a>, written with David Hansson.) <P> Most of us can't take a month at work doing other stuff, but surely we can spend 2%, 5%, even 10% of our time on speculative projects that may have no apparent immediate benefit but have the potential to take our organizations out of their humdrum zones. <P> You don't have to organize a Startup Weekend. Just make an extra effort to do something new that allows you to grow as a leader at your organization and in your community.2012-08-17T09:06:00ZVendors playing to fears about the security shortcomings of Dropbox, SugarSync, and similar apps might as well be selling security blankets.http://www.informationweek.com/news/240005685?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authorsJust about every week, either in my role as an IT leader or as a columnist for <em>InformationWeek</em>, I get an email pitch about how Product XYZ is "more secure" than the consumer-based cloud file sync apps such as Dropbox and SugarSync. In one example, the vendor referred to a recent, <a href="https://blog.dropbox.com/index.php/security-update-new-features/">human-related Dropbox security breach</a>, opining: "The fact is that commercial cloud services are not secure data repositories. Period." <P> Broad brush statements like that one drive me crazy. Of course, any time data leaves your span of control, it's less secure. But for business to actually get transacted, sometimes we need to achieve a balance between security and functionality. <P> I spent a bunch of my career in the security world, so I understand that security folks sometimes freak out. The consequences of the wrong actions can be brutal, but the bottom line is that we can't just lock up the data. Our job is to classify use cases and help our business colleagues understand the risk-benefit ratio. <P> Why do your users choose Dropbox? Because, unlike a lot of cumbersome tools supplied by central IT, it just works. It's usable. It doesn't require a consultation with an IT help desk person. <P> One vendor pitched me recently on its product, which allegedly "works the same as Dropbox except it has really high security standards." Whatever that means. Just about any vendor is vulnerable to human-based breaches. Any time you put your data out there you're risking a breach. Don't get me wrong--the purpose-built "secure" products are probably more secure than the standard cloud sync app, but if they're out of your span of control, there's some level of risk. <P> Most of these "secure" vendors are missing the critical point about why cloud file sync is attractive. The business benefits don't come from the file sync app itself. They come from the ecosystem. <P> <!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <!-- GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <div style="margin:0; padding:0 0 10px 15px; width:244px; float:right;"> <div style="margin:0; border-top:1px solid black; border-bottom:1px solid black; padding:6px;"> <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/"><img src="http://twimgs.com/infoweek/1217/217ID_GlobalCIO_75.jpg" width="75" height="75" border="0" align="right" alt="Global CIO" style="margin:0 0 6px 6px;"></a> <div style="margin:0 0 6px 0; font-size:1.3em; font-weight:bold; color:#113e53;">Global CIOs: A Site Just For You</div> <span style="font-size:.9em; font-weight:bold;">Visit <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/">InformationWeek's Global CIO</a> -- our online community and information resource for CIOs operating in the global economy.</span> </div> </div> <!-- /GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <P> What do I mean? Most of these "super lockdown" vendors pitch that their products work on BlackBerry, iPhone, Android. But the real value comes from the ease of use that comes from app integration into the cloud sync product. Vendors such as Dropbox, SugarSync, Box.net, and Google influence their developer communities to build support into their specific apps. In this way, you have direct support for notepad apps, Microsoft Office equivalents, photo apps, and the like. <P> You might get annoyed that these vendors don't just support secure WebDav (a standard for Web file sharing), but the fact is that doing file sync is fiendishly difficult. WebDav doesn't offer the same total solution for sync that the cloud file apps do. <P> So the ecosystem really matters because, to do cloud file sync right (where you're not getting frustrated by conflicting versions of files and other ugly things), vendors of productivity apps need a simple way to sync. The APIs and forums and community support that the cloud file sync vendors offer to third-party app developers really matter. <P> The ecosystem matters because adopting some strange, squirrelly vertical cloud file sync tool that nobody's ever heard of simply isn't going to work. It may make the security trolls at your organization feel better, but for them, I suggest buying a security blanket. <P> Assuming that the niche "secure" cloud file sync app works as well as the incumbent tool, not only will nobody want to use it, but nobody is going to be able to use it. The pervasive productivity apps don't support the niche products. For example, the latest Docs to Go supports Google Docs, Box.net, Dropbox, iDisk, and Sugar Sync. That's it. Not a highly secure niche solution among them. <P> Oh, you can use our secure tool within iOS or Android and then open it in another app, say the niche vendors' sales and PR folks. Really? And when you modify the doc, how does it sync back into the cloud? Hello, cumbersome! <P> There's no doubt that cloud-based file sync has created a huge security issue. But expecting to solve it with inadequate products isn't the way to go. Instead of IT acting like the no police and outlawing the tools that actually serve their user bases, IT can work with business leaders in several ways. <P> >> Establish and document acceptable use cases for cloud file sync. Not every use case is appropriate, obviously. <P> >> Integrate cloud file sync use case and other guidelines into your security awareness training. <P> >> Define the risks and then work with security personnel to establish what the mitigation strategy will be, such as data leak protection, adequate backups, and two-factor authentication. <P> It's much more difficult to have these conversations than to simply lock up everything and offer inadequate tools. But it's the right thing to do. <P> <i>At this year's <a href="http://informationweek.com/conference">InformationWeek 500 Conference</a>, C-level execs will gather to discuss how they're rewriting the old IT rulebook and accelerating business execution. At the St. Regis Monarch Beach, Dana Point, Calif., Sept. 9-11. </i>2012-08-09T09:04:00ZPam Slim, author of the bestselling <em>Escape From Cubicle Nation</em>, discusses what might keep our best and brightest from fleeing our cubicles. Maybe the answer is to encourage a "side hustle."http://www.informationweek.com/news/240005208?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authors<!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <div class="inlineStoryImage inlineStoryImageRight"> <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/galleries/global-cio/compensation/232900448"><img src="http://twimgs.com/informationweek/1331/331Coverart.jpg" alt="2012 Salary Survey: 12 Career Insights" title="2012 Salary Survey: 12 Career Insights" class="img175" /></a><br /> <div class="storyImageTitle">2012 Salary Survey: 12 Career Insights</div> <span class="inlinelargerView">(click image for larger view and for slideshow)</span></div> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <i>Last month's World Domination Summit made me realize that the micropreneurship isn't just so much <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/world-domination-summit-a-personal-life/240003245">smoke and mirrors</a>--these are real people creating real revenue and a real quality of life. But in addition, I also realized that technology and globalization has made it so easy for our very best and brightest employees to successfully join these movements, and there is a very real possibility that <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/interviews/here-comes-corporate-brain-drain/240003422">this is the beginning of some serious corporate brain drain.</a> <P> Freaked out at this notion, and to learn how to retain our best employees, I consulted an expert--corporate escape artist Pam Slim, author of <a href="http://www.escapefromcubiclenation.com/">Escape From Cubicle Nation</a>. Here's how the first part of our conversation went down.</i> <P> <strong>InformationWeek:</strong> If our corporation's best and brightest follow the advice from your book, <em>Escape From Cubicle Nation</em>, that's a huge concern to business technology leaders, because frankly, we need those folks! The work that business technology staff does is pretty complicated, and requires a lot of business savvy and creativity. What are the things that might make people who read your book keep your advice as a contingency plan instead of immediately jettisoning? How can we retain those people instead of losing them to the phenomenon of micropreneurship or solopreneurship? <P> <strong>Pam Slim:</strong> I think there are two different cases. There can be people who have, since the beginning of their career, gone into a corporate life, not really because that was really what they were meant to do, not because that particular environment is one that they really felt passionate about, but because they really didn't have any other idea what to do, and it was a logical step. <P> <!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <!-- GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <div style="margin:0; padding:0 0 10px 15px; width:244px; float:right;"> <div style="margin:0; border-top:1px solid black; border-bottom:1px solid black; padding:6px;"> <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/"><img src="http://twimgs.com/infoweek/1217/217ID_GlobalCIO_75.jpg" width="75" height="75" border="0" align="right" alt="Global CIO" style="margin:0 0 6px 6px;"></a> <div style="margin:0 0 6px 0; font-size:1.3em; font-weight:bold; color:#113e53;">Global CIOs: A Site Just For You</div> <span style="font-size:.9em; font-weight:bold;">Visit <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/">InformationWeek's Global CIO</a> -- our online community and information resource for CIOs operating in the global economy.</span> </div> </div> <!-- /GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <P> People fall into majors in college that way, often at the urging of very well-intentioned counselors and parents and people who want the best for them. And so the metaphor that I use for that kind of situation is somebody who is wearing an ill-fitting shoe, where they're a size eight and they're shoved in a size six shoe, where that entire environment or the role that they're in in a corporation is really not meant for them, because they're fundamentally wired to be somebody who's going to flourish more in an entrepreneurial environment that has high risk and very little rules and restrictions and a high amount of creativity, a much smaller organization for an individual like many of the micropreneurs that we saw at <a href="http://worlddominationsummit.com/">World Domination Summit</a>. They're people who just might want to work for themselves and travel around the world. <P> So that kind of person may never be the ideal candidate to be in a corporation, because that's not really the way that they're wired. And I think that there are people who do fit that profile, who prefer to always be on their own. <P> The second kind of person that I run across very often in my work is somebody who actually really enjoys a large part of the corporate environment. They like the camaraderie. They definitely appreciate not having to hustle every month to make sure they have a paycheck. They enjoy the resources that come with a corporation that's able to provide training and information and really smart people. I remember in my own corporate career--I was at Barclays Global Investors before I went out on my own 16 years ago--and it was an extremely stimulating environment. I loved walking around the trading room floor and talking to some of the smartest people in the world that were doing really interesting things with investing and data and all of that. So a lot of people enjoy many aspects of corporate life.<!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <div class="inlineStoryImage inlineStoryImageRight"> <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/galleries/global-cio/interviews/232700431"><img src="http://twimgs.com/informationweek/galleries/automated/772/01_Steve-Haindl_tn.jpg" alt="10 CIOs: Career Decisions I'd Do Over" title="10 CIOs: Career Decisions I'd Do Over" class="img175" /></a><br /> <div class="storyImageTitle">10 CIOs: Career Decisions I'd Do Over</div> <span class="inlinelargerView">(click image for larger view and for slideshow)</span></div> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> What doesn't work often, I think, is that many corporations are still managing people as if we were in another era and, they don't take into consideration the things that I think Dan Pink nailed so accurately in <a href="http://www.danpink.com/drive"><em>Drive</em></a>. That is, what really motivates us is autonomy, mastery, and purpose. People really do feel better if they're not totally regulated in how it is that they're working, where they have some autonomy, where they're able to really develop mastery, to be constantly learning and growing. They need purpose, where they see a connection between the work that they're doing and the actual outcome. And many people get stuck in a weird place where they might work for a year on some bizarre project that they don't even understand who the end user is or how anything is going to be used, and that makes them feel very disconnected. <P> There are many different shades of gray in between, but I think those are the two scenarios. Corporations that are trying to get somebody to stay who's fundamentally never going to be wired to fit in that environment is probably not the best use of resources. Where they want to be focusing are people who like 70% or 80% of what they have but just cannot take either the pressure of work pace, which they're always on, or they just don't have enough autonomy, mastery, and purpose. <P> <strong>IW:</strong> The point is, then, don't fight an unwinnable battle of somebody who is eventually going to pop and leave anyway, but focus on giving autonomy, mastery, and purpose to the folks have a chance of staying. <P> <strong>Slim:</strong> Yes. But having worked inside corporations for so long I know that, especially in today's age, nothing can be guaranteed. Anybody who's in senior management knows that often they're going to have to be making decisions, sometimes every year, about laying people off or restructuring, and so what can be a very awkward situation arises, because the corporation is asking employees to behave as if they're always going to be employed by that company. <P> Employees may be prohibited from doing what I affectionately call a "side hustle," where they're not encouraged in any way to have an outside pursuit like a freelance business or something else. It's often seen as being very threatening to the corporation. <P> And yet at the same time, people in corporations know how painful it is to sit across the table from somebody who they've known for decades and lay them off and realize, if they have no backup plan, that is not good for any of us. It's not good for our community. It's not good for our economy. There are many benefits that can happen from somebody that's happy in a corporation that might have a side project that brings in ideas and creativity and a new market and have access to other partners. <P> Corporations really need to be rethinking intense restriction on people.<!-- Image Aligning right --> <!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <div class="inlineStoryImage inlineStoryImageRight"> <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/thebrainyard/article/240003499"><img src="http://twimgs.com/informationweek/galleries/automated/827/announcement_full.jpg" alt="How 6 Tech Execs Set Social Example" title="How 6 Tech Execs Set Social Example" class="img175" /></a><br /> <div class="storyImageTitle">How 6 Tech Execs Set Social Example</div> <span class="inlinelargerView">(click image for larger view and for slideshow)</span></div> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <!-- / Image Aligning right --> <strong>IW:</strong> One of the problems with encouraging side hustle, and a backup plan, for IT organizations is that typically these are very high-impact, very long-hour type of jobs. The elephant in the room is all about perception. If someone is doing a side hustle, or if somebody has a backup plan apart from the usual family or hobby activity, what ends up happening is that you lose productivity from your IT workers, right? So if you lose 10% of your 100-person IT organization, it may be perceived as 10 FTEs out the door. We're not saying that's right, but in some organizations that's how it might play out. What would you say to those managers who have this in the back of their minds? <P> <strong>Slim:</strong> The one clear distinction about anybody working on a side project is it does not happen during working hours. That's something very, very clearly that I believe that you never want to do for any reason. <P> The managers who have the thought you mention assume, first of all, that you can actually control how an individual is choosing to manage their life outside of work. You can't tell somebody what hobbies they have to have. Another assumption is that productivity and value that's created by employees is just based on the numbers of hours in which they're working on a project. I do not see any correlation whatsoever, and actually many studies that have been done about productivity show that it has nothing to do with that. <P> I think the people who are the most valuable to organizations are those that are connected to the outside world, that are not just focused inside on what they're doing, and especially within a developer community or within IT. I've many, many clients--software engineers and developers--that have shown me there is tremendous sharing that happens in outsourcing projects that they might do together. Working on some open source, cool projects or developing apps, the amount of learning that happens when they're connected on a small project leads to epiphanies and ideas and different ways of looking at something. This, I think, far outweighs just making sure that employees are spending the max amount of hours within their day job. <P> These assumptions are dangerous and awkward in two ways. One is that you think you can control what it is that people are doing, and second, sometimes the more that you restrict, it actually increases the urge of people to want to rebel against it. Besides saying, "You are responsible for meeting your work objectives, and if you want to be here and you want to have a career, that is your responsibility as a professional," I think people want to do well. I think they want to do a great job. <P> There have to be clear parameters for people that their side hustle should not be doing something directly competing with the company. It makes sense to have very clear guidelines in terms of what side projects can be. But if everybody is adult, let them manage things, if it makes them more creative. We can look at companies like Google who very actively encourage people to be pursuing other projects and working on interesting things. And we've seen what the results can be in terms of innovation in a company. So to ask for innovation but to say, "You must be innovative between these hours and only focus on our job and never look at anything else outside" is very contradictory. And I don't think it's effective at all.2012-08-08T08:00:00ZYou won't lose your shirt on a desktop virtualization initiative, but don't expect it to be easy to implement or free of unforeseen complications.http://www.informationweek.com/news/240004876?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authors<!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <div id="analytics_briefsPromoContainer"> <div id="analytics_briefsPromo"> <div class="analytics_briefsInner"> <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/tech-center/storage-virtualization/download?id=189800861&cat=whitepaper" target="_blank">Get the full report on making the decision to use VDI</a> </div> <div class="analytics_briefsBottom"><strong>&gt;&gt; <a href="http://reports.informationweek.com" class="analytics_link">See all of our reports</a> &lt;&lt;</strong></div> </div> </div> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <P> Desktop infrastructure technology isn't as transformative as many of us thought it would be. Yes, it provides a solid bridge between where the puck was (Windows) and where it's going (mobile). But the business case must make sense.</p> <P> And that's where things get messy.</p> <P> As we discuss in more depth in our <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/tech-center/storage-virtualization/download?id=189800861&cat=whitepaper" target="_blank">full report</a>, the decision on whether and where to use VDI depends on your big-picture end user device strategy. As the 483 business technology professionals responding to our <i>InformationWeek</i> 2012 Alternative Application Delivery Survey make clear, VDI won't stop the arrival of what Steve Jobs famously called the "post-PC era." VDI is merely an extension of incumbent technology, not a disrupter, and what it will do is help smooth the transition to the post-PC era by providing three benefits:</p> <P> <strong>&gt;&gt; Mobility:</strong> One wow factor for VDI is its ability to deliver a full, user-customizable Windows desktop anywhere, anytime, and on a pretty wide variety of devices. That's a far cry from yesterday's terminal services, where the user wasn't able to install anything, and if the environment got bonked up, it got bonked up for everyone.</p> <P> <strong>&gt;&gt; Security:</strong> VDI lets IT keep the user's "hard drive" tucked away in the data center. If the device gets stolen, there's a lot less worry about data loss or network breaches.</p> <P> <strong>&gt;&gt; Manageability:</strong> We all know the drill. PC customer needs admin authority "to do my job!" Then, said customer falls victim to malware. With VDI, swapping out someone's PC is as easy as pointing him to a new image. Missing files? Easy, transfer them over. And it can all be done remotely.</p> <P> These are great value propositions. But is VDI the best use of your limited time and money?</p> <P> You won't know unless you do an ROI study, like 28% of our respondents. This isn't one of those cases where it's obvious that by investing in, say, licensed wide area wireless gear, you're going to save big bucks on operational expenses. VDI isn't clear-cut. There's value for some, but the path is anything but straightforward. And there are so many issues surrounding VDI that it's easy to leave something out of your factoring.</p> <P> Three major gotchas typically present themselves when it comes to the ROI and business case for VDI: storage costs, ongoing licensing, and the wisdom of investing in PC infrastructure in a post-PC world that features the rise of Web and mobile apps. </p> <P> Before you decide to begin or expand VDI use, run the numbers and consider the role of PCs in your future.</p> <P> <center><img src="http://twimgs.com/informationweek/1340/340F4_chart2.jpg" width="490" height="348" alt="chart: What conclusions did you come to after studying the cost and ROI of VDI at your company?" hspace="0" vspace="0" border="0" style="margin-bottom:7px;" /><br /></center></p> <P> <!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <center> <div id="printfeaturePDFpromo"><div class="printfeaturePDFCover"><a href="http://reports.informationweek.com/abstract/81/8997/Business-Intelligence-and-Information-Management/informationweek-august-13-2012.html?k=axxe&cid=article_axxe_os"><img src="http://twimgs.com/infoweek/1340/cov_110w.jpg" alt="InformationWeek: August 13, 2012 Issue" title="InformationWeek: August 13, 2012 Issue" /></a></div> <div class="printfeaturePDFCopy"><strong><a href="http://reports.informationweek.com/abstract/81/8997/Business-Intelligence-and-Information-Management/informationweek-august-13-2012.html?k=axxe&cid=article_axxe_o">Download a free PDF of <nobr><em>InformationWeek</em> magazine</nobr></a><br /> (registration required)</strong></div> <div class="clearBoth"></div> </div> </center> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE -->2012-08-07T09:00:00ZTelecom incumbents should consider innovating instead of abusing customers and playing fast with the rules.http://www.informationweek.com/news/240005038?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authorsThe incumbent telecom providers are acting like a bunch of irrational adolescents who won't let go after it's clear that the game is over and the stadium has cleared out. Their convoluted, customer-hostile, and reality-distorting arguments are starting to get old. I'm tired of seeing them spend money on lobbyists and spin instead of innovative business services. <P> For example, AT&T, Comcast, and a state lobbying group in Georgia are requesting that the state's public service commission <a href="http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2012/jul/31/georgia-att-petitions-state-for-rate-hike/">require rural telcos to <em>raise</em> their rates</a>. Apparently, little Chickamauga Telephone Co. doesn't charge enough. Next thing you know, they'll be begging regulators to require non-incumbents to make data speeds slower. <P> In another example, Comcast has announced that <a href="http://customer.comcast.com/help-and-support/internet/data-usage-plans-nash/">it's raising its usage cap</a> for all customers in its Nashville, Tenn., test market from 250 GB to 300 GB a month. And the crowd...went...mild. <P> <strong>[ What do we know about Google's upcoming next-gen communications device? Read <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/mobility/smart_phones/240001566?itc=edit_in_body_cross">Google's Mystery Communications Device: 6 Facts</a>. ]</strong> <P> Some background: In 2008 Comcast started "capping" broadband connections at 250 GB, meaning it could cut off or restrict customers' service if they exceeded the cap in a given month. Then in May of this year, Comcast suspended the cap policy in most markets, but in some it offered customers the option of paying more if they exceed the cap. Customers who use both Comcast broadband services and data services such as Xfinity, its competitor to Netflix, get a pass on the extra charges. <P> While today this policy discourages customers from using data services from providers not owned by Comcast, tomorrow it could discourage them from using other data services, such as enterprise-ready file storage, should Comcast decide to get into that market in competition with the likes of SugarSync. <P> Adding 50 GB to that test market is nothing to celebrate. My staff moves 50 GB of data every day, and if we're going to adopt more cloud services, I'd better not have to worry about hitting some arbitrary cap. <P> Then there's Verizon, which received a special allocation of the public's radio spectrum in exchange for promising to <a href="http://gigaom.com/mobile/fcc-tells-verizon-you-cant-block-tethering-apps-verizon-settles-for-1-25m/">run an "open" network</a> that doesn't restrict devices or apps. Verizon then went ahead and prohibited the popular tethering apps that let laptops and other computers share the phone's data connection. I can just hear the boardroom discussion at Verizon: "What's the worst thing that could happen?" What happened is that the FCC <a href="http://www.fcc.gov/document/verizon-wireless-pay-125-million-settle-investigation //">slapped Verizon with a measly $1.25 million fine</a> and told the company to quit it. <P> <!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <!-- GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <div style="margin:0; padding:0 0 10px 15px; width:244px; float:right;"> <div style="margin:0; border-top:1px solid black; border-bottom:1px solid black; padding:6px;"> <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/"><img src="http://twimgs.com/infoweek/1217/217ID_GlobalCIO_75.jpg" width="75" height="75" border="0" align="right" alt="Global CIO" style="margin:0 0 6px 6px;"></a> <div style="margin:0 0 6px 0; font-size:1.3em; font-weight:bold; color:#113e53;">Global CIOs: A Site Just For You</div> <span style="font-size:.9em; font-weight:bold;">Visit <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/">InformationWeek's Global CIO</a> -- our online community and information resource for CIOs operating in the global economy.</span> </div> </div> <!-- /GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <P> Back in July, Verizon had the ... interesting ... idea that the FCC was violating network owners' constitutional rights by mandating that they treat all traffic the same--in other words, not prioritize their own voice services over competing VoIP services. What Verizon and other operators want is to get customers excited about choice and availability and then create a monopoly in the guise of righteous indignation that their constitutional rights are being violated. But it's not about constitutional rights; it's about wanting lock-in. After all, if Verizon is allowed to manipulate traffic to make its services performance better than competitors' services, ka-ching! <P> Now contrast the incumbent approach, with Google's planned fiber optic deployment in Kansas City. <a href="http://fiber.google.com">Check out the site.</a> It's got actual innovation written all over it. <P> Instead of playing guessing games about how much fiber to build and where, and instead of doing some sickly sweet and expensive TV ad or direct mail campaign to build adoption (ultimately jacking up rates), Google assembled a quasi-crowdsourced/social system that provides transparent information about <a href="https://fiber.google.com/cities/kcmo">how many people have signed up in your neighborhood</a>. So all of a sudden, Google has legions of free salespeople at their beck and call: Those who passionately want broadband tell their neighbors and know when their efforts have succeeded. Awesome. <P> The traditional telcos and cable operators like to style themselves as good old-fashioned businesses fighting the good fight against government meddling. Except that telecom and cable networks, like water systems and highways, use publicly owned rights of way. Yes, Mom is giving them sugar for the lemonade stand. <P> If you're essentially in partnership with a group (in this case, citizens) because they have a commodity you want to use, shouldn't you be partnering instead of slapping them around? Cities are ready for such partnerships. Andrew Seybold at <em>Forbes</em> points out that <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/investor/2012/07/31/bring-on-the-broadband-with-privatepublic-partnerships/">Seattle recently made its government-funded fiber optic network available</a> for lease by private companies. "Bring on the Private/Public Partnerships," Seybold says. I agree. <P> Instead of continuing their adolescent attempts to bend reality, the incumbent telecoms should start joining the innovators and the folks who actually own the assets that broadband travels upon to create something new and great. Because if they don't, someone else will. <P> <i>At this year's <a href="http://informationweek.com/conference">InformationWeek 500 Conference</a>, C-level execs will gather to discuss how they're rewriting the old IT rulebook and accelerating business execution. At the St. Regis Monarch Beach, Dana Point, Calif., Sept. 9-11. </i>2012-07-23T13:58:00ZWhen IT holds the keys to our business-critical systems, employee dishonesty can have serious repercussions. Duke professor Dan Ariely says we're wrong about how to keep employees honest.http://www.informationweek.com/news/240004189?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authorsIf your responsibilities include managing budgets, people, or inventory, one of your worst moments is getting that phone call informing you about some type of dishonest behavior. For those of us in large IT shops, the dishonesty runs the gamut--from analysts who use their system access to compare salaries to an employee who got busted for changing records in a property appraisal system to benefit his buddies. As an FBI agent I once worked with used to quip: "The big-money bank robbers don't use a gun; they use a keyboard." <P> IT employees hold the keys to the treasure rooms, so their honesty or dishonesty is obviously of great interest to us and our organizations. From a societal perspective, one could even argue that in the era of voting machines and complex stock market transactions, IT is the one ring that rules them all. <P> It's not just about keeping IT personnel from looting our riches or <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/security/229205183">rigging our elections</a>, of course. Rampant, dishonest behavior can lead to a <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/global-cio/interviews/240003422">corporate brain drain</a>, as an organization's best and brightest, sick of being part of the Enron Nation, say "to hell with it, I'm not playing anymore." <P> For all of these reasons, most of us try to support an atmosphere of honesty. We check references, reject resumes with obvious falsehoods, and implement processes that support honest behavior. Turns out, we're probably doing it wrong. <P> <strong>[ Will Microsoft's management practices--more than its competitors or products--be the cause of its decline? See <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/global-cio/interviews/240004089?itc=edit_in_body_cross">Microsoft A Victim Of Its Own Success</a>. ]</strong> <P> I just finished Duke professor Dan Ariely's latest book, <em><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Honest-Truth-About-Dishonesty-Everyone-Especially/dp/0062183591 ">The (Honest) Truth About Dishonesty</a></em>," and was wide-eyed at a couple of passages. For example, when people deal with tokens of value instead of actual value (such as poker chips instead of dollars), they cheat more. Ariely discusses the rampant overstating of billable hours in most professional services organizations. A personal example involves the "near money" of frequent flier miles and other loyalty programs, all of which are tracked by the systems IT supports. <P> For years I've assumed that putting folks into teams would cut down on cheating. But Ariely's experiment-based research identifies something called "altruistic cheating," the cheating someone does <em>because</em> he's working on a team and wants others on the team to get a bonus or promotion or avoid punishment. <P> Ariely urges readers to leave behind the outmoded "simple model of rational crime" (SMORC), which assumes that when there's a favorable risk-benefit ratio to dishonest acts, such acts will be committed, and when there isn't a favorable risk-benefit, they won't be committed. Ariely buries that theory through the experiments he details in the book. <P> <!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <!-- GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <div style="margin:0; padding:0 0 10px 15px; width:244px; float:right;"> <div style="margin:0; border-top:1px solid black; border-bottom:1px solid black; padding:6px;"> <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/"><img src="http://twimgs.com/infoweek/1217/217ID_GlobalCIO_75.jpg" width="75" height="75" border="0" align="right" alt="Global CIO" style="margin:0 0 6px 6px;"></a> <div style="margin:0 0 6px 0; font-size:1.3em; font-weight:bold; color:#113e53;">Global CIOs: A Site Just For You</div> <span style="font-size:.9em; font-weight:bold;">Visit <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/">InformationWeek's Global CIO</a> -- our online community and information resource for CIOs operating in the global economy.</span> </div> </div> <!-- /GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> Organizations must also understand the forces that increase dishonesty. Those include basics such as hunger and fatigue from working on projects late at night without a company-supplied dinner. <P> Dishonesty is contagious. If it's well known in your organization that individuals are stealing a competitor's secrets, or if you're at one of those professional services organizations that regularly overstates billable hours, don't expect that the rest of employee behavior will be a model of honesty. The Talmud compares keeping bad company with hanging around in a tannery--the stink will stay with you. (But quoting the Talmud or your mom or scoutmaster at a meeting probably won't be as effective as pointing to serious behavioral science, and for that we can thank Ariely.) <P> When small dishonest acts accumulate, individuals start feeling what Ariely calls the "what the hell" factor. That is, once you've committed a bunch of dishonest acts, you sort of go with it, and they get bigger. <P> I had an email conversation with Ariely regarding Scott Thompson, the former Yahoo CEO who claimed (falsely) that he had a degree from Stanford. I wondered what would happen if I didn't correct the folks who refer to me in email as "Dr. Feldman." Might I one day be listed as such on a conference brochure and then not correct the organizers because I didn't want to cause them grief? Might someone then ask me where I had gotten my PhD? Would I make something up and watch it snowball after a colleague overheard the conversation? <P> If someone told me that I would act this dishonestly, I would argue against that notion vigorously, but wouldn't we all? Trouble is, I could see it happening to someone else, which--to be (honestly) honest--probably means it could happen to me. <P> Ariely agrees that "small slips that get larger over time are the main problem," and that this may well have been the case with Thompson. My point: It could happen to any of us if we don't watch the small stuff.2012-07-10T08:40:00ZIf IT organizations don't get their act together, there's going to be a massive brain drain, and we're all going to be in trouble.http://www.informationweek.com/news/240003422?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authors<!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <div class="inlineStoryImage inlineStoryImageRight"> <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/galleries/global-cio/compensation/232900448"><img src="http://twimgs.com/informationweek/1331/331Coverart.jpg" alt="2012 Salary Survey: 12 Career Insights" title="2012 Salary Survey: 12 Career Insights" class="img175" /></a><br /> <div class="storyImageTitle">2012 Salary Survey: 12 Career Insights</div> <span class="inlinelargerView">(click image for larger view and for slideshow)</span></div> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> As an innovation junkie, I attended the World Domination Summit this past weekend. And as I watched and <a href="https://twitter.com/#!/search/%40_jfeldman%20%23wds2012 ">live-tweeted the sessions</a>, one thought kept coming into my mind: If large enterprises that rely on innovators, like IT organizations, don't get their act together, there's going to be a massive brain drain, and we're all going to be in trouble. <P> Why do I say that? Well, <a href="http://worlddominationsummit.com/">World Domination Summit</a> (WDS) is an unconference, a not-for-profit gathering of perhaps the most creative, motivated, and intelligent people that I've ever met. One attendee <a href="https://twitter.com/melissamkirby/status/222343194220838913 ">tweeted to me</a> that she built more QUALITY connections there than at any so-called "professional" conference she's ever been to. And this is true for me as well. One example: I met a brilliant, highly-placed, yet discontent woman who works for one of the largest media and entertainment companies in the world. Then, she told me, "my bosses don't know I'm here," and proceeded to hand me her business card for her "side hustle," something that she's doing on the side that she'd much rather be doing, mostly because corporate life is a hassle. <P> This type of interaction was repeated over and over again over the weekend. I met folks who USED to work for "the man" (that is to say, YOU and ME), couldn't take it anymore, and quit their jobs to do their side hustle full time. Time and time again, I ran into people--a literary agent who left a bureaucratic agency that was just interested in "the numbers" to go solo, a lawyer who quit her job to be a business coach, several folks from the financial services industry who've gone into successful business for themselves, a software developer who started offering training courses online--who couldn't stand being under the inflexible and unyielding thumb of corporate America. The power of social media and other innovations that affect micropreneurs have allowed them to simply leave. <P> Sure, go ahead, don't let the door hit you in the butt on the way out, you say? Trouble is, these are all incredibly talented, creative, and innovative people. That translates into your best and brightest. And as we know, anybody can do maintenance & ops, but the key differentiator between an IT organization that can be easily outsourced and one that is has a key role in the organization boils down to one word: innovation. And that REQUIRES creative, innovative, and smart people. It's hard to find these people now, but I think it's about to get a lot harder. <P> Here's some math for you. WDS started as a 500 person event. It doubled this year. Tickets sold out in minutes, not hours. I had to use every ounce of my fly Interwebz skills to get a ticket, and it was still pretty hard to do. I have every expectation that even if it doesn't double next year, it's going to significantly grow again. But I'll put money on it doubling. And if the micropreneur movement keeps growing like this, that means that eventually YOUR employees are going to be a part of it, whether they tell you or not. The genie's out of the bottle. Your best and your brightest are starting to realize that there are options out there, and it doesn't bode well for those of us who are stuck in the '50s with our management philosophies. Like water over an earth dam, the erosion will happen quicker and quicker, and we're eventually going to see the dam burst. <P> <!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <!-- GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <div style="margin:0; padding:0 0 10px 15px; width:244px; float:right;"> <div style="margin:0; border-top:1px solid black; border-bottom:1px solid black; padding:6px;"> <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/"><img src="http://twimgs.com/infoweek/1217/217ID_GlobalCIO_75.jpg" width="75" height="75" border="0" align="right" alt="Global CIO" style="margin:0 0 6px 6px;"></a> <div style="margin:0 0 6px 0; font-size:1.3em; font-weight:bold; color:#113e53;">Global CIOs: A Site Just For You</div> <span style="font-size:.9em; font-weight:bold;">Visit <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/">InformationWeek's Global CIO</a> -- our online community and information resource for CIOs operating in the global economy.</span> </div> </div> <!-- /GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <P> I am the first to admit, [I was fairly cynical, going in, that <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/global-cio/interviews/240003245">WDS might just be some multi-level marketing morass of mumbo-jumbo</a>. It's an easy conclusion to come to. Many of the folks that I saw associated with the conference were leaders of the movement, and thus offering a certain amount of content for free (actionable plans of how to start your own micropreneur business), and some paid content. It was easy to interpret this as a kind of twisted MLM scam. But, having now been on the ground and challenged a number of people, both the organizers and the attendees, I'm pretty sure that nothing could be further from the truth. <P> And, as the CIO for a midsized enterprise IT organization, that's what scares me. It's hard enough NOW to attract and retain the best and brightest. If this micropreneur virus starts infecting more and more people, we're in big, big trouble. <P> We need to take action, now, to retain them. During WDS, Pam Slim, author of <a href=" http://www.escapefromcubiclenation.com/ ">"Escape From Cubicle Nation"</a>, pointed out to me that there are two kinds of people, someone who is fundamentally wired to be an entrepreneur, and those who actually enjoy the corporate environment because they like the social aspects, the relatively resource-rich environment, and so on. You're not going to keep the first kind of person, but unless we significantly change the way that we manage people in a corporate environment, we're going to lose the second set of folks.<!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <div class="inlineStoryImage inlineStoryImageRight"> <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/galleries/global-cio/interviews/232700431"><img src="http://twimgs.com/informationweek/galleries/automated/772/01_Steve-Haindl_tn.jpg" alt="10 CIOs: Career Decisions I'd Do Over" title="10 CIOs: Career Decisions I'd Do Over" class="img175" /></a><br /> <div class="storyImageTitle">10 CIOs: Career Decisions I'd Do Over</div> <span class="inlinelargerView">(click image for larger view and for slideshow)</span></div> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> "Many corporations are still managing people as if we were living in another era," says Slim. That's not a surprise for those of us who are survivors of the corporate wars. For the record, I have worked in midsized and large government and private sector organizations, and let me assure you that the dysfunctions are very, very much the same. There's always someone who has a bright idea about how to "increase productivity" by putting their thumb on people and treating people like factory workers in the industrial revolution. And, as much as your organization might "rah, rah, rah" behind the bottom line over all else, the great likelihood is that this is NOT the highest life priority for most people at your organization. <P> During WDS it was apparent to me that not much has changed and, in fact, that some of the <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/global-cio/interviews/232500519 ">bully bosses</a> out there think that they're doing the right thing. One attendee who works in the telecommunications industry told me how her boss recently handed down an imperial mandate that employees would no longer be able to listen to music on a headset while they work. "It makes you less approachable," was the justification. Yeah, it also makes you not want to come to work if you're an introvert that needs to focus in a cubicle environment while lots of chatter is going on. The stories go on and on. Well meaning, yet stupid rule, meet worker-made-uncomfortable-and-unwelcome. <P> One of my favorite people that I met at the conference happened to be a lawyer. We got into a conversation about law, since I work for government in one of my roles, and she quite seriously told me that the thing that drives her crazy is that the law is this massive and powerful instrument that gets misused. For example, it's the only way, she said, for you to put someone to death legally. It completely drives her nuts that it gets used for trivia, over-regulation, and so on. This is no less true of rules and restrictions in our organizations. Rules are powerful tools. We should use them only when it is critical to do so. As one of my mentors has said to me about performance reviews, when you give a review, it's as if you're holding a megaphone to an employee's ear. Be minimal and soft. <P> <strong>[ How do IT leaders see industry trends? Read <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/global-cio/interviews/240002852?itc=edit_in_body_cross">U.S. Tech Leadership On Solid Ground, IT Pros Say</a>. ]</strong> <P> I am of course not advocating for a country club attitude. As <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/global-cio/interviews/232600211 ">I've pointed out in the past</a>, that's a good way for the organization to burn down around your ears. But why, oh why, do we persist in doing things like asking people to "get approvals" to take some time off to go see their kid in a show? Why isn't the real position, "get the work done, and of course we're going to be flexible"? <P> As authors like <a href="http://www.danpink.com/ ">Dan Pink</a> have repeatedly pointed out in books like <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Drive-Surprising-Truth-About-Motivates/dp/1594488843">"Drive"</a>, our best and brightest don't just work for money. They do it for autonomy, mastery, and purposeful work. I would also add that the money that they do collect is for their LIFE purpose, what I call their "core." For some people, that's their dog. For others, it's their kids. For yet others, it's travel. We get in the way of that with capricious rules at our peril. <P> Ringleader Chris Guillebeau ended the conference with a bang. He distributed $100,000--in CASH--to the attendees there, with a mission. Go forth and contribute to something that matters. "Make an investment to a startup project. Invest in someone else because of community, adventure, and service," he said. Being part of something that matters is the reason why micro-finance sites like Kiva succeed. It's why Kickstarter projects succeed. And it's why, unless large organizations are very, very careful, they will lose their best and brightest as the micropreneur phenomenon takes hold, and as their best and brightest flee the organizations. It's still early on. Start doing something about it. Now. <P> <em>Jonathan Feldman is a contributing editor for </em>InformationWeek<em> and director of IT services for a rapidly growing city in North Carolina. Write to him at <a href="mailto:jf@feldman.org">jf@feldman.org</a> or at <a href="http://twitter.com/#!/_jfeldman">@_jfeldman</a>.</em> <P> <i>At this year's <a href="http://informationweek.com/conference">InformationWeek 500 Conference</a>, C-level execs will gather to discuss how they're rewriting the old IT rulebook and accelerating business execution. At the St. Regis Monarch Beach, Dana Point, Calif., Sept. 9-11. </i>2012-07-06T09:50:00ZAn innovation junkie attends a gathering of "amazing people" seeking a "remarkable life in a conventional world." But are they just bragging and promoting themselves?http://www.informationweek.com/news/240003245?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_authors"To World Domination!" That's the swaggering tagline of the <a href="http://worlddominationsummit.com/">World Domination Summit</a>, an "unconference" that I'm headed to in Portland, Oregon this weekend. We are all "amazing people with big plans," who seek a "remarkable life in a conventional world." We are a "worldwide army," each of us with our own "dispatch" page. It is a Millennial-generation feel-good fest. And, it appears that just about every attendee who's "doing it right" has something to sell me so that I can be as awesome as we're all saying we are. I'm a bit nervous, honestly, that I'm headed into a multi-level marketing morass of mumbo-jumbo. <P> So why am I going? Well, if you're a regular reader of this column, you probably know I am an innovation junkie, and a firm believer in the Einstein principle (the definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results). So I try really hard to get outside of the normal "IT dude" circles to have conversations and do some professional development and learning. (For example, my recent <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/global-cio/interviews/240002067">interview with Eric Ries</a> helped me understand how some principles normally associated only with startups and ventures can be applied to large enterprise IT organizations.) <P> So it is with World Domination Summit. Even as I am nervous that at every turn someone will be marketing me for their new course about how to reach "10,000 NEW FOLLOWERS" or the "big bag of chips" version of "Creating Personal Freedom through a Very Small Business" (which the creator of the conference will be glad to let you have for a low, low price of $129), I am going because I think that there's something to all of these micropreneur concepts. <P> Even as I read one attendee's profile and wonder how the activity of "Cultivating Transdisciplinary Consciousness" plays out in the real world, or if it's so much malarkey, I am fascinated by one presenter's "how to humanize business" theme (As I've <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_pU5xL5wJM">said at a TEDx talk</a>, I'm a big believer that your best employees won't tolerate brutal treatment, so it's in the business' interest to humanize). And, to be fair to the creator of the conference, I <em>am</em> interested in his notion of the "$100 startup," which seems like Lean Startup on a starvation diet. <P> The thing about WDS that makes me the MOST uncomfortable is the self-promotion, writ large at every opportunity. We are all "like-minded geniuses and kickers of supreme non-conventional ass," according to one attendee. Boy, does that make me uncomfortable. I think I'm no dummy, but most of what I have accomplished has been by outworking the competition, not by some transcendental genius on my part. On the other hand, as one CIO mentor once said to me, the CIO needs to also be the chief marketing officer of the IT organization, also known as self-promotion for the organization. <P> True fact: IT organizations tend to perish because they don't communicate enough about all of the fantastic work that they do to save money, enhance the customer and employee experience, and create new business opportunities. I have gotten better over the years about highlighting the good work of the IT organization that I am responsible for, but I am still pretty horrible at what pessimists would call self promotion, or as optimists might say, telling my own story. A mentor of mine once took me to task for not "telling my story" more, pointing out that staff <em>wants</em> and <em>needs</em> to be inspired by their boss. Sometimes you learn most by entering your zone of discomfort. So, maybe WDS will help me tell that story a bit better. <P> <!-- KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <!-- GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <div style="margin:0; padding:0 0 10px 15px; width:244px; float:right;"> <div style="margin:0; border-top:1px solid black; border-bottom:1px solid black; padding:6px;"> <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/"><img src="http://twimgs.com/infoweek/1217/217ID_GlobalCIO_75.jpg" width="75" height="75" border="0" align="right" alt="Global CIO" style="margin:0 0 6px 6px;"></a> <div style="margin:0 0 6px 0; font-size:1.3em; font-weight:bold; color:#113e53;">Global CIOs: A Site Just For You</div> <span style="font-size:.9em; font-weight:bold;">Visit <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/global-cio/">InformationWeek's Global CIO</a> -- our online community and information resource for CIOs operating in the global economy.</span> </div> </div> <!-- /GLOBAL CIO GLOBE --> <!-- /KINDLE EXCLUDE --> <P> I can also already tell that there will be learnings to be had about digital lifestyle. For example, <a href="http://worlddominationsummit.com/~jennyfoss/">one attendee</a> tells how she runs two companies and raises three children by being a digital entrepreneur. At large enterprises, we like to think that we can lure the best and brightest. But can we? Only the other day, a woman at a large consumer products company was telling me how they don't allow people to work from home until they've worked for the company for at least a year. "You've got to earn the privilege," she said. Translation: "We assume that you're stupid and lazy until proven otherwise, and we judge people by the hours that your butt is in the seat instead of your productivity." <P> But in a world where there are starting to be ways to earn a living outside of a large organization telling you where you need to do your work, maybe the best, brightest, most motivated and creative people will tell you to stick your "earn the privilege" where the sun don't shine, and go out and make money on their own. <P> It's easy to write off the folks who are doing unconventional things and (let's call it what it is) bragging about themselves in the process. But, as Facebook and Google have stripped away our abilities to have a private life, and as large organizations have made it abundantly clear that, while loyalty is expected to the organization, the organization will <em>never</em> love you back, maybe this over-telling and self promotion is the right answer to helping us all create our best professional and personal lives. Maybe the notion that having a personal life strategy and telling everyone about it will help us all get what we're looking for. If there really is an answer to be had about how to have an awesome life with the resources you need among the hawkers and peddlers of self-help and braggadocio, seems like WDS is the place to get it. <P> <em>Jonathan Feldman is a contributing editor for </em>InformationWeek<em> and director of IT services for a rapidly growing city in North Carolina. Write to him at <a href="mailto:jf@feldman.org">jf@feldman.org</a> or at <a href="http://twitter.com/#!/_jfeldman">@_jfeldman</a>.</em> <P> <i>At this year's <a href="http://informationweek.com/conference">InformationWeek 500 Conference</a>, C-level execs will gather to discuss how they're rewriting the old IT rulebook and accelerating business execution. At the St. Regis Monarch Beach, Dana Point, Calif., Sept. 9-11. </i>