Beyond Blinking Lights and Acronyms

The Tyranny of Rules

2012-03-06T20:13:47-06:00

Rules are meant to be an means to an objective not an end unto themselves.

This past week, Beren Acadamy, an Modern Orthodox Jewish high school made the headlines when they advanced to the semifinals in the Texas Association of Private and Parochial Schools (TAPPS) basketball tournament. What made this especially newsworthy wasn’t their basketball prowess (as good as they are) but the fact that they decided to forfeit rather than play in a game scheduled during the Jewish Sabbath, a remarkable demonstration of staying true to your religious beliefs.

Beren had appealed to the TAPPS board for an accommodation to reschedule the time that would not conflict with anyone’s religious beliefs. The board pointed out that Beren was made aware of the potential conflict when they joined the league years ago and denied the request for an accommodation. Berens admitted that they knew of the scheduling issued but had hoped for an accommodation based upon their religious beliefs.

TAPPS issued a statement that says in part “When TAPPS was organized in the late 1970's, the member schools at that time all recognized Sunday as the day of worship. The By-Laws were written to state that “TAPPS would not schedule any competition or activities on Sunday”. At that time, there were no member schools that observed their Sabbath on Saturday.” They statement goes on to explain that Beren was aware of this and didn’t see a problem as they wanted to play in a ‘district’.

This story made all of the news outlets and generated a lot of discussion throughout Houston. Many agreed with the board which was saying in effect “The rules are the rules, you knew about them when you joined we will not change them for you. Rules are rules.” Others took the stance of “it’s not fair to the kids, it’s not their fault, they should be given them a chance”. Still other decried religious discrimination, why is it okay to observe the Christian Sabbath but not the Jewish Sabbath?

Personally none of these arguments holds much sway with me in determining how this should have been resolved. I believe the best approach would be to look at what is the purpose of TAPPS and the tournament and to choose a course of action that best support those.

According to the TAPPS constitution, “The Purpose of TAPPS is and shall be to organize, to stimulate, to encourage and to promote the academic, athletic and fine arts programs in an effort to foster a spirit of fair play, good fellowship, true sportsmanship and wholesome competition for boys and girls”. I could not find a stated purpose for the basketball tournament but generally tournaments are held to determine who has the best team.

Noting the concepts of fair play, good fellowship, true sportsmanship and the desire to determine the best team I would conclude that re-arranging the schedule would be the best solution that fits the goals and purpose of the organization and the tournament. Others might disagree and that’s okay because we would at least be discussing how to achieve the objective. The arguments are ones of defending the sanctity of rules and the fairness of life neither of which gets us closer to fulfilling the objective.

Beren although disappointed accepted the TAPPS board decision and indicated that they would not continue in the tournament and another school was named to advance to the semi-finals. It would have ended there except that someone (not the school but presumably a parent of one of the players) filed a lawsuit requesting a restraining order on TAPPS to prevent them from playing the tournament pending the lawsuit outcome. The TAPPS board then decided that it was in the best interest of everyone to make an accommodation to Beren and reschedule the game by a few hours and Beren was able to play. At this point there seemed to be a general consensus that is was a shame that it had to come down to a lawsuit to get final resolution.

The whole point of this is not to discuss high school basketball. Rather in seeing this unfold I couldn’t help but see the similarities to what I’ve seen happen in IT rather frequently. I’m sure that you’ve seen it too.

Someone will come to IT want to do something and IT will quickly parrot back “That doesn’t meet our standard” or “That violates our policy” the stereotypical “rules are rules” response. Often the requester will escalate their request and the word will come down from on high to give them what they requested even though it goes against standard or policy. No one is happy about the process and everyone wonders why it had to go that way.

The simple answer is that it doesn’t. There is a better way.

We create standards/policies for a variety of reasons. Some are for compliance, some for security, some for cost control, governance, efficiency, etc. All of them designed to achieve some particular objective. Rather than simply saying “No, rules are rules” you might want to look at how the request matches up with the objective. If it goes against the objective by all means say no but explain why. You’ll find you’re less likely to get push back and less likely to be overruled if you explained your decision in those terms.

If however, the request furthers the objective than you might want to consider making an exception or accommodation or possibly even adjusting the standard policies.

The other way to approach this is to ask - What would be the harm of granting this exception? If the exception would be in support of the overall objectives of the organization and the harm is not great they you should probably grant it.

Some simple examples:

A user wants to have some security provisions removed as they are hindering his efficiency. Rather than saying “No, rules are rules” you may want to say “No, that would expose us to high levels of risk viruses, hacked data etc. that outweigh their individual potential gain.” In this case the potential harm is very significant. The requester may not like it but they are less likely to try to go around you and you are less likely to be over-ruled.
The VP of Sales wants to replace all sales people’s laptops which are standard with tablets that are not standard. After considering all the factors you may determine that the benefit this allows the sales force to do is sufficient to warrant and exception or an adjustment to the standard. “No, rules are rules” in this situation could easily make you the bad guy in this case and over-ruled.
A sales person asks to get a non-standard piece of equipment such as a tablet or smartphone contending that it would make them more efficient. The reality is that it really might make them more efficient and efficiency could be one of the objectives. However, you could still be justified in saying no if the net efficiency to the company doesn’t improve. Like in the first example a “No, rules are rules” response could easily be over-ruled where an explanation of the hidden cost increases it generates is less likely to be over-ruled.

I’m not at all suggesting that we give in to every request. I’m simply suggesting that we focus the discussion on whether or not the request furthers our efforts towards the objective or hampers them. That is a much better conversation to be having and one that can help make IT more effective in reaching our objectives.

By the way, for those of you wondering about the outcome of the tournament; Beren won their semi-final round but lost in the finals to Abilene Christian High School. As for TAPPS, they are not out of the spotlight yet as some of their other previous decisions are coming to light.

"Tyranny Ahead" photo by charlesfettinger/ CC BY- ND 2.0

If this topic was of interest, you might also like these:

Making Exceptions to IT Rules - Follow-up
Making Exceptions to IT Rules
Saying Yes
Are You A Policy Parrot?
Or the posts in the "Strategy & Management" category.

Found Photos - Japan, 1958

2012-02-19T11:48:51-06:00

23 glimpses into another place and time

Other than a belated "I'm taking a break" post it's been 13 months since I've posted to this blog. With all of the changes in the world of IT and 13 months to ponder them you'd think my first post back would be a wondrous thought-provoking manifesto on the state of IT. Yeah, you might think that but in this case you'd be wrong, way wrong.

I'm an amateur photographer. I'v always enjoyed taking pictures and editing them. Working with photos relaxes me and takes my mind off my worries for a treasured little time. As far as amateur photography goes I'm an okay photographer, not a great one or even a good one. Some day with enough time and practice I hope to be good.

In the mean time like so many others I share my photos on Flickr for what they are. I've just posted some found photos that I really enjoyed. I didn't take them, I found them, but I still enjoy them nonetheless.

I've got thousands of color and black and white negatives and color slides from the pre-digital camera days. Many are the typical family snapshots and many are pictures from many of the exciting places I've been fortunate to be able to visit around the world.

For Christmas I received a Plustek OpticFilm 7600i SE negative and slide scanner that allows me to convert the negatives and slides directly to digital photos. I've started using the scanner and have lots more to scan. Since a lot of the slides are just laying in the bottom of a large cardboard box I thought I'd get a storage case for them. So I went to eBay and invested $5 (plus $10 shipping) for a nice metal case to hold up to 300 slides.

The listing for the case mentioned that it included some old slides but I was completely surprised when I received it. In the case were 25 slides. A quick look told me they were quite old. The old car was a give-a-way. Fortunately, one of the slides was marked with a processing date: "AUG 58".

Wow! These slides were almost 54 years old!

On top of that many were obviously taken in Japan based on the scenes plus some were marked as processed by Shrirolab Tokyo (curiously printed in English). However many others even with Japanese scenes are marked as processed by Kodak and "Made in USa". Other slides include family photos of some U. S. Navy officers. We see one standing proudly as a presumably newly mint Ensign with his sword, with his mother and later as a Lieutenant (jg) in another. There are also other photos of another young Ensign and his family.

The family photos may have been taken in the US since having your parents visit you at your duty station in Japan in 1958 would have been rather unusual at the time. International travel as a commonplace occurrence hadn't begun.

The Japanese scenes are quite interesting as they show us a time and place many of us have never experienced. It is also interesting to see that the officer got out to the country side with his family. In one scene we see a young American child in the back seat of the car surrounded by Japanese children. Other scenes also show that 1958 Japan was a long way from the technologically advance Japan of today.

Some of the slides are in remarkable condition for being 54 years old; the colors are quite strong and sharp. Other slides have begun to deteriorate and are discolored adding to the old time allure.

When I look at the photos I cannot help but wonder about the stories behind them. Who are these people and what has happened to them in the last 54 years?

Twenty-five slides isn't a lot. Why were these slides out of all the others that there had to have been discarded. Were they duplicates, considered uninteresting or too deteriorated to keep and therefore discarded? We can only speculate and will probably never know. Maybe we learn more about ourselves and others from our scraps than from our treasures. In any event, this was an interesting peek in to someones life in another time and in another place.

A few of my favorites are posted below. All 23 (2 were too badly deteriorated) are posted on my Flickr page as Found Photos. If anyone has advice on how to clean them up further or by some random chance can identify the scenes or people or add to the story I'd love to hear from you.

Two girls in traditional dress

A hand-written note on this slide states "Much merchandise is transported this way"

I love the expression on the mother's face. Is the young woman the Ensign's sister? a girlfriend? a wife?

A village scene. I wonder if the motorcycle in the foreground is the photographers?

A family outing to a local village.

I've been taking a break . . .

2011-08-27T10:14:28-05:00

. . . a long, long break.

With the start of the New Year I decided to take a break. I stopped blogging, stopped using Twitter, and just made a complete break from the whole social networking arena. The routine of researching and writing articles was taking a lot of time and I needed some time off to recharge my batteries as they say.

I really intended for this to be a short break but free time can really be an addicting luxury. And so my “short” break kept extending and extending and here we are 8 months later.

I was recently asked about my blog and if I had given it up? Was I sick? Was there some other issue? The simple answer to all of these is no. I am simply taking some time off. However, I was remiss in letting you, my readers, know and for that I apologize. I should have posted something about taking a break and failed to do so. Thank you for your patience, your encouragement and your understanding.

Having said that, I do miss the opportunity that blogging provides to voice my opinions as misguided as they may be. I hope to be back soon but I probably won’t be publishing as regularly as I have in the past.

"hammock-time" photo by katie weilbacher / CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 (That's not me in the picture but it is a great way to take a break)

Better Communication: Technology Isn't Always The Best Solution

2011-01-04T06:21:05-06:00

IT folks get a lot of knocks for poor communication skills. In response we typically react by increasing the number of emails we send out and the announcements we post on our company's intranet. Ultimately we are shocked to learn all this extra effort doesn't improve the perception of IT as poor communicators.

This is like the comic situation of meeting a foreigner who doesn't speak your language and assuming that they will surely understand you if you simply speak louder. The sad reality is that when people refer to our poor communication skills they are often referring to the quality of our communication rather than the quantity.

Simply increasing the amount of poorly done communication doesn't make things better. We need to change our style instead. Email and intranet posting can be great ways to communicate, just not for all situations.

IT folks sometimes are slavisly addicted to their technology and are reluctant to give it up to get involved in all the messy interaction. The key is to use the right technology; to use it properly; and, to know when to not use it all.

Good communication has two components. First is the conveyance, the “how” of your communication. The second and frequently over-looked component is the responsibility of the communicator to make sure the communication was received and understood.

Listed below are the more common communication methods we use which I’ve listed in a very particular sequence.

Face-to-Face
Video Chat/Conference
Phone
IM/chat
Text
Email
Posting information on a website

Starting at the top with face-to-face communication you get: the greatest interaction (two-way communication); multiple forms of communication (words, inflection, body language), and feedback (the other person’s body language) and immediacy (rapid exchange between the two parties). As you progress down the list these decrease. Basically, the ability to make sure that your message was received and understood is highest and easiest with face-to-face communication and decreases as we go down the list.

Likewise starting at the bottom with posting information on a website you get: permanency (it stays there until you remove it); equality (the exact same message goes out to all that see it); and, ease of timing (you and the other parties can take part in the communication at different times). In this case the ease of communication is highest with posting on a website and decreases as we go up the list.

I’m sure some will take exception to my assertion that posting to a website is easier than a face-to-face conversation. After all, I can have a face-to-face in a few seconds while posting takes some time and effort. All very true and in those terms face-to-face is easier.

However, I’m referring to ease in terms of personal involvement. With face-to-face you have to get involved with the other party. You have to listen to them, watch for visual cues, think about their response etc. All much more difficult than just posting something in a fire and forget manner.

So while the tech-savvy may tend to always default to the more technology form and the technophobes may naturally go towards the less technology forms it is best to pick the form that best meets your needs based upon its characteristics. The key is to determine what you want to accomplish with your communication and the audience and then pick the method that is most applicable.

For example, if you’re trying to sell a project and get buy-in from other people a face-to-face meeting will generally work better than email. For that type of communication you need the personal exchange to effectively get you point across and to understand their concerns. Conversely, if you’re simply transferring data, operational metrics for example, a web posting or email may be the perfect way to go.

But most importantly you need to be willing to adjust your communication method if you see it isn’t working. This is the basis of the “3 email rule”.

We've all seen the never-ending email chain of people going back and forth on a particular issue. Email may have been a good choice of communication method based on how the initiator thought the conversation was going to go. However, as often happens, your email may generate more questions and discussion.

An email chain soon starts and everyone’s frustration grows as they think to themselves “why aren’t they listening to me” or “their answer doesn’t address my question at all” or “they’re missing the point” and then go onto to send yet another email in reply. It quickly becomes obvious that email isn't an effective communication means and the method needs to be changed.

In this example people are talking “at” each other rather than “with” each other. The second component of good communication, making sure it was received and understood, is clearly missing. Hence the 3 email rule which states if the email back and forth goes to 3 emails break the chain and try another method such as a phone call or a face-to-face meeting. Sometimes face-to-face really can be more efficient and effective than email.

Too often IT gets a bad reputation for not communicating well. Perhaps it isn’t always the quantity but the way we communicate.

"Kiddo Discussions" photo by Bindaas Madhavi / CC BY-NC- ND 2.0

This article is also posted on Forbes.com. Feel free to join in the discussion either on this site or at Forbes.com

If this topic was of interest, you might also like these:

Step Away From The Computer
Words Matter
Break the BlackBerry and Laptop Addiction
Or the posts in the "Communications" category

A Tale of Apple, Microsoft, Google and Others For The Holiday Season

2010-12-21T08:09:05-06:00

In the spirit of the holidays and with most profound apologies to Moore and/or Livingston my gift to you this holiday season is this little poem written with extreme poetic license. Please feel free to add a stanza of your own.

'Twas The Night Before An IT Christmas

'Twas the night before Christmas, and in all of the NOCs

All was quiet with laptops secure in their docks;

The tapes were hung by the racks with care,

In hopes that St. Techolas soon would be there;

The techs were nestled all snug in their chairs,

While visions of the fun soon to be theirs;

And with Ballmer in his suit, and Jobs in his jeans,

Each trading barbs and being so mean.

When out in the DC there arose such a noise,

We thought it was the iPhones fighting the Droids.

Away with his iPad Jobs flew with no Flash,

And Ballmer on Win7, he hopes it won’t crash.

We needed the glow from the iPad to vanish the night

Surely not Kindle without its backlight.

That’s when we saw thanks to all this hardware,

Eight shiny gadgets and lots of software.

With a little old driver, so lively and quick,

I knew in a moment it must be St. Tech.

More rapid than broadband his gadgets they came,

And he whistled, and shouted, and called them by name;

"Now, iPhone! now, iPad! now, Droid and Facebook!

On, Kinect! on Mac! on, Kindle and Nook!”

To the top of the rack and post on my wall!

Now hack away! hack away! hack away all!"

With surprise I jumped to my feet,

As I knew right away what would be my next tweet!

As I drew in my head, and what did I see,

He looked almost as good as he would in 3D.

He was dressed all in black, from his cap to the floor,

Complete with backpack and pocket protector.

His posture is bad and his mind’s in a fog,

He’s been staying up late writing his blog.

Sitting all night slouched in a chair

He spends all his time on FarmVille and Foursquare.

He’s friended by millions but not a big deal

‘Cuz his friends are all virtual, none of them real.

St. Tech dropped his sack and needless to say,

Jobs told him “Just avoid holding it in that way”.

With a shrug into his bag he did dive,

After all the prep it was time for go-live.

There were gifts of Oracle, SAP and Microsoft too,

And Linux and Apple for when MS wouldn’t do.

With presents for all it was a bit of heaven,

Ballmer is hoping for a successful Windows Phone 7.

But with a shock of surprise he shouts “Ye Gads”

As jolly old St. Tech unloads his sack of iPads.

It was quite fun and at times quite merry;

For we all got an iPhone, Droid or BlackBerry.

Things are jolly and we haven’t a care;

Hurd and Apotheker are playing musical chairs.

Everyone runs, around and about;

Unfortunately Whitman and Fiorina, are already out.

Presents for all or haven’t you heard

Those who were on Gawker had to get a new password.

Some of us were good, and some not yet;

For them it was, a dose of Stuxnet!

Ellison opens his gift which draws quite a crowd,

For Larry ironically gets his own little cloud.

For the fanboys it’s more topics to flame,

But sadly their rants still sound the same.

The gift of privacy was quite the coup;

Except for those on Google’s Street-View.

So our new browsers went right to Netflix;

But some of us wouldn’t give up our old IE6.

Zuckerberg’s gift caused some to jeer,

They were hoping they’d be the “Person of the Year”.

But our excitement was high and hit new peaks,

You can read about it soon, in Wikileaks.

We played with the Kinect all flashy and sporty,

Then tweeted about it, all in one forty.

St. Tech was rushed and wanted to flee,

The feds were on his trail for no H-1B.

So with a flick of his finger across the touch screen

He posted on Facebook of all he had seen.

And on to Twitter, he typed with a smirk,

For even St. Tech is hooked on the social network!

He jumped in his Tesla for his delivery next,

Driving and swerving while continuing to text.

But I heard him exclaim, and he said with a scoff,

"Happy Christmas to all, and now I logoff."

Photo courtesy of Wikipedia / Malene Thyssen

This article is also posted on Forbes.com. Feel free to join in the discussion either on this site or at Forbes.com

Wikileaks Positive Side Effect for IT

2010-12-10T10:34:12-06:00

The disclosure of diplomatic cables by the organization Wikileaks got a tremendous amount of attention. Given that the story involves issues related to theft, sexual assault, the moral duty for civil disobedience and just plain gossip, this is not at all surprising.

We shouldn't take any comfort in the notion that this is just an issue for the government. The corporate world may be next. Recently there have been rumors that Wikileak's next target is Bank of America. In addition a hacker group in support of Wikileaks took Mastercard's website down for a period of time in retaliation for Mastercard blocking payments to Wikileaks.

Although most of us will likely never be working for an institution that would be of interest to Wikileaks, that doesn't mean we won't be affected by the Wikileaks phenomenon. Someone acting with malice or with a real or perceived concern about pay inequity couldn't publish salary data and find a receptive local audience. Customer information, design data, safety records could all be easily published with damaging results even if they don't rise to the attention level of Wikileaks. The fact that the information is taken out of context and may not actually be accurate is not important as perception soon takes over reality.

The technology has long been available to everyone to become their own Wikileaks-like organization in regard to the institutions they are involved with. Inexpensive USB memory sticks and hard drives full of data on our laptops give people the ability to remove data from our companies very easily.

No doubt that after a lot of discussion and hand wringing IT will be instructed to "do something about security". The good news is that there is much we can and should do.

There are a number of data loss prevention systems and techniques that can control data from leaving your system. The downside is that there are trade-offs including cost and impact on your business. While controlling the flow of information can protect your data it can also limit your ability to do business.

This is the classic security dilemma. Everyone wants three things; tight security, ease of use and low cost. The dilemma is that you only truly have a choice of two. As a result we compromise to balance these three factors to suit our needs. Our job as IT leader is to help determine the right balance, to be an honest broker in evaluating pros and cons and to lead the discussion and decision.

The one interesting aspect of the Wikileaks inspired drive to re-look at data protection is that it may cause us to do the right thing for the wrong reason.

Yes, Wikileaks type data losses are a threat for any organization but for the vast majority it is not a likely threat. I believe a more likely threat is the inadvertent loss of data rather than losing data through some deliberate action.

This inadvertent loss is from such things as our employees emailing sensitive information to vendors or a laptop full of information being lost or stolen. A simple Google search of laptops and “social security numbers” results in a long list of stories that demonstrates that this is not an uncommon experience. It all reminds me of that famous Pogo cartoon from the first Earth Day where Pogo realizes “We have met the enemy and he is us.”

So while we implement data loss prevention measures to save ourselves in fear of a Wikileaks episode that never comes we just may find it keeps us from harming ourselves. That may not be such a bad thing after all.

This article is also posted on Forbes.com. Feel free to join in the discussion either on this site or at Forbes.com

If this topic was of interest, you might also like these:

Identity Protection Goes Beyond Technology
The IT Security Balancing Act
The Hidden Price Of Free Applications
Or the posts in the Security category

A New Blog by HR Competency Expert, Robin Kessler

2010-11-30T10:13:00-06:00

Robin Kessler, a good friend of mine (we went to B-School together way back when) has just become one newest members of the blogosphere with her blog. Robin is a Competency Speaker and HR Consultant. Note that I said "Competency" not "competent" (although she is that too).

Robin is an expert on competencies - those skills that are essential to be successful in our job. She's written 3 great books on them:

Anyone of that's written a resume, had a job interview and performed or received an employee evaluation (who hasn't done these?) will find these useful and you may want to check out Robin's blog to get the latest insights on this. After all - it's your career - do all you can to make it a good one.

What Sarbanes-Oxley, Lawyers, and Auditors Really Mean for IT

2010-11-24T10:10:38-06:00

Don't rely on a "higher authority" to justify your policies and procedures

A lot of IT folks routinely invoke a higher authority as justification of why we have to do something or a policy can't be changed. This "higher authority" is usually included in one of 3 tried and true excuses:

We have to do that to comply with Sarbanes-Oxley.
The lawyers say we have to do that.
The auditors make us do that.

That bumper sticker from the late '70s urging us to "Question Authority" may have been right all along. In reality those 3 reasons are just spurious excuses, not valid reasons for doing something. Although the "required" action may actually be the right thing to do, citing an excuse such as one of these is wrong for a number of reasons.

Let's start by taking a look at each of the excuses. The Sarbanes-Oxley law was enacted as a result of a number of corporate and accounting scandals. IT often cites this as why we have to do certain specific actions. I freely admit I haven't read all 745 pages of the bill but as best I can tell it doesn't get down to dictating specific IT related actions. Nothing about how long your computer can be inactive before if automatically logs you off, nothing about how often you have to change your passwords and certainly nothing about all those other things we so often claims it makes us do.

What Sarbanes-Oxley does do is make us evaluate risk and develop mitigating controls. Auto log-offs and frequent password changes are mitigating controls but Sarbanes-Oxley doesn't specifically call for these and therefore doesn't require specific time periods either. We have these mitigating controls because someone in the company has evaluated the risk and decided these controls are appropriate. Although this is a rather trite example it applies equally to all the other IT actions we insist on because of Sarbanes-Oxley.

Lawyers act as trusted advisors in our companies. That is precisely what they do, they offer advice but except in rare cases they don't make decisions. Our job as managers and leaders is to consider this advice but it is up to us to decide on a course of action.

We decide not the lawyers. Don't believe me? Imagine yourself explaining a bad decision to your CEO and trying to use the "the lawyers made me do it" excuse. The lawyers have over the years practiced and polished the "we're only advisors" speech and can deliver it with an ease and persuasiveness that will make your head spin. You weren't hired merely to follow orders but to consider the situation carefully (which means listening to the lawyer's advice), weigh the options and then you make the decision.

Like the lawyers, auditors don't make business decisions either. The job of the auditors is to evaluate our actions and controls to see if they meet certain standards of action. Many auditors, especially the inexperienced ones we first deal with are not experts in IT.

The auditors are merely comparing us against a checklist someone higher up gave them without any real understanding of how appropriate that checklist is to any particular situation. Part of our job is to work with them to make sure they are using the appropriate checklist.

The next time someone uses one of these excuses there are a couple of things to keep in mind before charging off in a flurry of righteousness. Although the justification may be spurious it doesn't necessarily mean the required action is wrong. After all they may have simply been using an easy excuse rather than wanting to explain the valid reasoning.

Also, remember to choose your battles. Do you really want to engage in a major political battle over whether the auto log-off should be 90 minutes instead of 30? If you're going to start a fight make sure it's worth winning and the inevitable wounds that come with the fight.

We as IT leaders need to stop our people from relying on these excuses to deflect questions. First, it degrades our credibility. My analysis is not ground breaking, others understand this implicitly. If we use this excuse with them they naturally draw two conclusions neither which helps our credibility. Either we don't understand the purposes of Sarbanes-Oxley, lawyers or auditors; or we're assuming they're dumb enough to accept our lame excuse and will just go away.

Second, and most importantly, allowing people to rely on these excuses destroys our critical thinking ability. Our policies and actions are controls to mitigate risk. As technology changes the control actions should change accordingly as the techology presents new and different risks. We can't allow ourselves to get locked into thinking there is a rule that prevents us from using the new technology. Our job is to figure out the best ways to utilize new technology while mitigating risks not finding giving lame excuses not to do something.

"Question Authority #4" photo by curiousyellow / CC BY-NC- ND 2.0

This article is also posted on Forbes.com. Feel free to join in the discussion either on this site or at Forbes.com

If this topic was of interest, you might also like these:

IT: It's Not Just About Technical Skills
Making Exceptions to IT Rules - Follow-up
Making Exceptions To IT Rules
Or the posts in the "Strategy & Management" category.

Why E-Commerce Still Isn’t Easy To Do

2010-11-10T13:22:51-06:00

Recognizing the difference of the Internet is key to online sales success

Doing business over the Internet, whether B2C or B2B, is not the same as the traditional pre-Internet methods. I’m sure the typical response to this is “well, duh!” That simple statement is taken as a given by most people.

Amazingly there are still people and businesses that haven’t grasped this seemingly simple concept. The most recent example was when I ordered a meal to be delivered to my workplace for a late meeting. I dutifully collected everyone’s selection, went to the website and entered my account information along with the credit card details.

When placing the order online I saw a notation that the restaurant would call after the order was placed to get the credit card information. I thought that rather strange as I had already provided it. The meal arrived at the appointed time and I was surprised yet again when the driver indicated that he needed to take an impression of the card on the receipt – the third time I had to provide my credit card for the same order! In addition I had to re-enter the tip amount I specified when placing the order.

Conversely, other restaurants I’ve used allow people to add to the order without requiring me to collect it for them, use the credit card information that I’ve added to my account, and allow me to add the tip at the time of ordering and include it in the total. In other words they’ve made an effort to make it easy for me to do business with them.

My second example is a candy company favored by a relative of mine. Every year I like to send him candy for the holidays. Unfortunately, I’m a kind of “wait till the last minute” guy. I’m usually forced to send candy from another retailer because when I go to the website I’m greeted with bad news. Right up front in bold letters the retailer states, “PLEASE ALLOW 4-5 DAYS PROCESSING TIME ON ORDERS BEFORE WE SHIP!!”

This isn’t 4-5 days until it is delivered, it is 4-5 days to get boxes of candy ready to ship. Conversely the company’s competitors typically ship the same day or next day at the latest and that’s why I usually end up going with its competitors. Rather than treating the Internet as another sales channel, the candy store has chosen to treat it as a low priority extension of its brick and mortar operations.

I’m sure both of these companies thought it would be a good idea to go to the Internet as a way to increase business. I’m equally sure that they are both disappointed with the results. No doubt they did get some more business, but I doubt if it is near what they expected or could get.

So if you find yourself in the same situation, please bear with me and let me repeat some of the basic rules of Internet marking.

First, the Internet really is a different way of doing business. The way people browse, find products, pay for them (e.g. one-click purchase) are all different. How you compete is also different, your competitor isn’t just next door, they can be anywhere in the world. Information is freely available which means I can easily compare prices, get product and service information, and get consumer review easily before deciding who to buy from.

Because it is different, treat the Internet as a separate sales channel. Internet commerce isn’t just an extension of the traditional processes. Marketing, communication, order placing and fulfillment–and sometimes even pricing–are all different. Therefore you should address them differently, including treating it as a separate business unit when possible. Compromising between Internet and traditional channels serves neither one well.

Finally, make it easy to place an order and make it easy for repeat customers. Clicks matter. Navigation, interaction with customer sales reps, search and support are often as important than price in the Internet world. One of the first things I learned about the way to be successful in business was to make it easy for customers to do business with you. This is true for both the Internet and traditional business models. It’s just that easy means different things for each.

Hopefully, someone will take all of this to heart and I won’t have to order candy 4-5 days early this year. I’m confident a competitor is more that willing to get my business – again.

"Shopping Cart Misshap"[sic] photo by Wiedmaier / CC BY NC 2.0

This article is also posted on Forbes.com. Feel free to join in the discussion either on this site or at Forbes.com

If this topic was of interest, you might also like these:

Making IT Better For Customers

2010-10-27T05:00:00-05:00

Three things to keep in mind when designing applications.

IT spends a lot of time trying to improve our system and the user interface, especially when they will be used by our external customers. Most of the time, we're pretty good at delivering easy-to-use applications. However, I recently came across two examples of how our systems can impact customer perception even when the customer doesn't use them, or when it is a minor utility application.

The first example was when I renewed two prescriptions. The pharmacy I use is a large national chain. It has online prescription renewal, and everything went smoothly. Shortly before I picked them up, I received an automated phone message that one of the prescriptions was delayed. This was a little off-putting since the pharmacy didn't say which one was delayed. It also struck me as strange that it ran out, as both were very common prescriptions.

The next day I went to the pharmacy to check on the prescriptions since one of them had completely run out. Fortunately, the one I needed most was filled and led to a rather telling conversation.

Clerk: I'm sorry but we're out of the second item, and it is back ordered.

Me: Any idea when it might be in?

Clerk: I don't have any way of knowing…but if you'd like, I can phone some of our other stores and see if they have it in stock.

Me: No thank you, I'll take care of it myself.

This little exchange told me a couple of things. First, the pharmacy didn't have (or wasn't trained on) visibility into the supply chain. Second, it didn't have (or wasn't trained on) visibility into its inventory. Given that the pharmacy deals with highly regulated, controlled substances this insight is not very comforting.

Ultimately, even though I was not a direct user of the pharmacy's system, the system deficiencies (yes, even if it was inadequate training, I consider that to be a system deficiency) led to a bad customer experience, which is never a good way to grow or retain business.

My second example involves dealing with a major IT publication for which I receive the print edition. About six weeks ago, I changed offices and dutifully went online to the publication's website and changed my mailing address.

An old officemate was kind enough to forward recent issues that are still going to my old address even though I had given the publication my new address six weeks ago. Thinking I might have done something incorrectly, I went to the publication's website and confirmed that I had indeed changed my mailing address.

That's when I saw something strange. It was a little disclaimer that said new subscribers should wait two to four weeks after ordering before they attempt to login.

Two to four weeks? In a world with Internet, two to four seconds is a long time. Two to four weeks is an eternity.

Keep in mind this was an IT publication. A publication that focuses on new technologies, how best to deploy them, how to leverage them and how to be successful in your IT career.

Sadly, two to four weeks to activate a login account only calls its credibility into question. It may have been only a minor utility application, but it highlights the face that it doesn't practice what it preaches.

These two examples reminded me of a couple of things.

First, the impact of how systems are used goes beyond just the direct end-user experience. As important as the interface is, we have to make sure that we also provide all of the information needed or alternate ways to get it. It's easy to design our applications around the normal activity, but we also need to think about what happens when the unusual situation occurs. We need to make sure we provide a means of addressing those situations too.

Second, attention to detail is crucial. Often it is the little things that matter, and are the difference between good and great.

Third, don't forget the basics. Although it is hard to get too excited about the routine items, people want to know that you can do the basic "blocking and tackling" before they'll consider you for the more challenging items. Doing the basics well has to be a given, which is not that same as taking it for granted.

"headache powders" photo by crunchcandy / CC NC ND 2.0

This article is also posted on Forbes.com. Feel free to join in the discussion either on this site or at Forbes.com

If this topic was of interest, you might also like these:

IT: It's Not Just About Technical Skills
IT's Business Lesson
Making Exceptions To IT Rules
Or the posts in the "Strategy & Management" category.

"Bring Your Own Technology" Is In Your Future

2010-10-13T09:00:00-05:00

IT leaders need to start thinking in terms of users making their own technology choices.

Consider the concept of BYOT, or Bring Your Own Technology. The premise is that instead of IT dictating the supported computing platforms and cellphones, users will make their own selection based on what best meets their needs or preferences.

As a result you may have PCs, Macs, iPads and their coming slate competitors, iPhones, Droids and Blackberrys within your environment, and you'll be expected to support all of them. Add to the myriad various models of each device and it becomes a mind boggling array of technology.

A couple of things are driving this trend. The first is the consumerization of IT. It used to be that the workplace had the best technology. A consumer couldn't afford to have the type of technology used at work. Now the best technology is within the reach of all and is coming at us in new forms and capabilities at a dizzying pace. People are logically asking why they can't use the same technologies at work that they use at home.

The second driver is cloud applications like Salesforce.com and Google Docs. These apps divorce themselves from the corporate data center and are accessible on just about any computing platform. So users logically ask, “Why do I have to use only IT's standard?”

The third driver is VDI, or virtual desktop infrastructure, which allows IT to in effect convert client-server applications into cloud-like applications. This separates the application from the hardware, allowing many hardware configurations to run the application.

While these seem like compelling arguments it hasn't gotten a lot of traction with IT departments yet. I was recently at an IT conference and this topic came up during a panel discussion. For the most part the panel members and the audience alike hadn't really done much in terms of BYOT other than a few that were experimenting the BYOT for cell phones.

Why isn't IT jumping on the BYOT bandwagon? For the same reasons that IT created those uncompromising standards for technology that everyone likes to complain about in the first place. Namely, cost control and security.

Cost control is a two-part issue. The first part is the cost of the equipment itself and how we manage it. Some users want the latest and most popular technology, swapping it out again and again. How much is the company willing to fund? Does it only fund a set amount per year?

The second part of the cost issue is perhaps more perplexing to IT. With the ever increasing pressure on IT to control costs, how do we do this when we don't control the technology choices users are making? Creating a support organization for all platforms is costly and daunting concept.

The security question isn't so much about the security of the applications itself. We've been handling this for a long time and can control who sees what data and what they can do it within the application.

However, if we open up the platform we don't necessarily know how strong it is, how the users have configured it, how secure they've made it, where else they're using it and what else they're using it for. A pretty scary scenario, indeed. With the increasing sophistication of worms, rootkit hacking, malware and zero day attacks on operating systems, IT is understandably reluctant to open this up.

While we may have valid reasons for not jumping on the BYOT bandwagon right now, we shouldn't fool ourselves into thinking this will just go away. As the consumerization effect continues to grow and technology evolves further this may become practical in some situations.

IT leaders would be well advised to monitor this situation and in the meantime take a look at expanding the standard offerings as a way of giving more choices. We should also be trying VDI to see where it makes sense.

Like a lot of other "hyped" concepts BYOT isn't the universal answer but it just might be the answer for some situations. Our job as IT leaders is to figure that out and not get caught up in the hype.

This article is also posted on Forbes.com. Feel free to join in the discussion either on this site or at Forbes.com

If this topic was of interest, you might also like these:

Why IT Must Embrace Facebook, Twitter, iPhone
Where's My Flying Car?
IT's Business Lesson
Or the posts in the "Strategy & Management" category.

SIMposium2010

2010-10-10T11:46:43-05:00

I'm not a big fan of IT conferences. For the most part you're just paying for the privilege of attending a vendor sales pitch. I don't like the free ones and certainly see no need to pay for one.

The one thing that is nice about the conference is the opportunity to meet other practitioners and discuss topics of interests openly and to learn from each other. When I have gone to conferences this is the factor that draws me in.

I've been a member of SIM (Society for Information Management) for about 10 years but have never bothered to attend their annual conference for the reasons mentioned above. However, as I became the president of the Houston Chapter of SIM I thought I should attend to see what it was all about - so last week I was in Atlanta for SIMposium2010.

All I can say is - boy, was I wrong about judging this one. SIMposium2010 was fantastic! Although there are vendors there it is not just one big sales pitch. The vendors are limited in number and there is no hard selling.

As I mentioned the one thing I do like is being able to meet other practitioners. SIMposium was great for this as it is designed by and for senior IT leaders. Because of this you have a great opportunity to discuss issues with people that are in similar situations as you and they understand the problems and opportunities you meet on a daily basis. The panel discussions in particular were very good as they had a lot of open and frank discussion among both panel members and the audience.

My only regret about SIMposium is that I waited so long to attend. I met a lot of great people and made some good friends. I'm looking forward to next year's conference in Orlando. I hope to see you there.