Beyond Blinking Lights and Acronyms

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.

How IT Can Give Better Presentations

2010-09-15T05:00:00-05:00

Cut out jargon and focus on helping, not limiting, customers.

IT has long sought to be considered a partner to the other business leaders in our companies. It's all part of our pursuit of the holy grail of "having a seat at the table."

Naturally, getting there means we have to promote our ideas, explain technology concepts and communicate our plans. In today's world that also means we use a lot of PowerPoint presentations.

Sadly, IT doesn't have a reputation for giving great business presentations. In the world of death by PowerPoint, IT guys are ninjas.

A key to a good presentation is to tailor it to your audience. We have to recognize that the presentation we give to our business partners shouldn't be the same as the ones we give to our IT compatriots.

Too often we forget this. The presentation that wowed the IT folks fails miserably with our business leaders. Here is my list of things you may want to avoid in your next presentation to the executive staff.

Too many slides. How often have you heard someone say, "Well, since I've only got 15 minutes to talk, I combined a number of slides and cut quite a few out and was able to pare my presentation down to just 67 slides." For a 15-minute presentation, six or seven slides, not 67, is a better guide.

The purpose of PowerPoint should be to act as a reinforcement to what you say and a stimulus to discussion, not a history of IT.

Business process swim lane diagrams. Although helpful for studying the details of a process, acting as a guide for technical specs and showing the responsibilities of the various groups involved, diagrams often send the wrong message in business meetings.

Our goal in process design is to simplify them and reduce the chance for error. Most processes typically have a path that is followed at least 90% of the time. This is what most people picture in their mind when they think of a process flow.

However, there are lots of alternate paths to handle exceptions, errors, reworks, etc., that add complexity to the overall process. The problem with the swim lane diagrams is that they show not only the most common path but also all alternates.

Showing all these various paths and lines going back and forth, it looks like we've added complexity instead of reducing it. It's much better to show only the major components of the core process in a simplified diagram to keep the discussion on point.

Technology stack chart. IT folks are proud of our technologies and how we tie them all together. These charts illustrate how the applications are tied to the application framework and the platforms.

The truth is that most people outside of IT don't care about this. They are, however, interested in what this technology will do for them, so stick to that topic.

The eye chart. How many presentations have you seen where the presenter puts up a slide with a lot of tiny text or a very busy diagram? This is usually accompanied with the statement, "I know this is something of an eye chart. Don't bother trying to read it. The key point is..."

Naturally, once you tell people not to try reading it, they of course do try to read it and they also stop listening to you while they're doing it. By the time they've given up trying to read it, you've already made your points (which they've missed).

Nobody came to a meeting to read your presentation. They came to see you and hear you present. It's much better to highlight the few key words or phrases and then talk about them.

Too many TLAs. IT is famous for our use of TLAs (that's Three Letter Acronyms, he said with no sense of irony). Our presentations are full of TLAs and tech lingo, and therefore our presentations are in a foreign language for people outside of IT.

An executive once told me that business folks are looking for IT people "that talk like the rest of us." Drop the tech lingo and use the language of your audience.

We use the wrong tone. Take a look at your presentation to see if it focuses more on the concepts of control, governance or limiting access, than it does on the concepts of benefits, return on investment or new functionality. People are more interested in learning what they can do and how you are helping them than they are in hearing about what you won't let them do.

It's not an IT project. Perhaps the best indication that you're really making an IT presentation is when you include a slide that proclaims, "This is a business project, not an IT project." All this does is highlight how much it really is an IT project, so I'd suggest you drop it.

You don't see HR, marketing, legal, etc., proclaiming their projects aren't HR, marketing, legal projects. They've learned their lesson and we should too.

"Business Process Modeling Techniques in Software Development Liyecycle [sic]" photo by Ivan Walsh / CC2.0

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's Business Lesson
PowerPoint: The Good and Bad
Leadership Conversations
Or the posts in the "Strategy & Management" category.

Why IT Must Embrace Facebook, Twitter, iPhone

2010-09-01T05:00:00-05:00

Consumer technologies are infiltrating the corporate world. Learn to leverage them.

I like TED. TED is a nonprofit organization that is dedicated to "Ideas Worth Spreading." They have conferences where they bring together thought leaders from the world of technology, entertainment and design (hence the acronym).

The great thing about TED is that for those of us who don't actually get to attend its conferences, the talks are posted on its website. The downside is that there is a lot to see and you can spend a lot of time there. (Or is that an upside?)

That is why I was happy to see an article by John Brandon, 8 must-see TED talks for IT pros, where he's found some talks about interesting new technologies that should interest IT professionals. Brandon doesn't just list the talks but also reviews them and has some consumer analysts give a "reality check" on how ideas such as this come to market.

Although the analysts were generally skeptical that any of these technologies would come to market and be widely used in the near future, it is still important that we in IT look at these and think about how we could use these new technologies.

It used to be that computer technology was applied at work PCs, networking, e-mail, etc. and then entered the consumer space. Now people are using technologies first in their personal lives such as Skype, Twitter, Facebook and iPhones long before they're introduced in their workspace.

As a result, we are seeing what is referred to as the consumerization of IT. This refers to people being exposed to new technologies in their personal lives and asking, "Why can't we apply this to our work?" It's important to recognize that they just aren't asking to use Twitter with their friends at work, they're also asking to use the technology to do their work.

In many cases, people figure out a way to use these technologies as part of the work and then IT has to play catch-up. Typically IT will try to quash them by saying it is not a standard corporate offering and is unsupported by IT. When this fails, we scramble to learn something about it and then try to formalize its use in one standard form for one purpose. This of course fails and we lose all control of the technology.

Because of this, I believe IT professionals should be studying both future and current consumer technologies.

To what extent Twitter and other consumer technologies are useful in the corporate world depends on the nature of the company, its business, its customers and its market.

However, we need to look beyond the particular application of technology. Twitter itself may not work for your business but the underlying communication technology could be very useful. Likewise, the networking concepts of Facebook could be used to allow your employees to network together and know what each of the others is working on.

The social networking application, Foursquare, has location-based technologies that could be useful to your business. You may consider the iPhone as just another phone with no particular significance for your business, but the user interface technologies it employs may be very useful.

Our job as IT leaders is to not only manage the current technologies but also to look ahead and see what new technologies are out there and how we can use them to our competitive advantage.

Toward that end, we need to get familiar with new consumer technologies and look beyond the superficial and see if we can utilize the underlying technology that makes them popular.

Perhaps by doing this we can lead the introduction of new technologies into our companies rather than trying to play catch-up with the technology that our users bring in from the personal technology world.

"Brave New World" photo by alles-schlumpf / CC BY 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:

Where's My Flying Car?
CIOs: Stop Ignoring Social Media
Twitter's Corporate Message
Or the posts in the "Technology" category