Advertisment

Ban the CIO

author-image
DQI Bureau
New Update

The above the surface view is obvious. Tremendous absorption has taken place

and a lot of it is good technology. There is some bad technology-the part that

does not deliver. Gartner has in some studies estimated it to be 20% of the

total spend or about $500 billion wasted so far. Twenty percent does not sound

all the big, $500 billion does!

Advertisment

Taking the 'below the surface' view, there are a few places where the

scope for enhancement is high. For starters, the term information technology is

completely inadequate. It is the use of technology with computers, other

electronic devices and communications that is essential. Information technology

started as a handmaiden of other organizational processes. Now the other

functions have to become handmaidens of technology. Technology has to run the

business. It may also generate information. The 'I' has to be dropped. While

designations have changed and the CIO has become the CXO or the CTO, the

absorption of the concept is cosmetic. There is an urgent need to ban the

designation-CIO. And speed the up the fundamental change that this implies.

Shyam MalhotrA
While designations have changed and the CIO has become the CXO or the CTO, the absorption of 



the concept is cosmetic

The problem has therefore progressed one level up the value chain-and in

the process opened many new opportunities. Business strategies and processes are

starting to get built around technologies-instead of technology supporting

businesses processes. Earlier it used to be-how can I sell my products and get

more information about the process to do it better. Now it is how can I sell

using technology. This is easier said than done. One reason is that compared to

other functional areas in an organization-finance, human resources,

manufacturing and marketing-technology is still a kid. From the advent of

computers to their absorption in organisations has been a maximum of fifty

years. In most organizations the period may be a decade or so. Technology is

exciting and has potential. It is also evolving and therefore does not always

deliver on the potential. It continues to manifest itself in different ways-none

being stable for more than a few years. Standards change, terms are modified,

applications are added and the legacy gets stronger.

Advertisment

The principles of accounting and marketing have remained unchanged in the

time period in which technology has been created and deployed. Consequently they

are more understood, have standard global terminologies, are applied more

homogeneously and have a higher level of comfort associated with them.

Technology understanding, absorption and deployment by contrast is patchy, uses

many terms, has many manifestations and therefore becomes fuzzy and

uncomfortable. To name a few terms in vogue-ERP, CRM, e-commerce, mobile

computing, datawarehousing, on demand applications and many more. Since

technology is also getting decentralized these have to understood by the

functional managers. And here the options themselves become the limitations. The

average functional manager who has to make his business plan as per technology

available simply does not know enough to do so. That results in window shopping

rather than shopping. A lot of glitter, a lot of discussion, a lot of debate but

much less of the action. Enjoyable yes, effective no.

The measurement of technology effectiveness is also a tedious and often

inaccurate process. In many cases technology absorption has a long term benefit.

And the problem is similar to measuring investments on training and advertising?

Training can impart knowledge and skills but people have to make it effective.

Advertising can build brands and generate leads but people have to sell.

Technology can provide the tools but people have to use them. In such contexts

organizations have to work on the belief principle and not the returns principle-a

luxury that the returns driven environment does not support. Imagine a great

meal at a specialty restaurant. The pleasure cannot be quantified. It also

cannot be ignored. You can, of course, measure the time they took to serve the

food and the temperature at which it was served. Doing that takes away the

pleasure itself.

The author is Editor-in-Chief of CyberMedia, the publishers of Dataquest Shyam

MalhotrA

Advertisment