Misinformation,
mythmakers, and mayhem
We didn't get to the miserable, disconnected situation executives
and technology managers find themselves in by accident. No, we had
considerable assistance from a group of mostly well-meaning people
who, for a variety of predictable reasons, perceived it to be in
their interests to leave a robust measure of confusion, complexity
and antagonism in their wake.
Every participant
in the computer industry has, to one degree or another, been snookered
or exploited by the forces I call the "ignorance lobby".
On the short list of the ignorance lobby are selected industry and
management consultants and analysts, technology associations, and
members of the media. I emphasize the word "selected".
Consultants, analysts, associations and journalists all make legitimate
contributions to the computer industry. Indeed, it's hard to imagine
the industry without them. Some of the industry's outstanding achievements
can be traced to their efforts. Nevertheless, it's advantageous
to consider their motives and agendas. Prudence dictates that if
we are to counteract the effects of the excesses of the ignorance
lobby, we must be acquainted with the forces that influence them.
Understanding
just two fundamental principles puts the situation into perspective.
The first principle is:
Many members
of the ignorance lobby have a stake in your continued ignorance.
With this attitude,
there is surprisingly little percentage in making things look easy.
The more mystical and esoteric the ignorance lobby can make the
situation, the more likely they are to command high fees, get subsequent
assignments, raise association dues or sell more advertising space.
The second principle is even simpler:
Follow the money.
If you can establish
the financial incentives that members of the ignorance lobby have
developed, you are in a much better position to appropriately discount
their advice and services. Now, everyone is entitled to compensation
for services and expertise. Some of the best money I have ever spent
went to consultants and analysts. But when I buy advice, I want
that advice aligned with my objectives, not anyone else's. Analysts
or consultants who are beholden to other parties, especially when
I am not aware of those interests, serve no one but themselves.
When that happens, even the soundest advice loses credibility.
A common characteristic
of many of these groups is that they welcome upheaval. Change makes
their jobs easier; in fact, change in many cases is just about the
only thing that justifies their existence. Fortunately for the ones
with integrity, the computer industry offers sufficient naturally
occurring upheaval to gainfully employ an army of consultants, analysts,
technical associations and journalists. Unfortunately, some groups
and individuals go out of their way to encourage an entirely artificial
and unnecessary threshold of upheaval and confusion.
I call these
the 'mythmakers'. Like the gods on Mount Olympus who were always
vying for human subservience and devotion, the mythmakers offer
pronouncements and edicts that inspire friction. Hired by organizations
to resolve tension in the industry and promote consensus, they frequently
do just the opposite. On principle, they make war on the status
quo. They want to destroy the old in order for the new to succeed.
Friction is useful for those who make a living by promoting change
for the sake of change. Let's take a closer look at the groups that
make up the ignorance lobby.
Consultants
and analysts
We look to consultants and analysts as independent and objective
sources of expertise and advice, yet the advice we receive is frequently
less independent and objective than we are led to believe. Truly
independent consultants and analysts can play a vital role in the
decision-making process because technology is shifting so rapidly.
As witnesses to many different approaches to a large number of problems,
consultants and analysts are in a unique position to render judgments
about the relative merits of a number of approaches.
Yet from the CEO's perspective, truly independent consultants and
analysts are as rare as cigarette machines at the American Cancer
Society. Many consultants and analysts following the IT industry
have business relationships with hardware and software vendors that
they often do not disclose. Some of these relationships are perfectly
legitimate and aboveboard; others are less so.
CEOs also need
to recognize that consultants and analysts are naturally beholden
to the IT department and the CIOs. The CIOs sign the purchase orders
and implement the programs. It's very easy for IT professionals
to 'analyst-hunt' for some authority to support their position.
Evidence of this practice is suggested by CIOs who use different
consultants or analysts to justify different projects. Ask the CIO
why analyst A, who did such a good job on Project A, was not used
to analyze Project B.
Consultant: Someone who borrows your watch to tell you what time
it is, and then keeps the watch.
Many books have
been written on selecting and managing consultants, and it is not
my goal to repeat this material. My point is that a small number
of very vocal consultants and analysts play a prominent role in
the proliferation of misinformation, myths and mayhem in the computer
industry. It's quite simply in their interests to do so, for as
long as there are disputes, there will be need of individuals to
study, debate and present those disputes. I have just one piece
of advice about consultants and analysts:
It is better
to be wrong than biased
The most important
attribute of a consultant or analyst is independence. If you don't
have that, you are not dealing with a consultant or analyst at all,
but with a member of a profession considerably older.
Here, little bird, let me help you
A small bird
lay freezing to death along a country lane in the Northern steppes.
A peasant came along, saw the dying bird, and thought to himself,
"If only I had something-anything-in which to wrap this bird,
I might save its life. "But, alas, he had nothing on him that
he could spare in the face of the cold Russian winter. Then he saw
some cow droppings nearby and he thought in desperation, "Perhaps
if I wrap up the bird in that, it will warm it enough to save its
life." He picked up the bird, wrapped it in the cow manure,
laid it gently on the ground and went on his way. Sure enough, the
dung began to warm the bird and it started to come to life again.
The bird was so overjoyed at feeling warm again that it tried to
sing. But all it could manage in its feeble condition were some
low, feeble notes.
Just then another peasant came along. He heard the bird's attempt
at singing and thought, "Poor bird, it's choking in the cow
dung." So he picked it up, removed the dung and laid the bird
back on the ground. Shortly thereafter, the bird froze to death.
There are
three morals to the story:
- First, it
isn't necessarily your enemies who put you in it.
- Second, it
isn't necessarily your friends who get you out of it.
- And third,
when you're in it up to here, for heaven's sake, don't sing.