Advertisment

Lacking In Communication

author-image
DQI Bureau
New Update

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.




Advertisment

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.

Advertisment

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.



Advertisment

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.





Advertisment

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:

Advertisment

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



Advertisment

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.



The

computer industry media

Advertisment