CIO Rant - Latest Comments

Re: Reports of CIO ‘Death’ Premature

Brian — Mon, 29 Nov 2010 15:07:04 -0000

Hi George-

I love your "Bottom line" comment. It's so totally true. I come a business background and I'll be honest, the best leaders are those who have that kind of confidence. Add in tech knowledge and some business savviness... the sky is the limit. I actually read a blog you might be interested in that talks about the business skills of IT pros: http://techpros.mgt.ncsu.edu/2...

Awesome post!

Re: Reports of CIO ‘Death’ Premature

CIO Consultant — Thu, 09 Sep 2010 01:49:02 -0000

Every CIO should be strategic and provide justification of what they have planned.

Re: Reports of CIO ‘Death’ Premature

Chris Curran — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 12:54:04 -0000

George -

Deserving a seat at the table is about doing the right things, not demanding a seat or acting like you belong there - those will take care of themselves when your work and actions draw you into the right meetings, conversations, etc. I think the right way to do this is by fully engaging in understanding and driving investments in the business priorities, becoming the Customer Information Officer and integrating ITs day to day work into the processes, meetings and language of the business. Alignment is not enough, cause that implies two things operating in coordination. It's about organizational integration.

While the CIO is far from dead, if they don't figure this out in their own organizations, they will risk losing their "C."

Re: The Gift of Time

gmtomko — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 18:41:16 -0000

Thanks Dave for the comments. I really like your concept of a "hard rest". Classic.

Re: The Gift of Time

dwploc — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 10:14:16 -0000

George, couldn't agree with you more. My grandkids were in town last week and we had a ball. Didn't do much but ate, played Wii and went to see Santa's Magical Kingdom. It was GREAT. Oh, my daughter and son-in-law were here too.

Downtime is critical to our overall mental health. Maintaining focus and the energy for leadership is hard work which requires hard rest sometimes.

Enjoy your holidays and see you in the next decade !!!

Re: Cloud Computing – a Capital Idea?

George Tomko — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 10:03:25 -0000

Ed: thanks for taking the time and expanding the discussion. I especially liked your concept of "near-stealth expenditure". In my consulting practice and CIO days I saw too much attention and effort paid to being stealth-y rather than learning how to position technology investments properly and effectively. Regarding the CFO's hand in all of this -- I found it dangerous in those cases where the CIO reported to the CFO in the organization because the pendulum swung too far into the financial aspects of the transaction rather than advancing the 'science' of how to identify economic benefits precisely of IT investments.

Re: Cloud Computing – a Capital Idea?

Ed Richardson — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 09:30:44 -0000

Interesting read and I agree whole heartedly with the sentiment and also the fact that this is now a common practice.

The issue often lies with the CFO rather than the CIO, with the financial management team taking a particular opinion of different types of investment and budgetary requirements.

Leasing costs can often be "absorbed" into the general day to day expenditure of running an infrastructure framework, were as capital costs require business justification, budget planning and approval processes.

Ironically as expenditure increases on op-ex costs to offset the requirement for further cap-ex requests, we also a diminishing number of capital assets to list on company papers, effectively further increasing the total realised costs of infrastructure.

The occurrence usually happens when an CIO's opinion/requirement for technology funding for the year exceeds that of his/hers financial counterparts. Instead of pushing back on cap-ex requests a CIO can seek other methods of acquiring the seemingly much need technology.

What would be better for all would be an appreciation of the real need for business investment in technology costs at a cap-ex level, in addition the understanding of CIO of the real costs to the business of almost stealth expenditure on op-ex investment.

It might find its way all the back to the old argument about business justification for a none fee earning department (technology often still regarded as such) demanding such a percentage of total business expenditure.

Heaven bid for company to reel in, what are for all intents and purposes, op-ex costs of other fee earning departments, such as expenses.

Thanks for the post, it's good to put my old infrastructure management hat on every once in a while.

Re: Making Companies Smarter

1samadams — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 22:24:37 -0000

Great comment: Net-net, companies have to do a number of things with their culture, vision, approach and, above all, not leave the job to the IT department.

Where I am, it feels like, and I could be wrong, that my CIO loves putting my team on the tip of the spear as disruptive change agents.

Its' been quite interesting.

Re: A friend in need, is a friend indeed…

gmtomko — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 16:19:25 -0000

Thanks for the comment, Karen. I like the term "elasticity" in reference to work teams. Years ago, the "virtual" corporation was envisioned. I guess it is finally here.

Re: A friend in need, is a friend indeed…

gmtomko — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 16:17:49 -0000

Great input from personal experience and much appreciated. You are absolutely right that the hard work is worth it.

Re: A friend in need, is a friend indeed…

Karen Masullo (OPCGal) — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 16:02:24 -0000

Great read as always. Lead with value. We have for some time been moving to a self-employed, contractor employment dynamic. Everyone must be focused on their customer and the shifting role they play in serving the customer in order to retain the customer. Crowdsourcing, mobtrusts... the elasticity of new work teams as they form, dissolve and reform are based upon trust, reputation, and those lasting professional friendships that are the customer.

Re: A friend in need, is a friend indeed…

gmtomko — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 23:59:31 -0000

Virginia, thank you for your thoughtful comments. I also like the reference to Ferrazzi's book. In the end, your comments perfectly encapsulate the feelings and reactions that I was hoping to elicit from readers. You also extend the article nicely. I may update the article with your builds and re-publish. Again, many thanks.

Re: A friend in need, is a friend indeed…

jhdobbs — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 06:03:58 -0000

Thanks for this post. Several years ago I took one of those "once-in-a-lifetime" voluntary early retirements. Although I would ultimately return to the workforce, I wasn't initially looking for leads or referrals I just wanted to keep in touch with people. What I found out quickly is that many people I considered "friends" suddenly no longer answered my e-mails or returned my calls. It was a painful and valuable life lesson. Since then I have chosen to make a deliberate effort to stay in touch with people "just because" and to always offer to help any friend or acquaintance who suddenly finds themselves in a bad place. Interestingly, I am amazed at how many of these folks, after finding work, drop out of sight again. Keeping relationships alive is hard work but it is always worth it.

Re: A friend in need, is a friend indeed…

Virginia Steinberg — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 14:10:59 -0000

Everything you say is so true. And I agree: "Bring it on." The social contract you refer to has been shifting for years. Whether we like it or not, it isn't going to go back to the good 'ole days. The rise of corporate mediocrity is less able to be the case these days. In the words of Martha Stewart, "This is a good thing." Now the search for and pool of talent extends well beyond the traditional corporate environment, and includes those people you reference who are constantly looking for ways to improve themselves, increase efficiencies at the companies they work for or clients they serve. Performance measurements include more than being seen at the office. The shape of employment has forever been altered.

That means that all professionals need to be connected--in a genuine way. I like to say that it needs to be without an agenda. In other words, do it because you know these "friends," "connections," and "followers" are truly people who trust you and who you trust in return, and for whom you would be willing to extend yourself. Knowing who these people are is particularly important now, regardless of whether you are experiencing trying times or not. Keith Ferrazzi's book "Who's Got Your Back" offers a wonderful take on this.

In an age of transparency, it is so obvious when someone builds up their network quickly, at an almost feverish pace, that they are friending you because they want something. While I am more than willing to help those I respect and trust, I admit to a greater willingness to go out of my way for those people who connected with me because of a mutual desire to remain in contact. The relationships tend to be deeper, based not on quid pro quo or desperation, but on a desire to assist and offer sound advice whenever, wherever and however it is needed. A true friend indeed.

Re: UNIX at 40: We haven’t had that spirit here since 1969…

Farko — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 13:18:19 -0000

I added your blog to Google Reader.

Re: Making Companies Smarter

John F Moore — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:07:40 -0000

George, great questions. In my opinion the CIO must be a business-savvy technologist. They must be equal partners at the executive table, sometimes leading, sometimes collaborating, sometimes following.

Businesses that expect the CIO to lead the way will fail. Those that ignore their input will also fail. Those that treat the CIO as an equal party in both reducing costs and driving revenue will win.

John

Re: Does Business Intelligence Require Intelligent Business?

johncousineau — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 14:00:14 -0000

George: Both your post + the question it asks are thought provoking. My feedback, a bit provoked, hopefully a bit thoughtful:

1/ despite the orgy of data that's now digitized, IMO there's still a daunting lack of data on outcomes. Such data are much rarer than data on inputs + inventory. Hard to optimize the intelligence of a business when the picture of what's going on is incomplete. Some of its incompleteness, I agree, is due to the inability of systems to 'speak a common language'. Some, however, is due to a lack of needed measurement of other things.

2/ analyzing becomes easier with the clarity of a business' picture of what's going on. People (and the businesses they work for) can suddenly become incredibly intelligent when armed with info on the outcomes they're producing from the work that they're doing.

3/ dissemination is impeded less by a lack of data standards for doing so than by its perceived marginal value. Once the value of what's been analyzed is much higher, dissemination challenges will fade.

4/ the truly intelligent business is one that overcomes the above challenges and, in so doing provokes amongst its workers the continuous learning needed with which to gain front-line wisdom. When work done is done with craftsmanship (borne of wisdom + gained from learning), firms make better things + make things better.

Thanks for making me think. Hopefully some of my thinking will add value to yours.

John

Re: Does Business Intelligence Require Intelligent Business?

charlie rein — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 02:28:03 -0000

I see you worked at Hess Holidays evenings saturday sundays, and Monsanto two of my clients for my ChE recruiting days. Great article about the newest three letter acronyms of the IT world. As a recruiter I am given the unfill-able BI job descriptions, create a definition, but don't take into consideration the actual availability of real people. thanks for the knowledge.

I can imagine what the specs for a C Wisdom O

Re: Does Business Intelligence Require Intelligent Business?

Peter Thomas — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 15:12:13 -0000

Long,

I liked the diagram as well.

Peter

Re: Does Business Intelligence Require Intelligent Business?

Peter Thomas — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 12:19:44 -0000

George,

Thought-provoking article. Thank you for the quote / link, which I have reciprocated at:

http://peterthomas.wordpress.c...

Peter

Re: Does Business Intelligence Require Intelligent Business?

Long Huynh — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 12:11:05 -0000

I agree with your reservation about Gerry Davis' recommendation to name yet another Executive as the solution. Organizations have a convenient yet sad tendency to think that one person could solve a systemic problem.

I also love your chart. It's richer in context that the one from Gene Bellinger, Durval Castro and Anthony Mills of systems-thinking.org. My only comment is about the inclusion of Wisdom as the next step after Knowledge. You may sense that already by putting "Wisdom" in quotes. To me, there are something else between K and W. Intelligence is one of them.

A Knowledgeable business is not always an Intellligent one. Likewise, an Intelligent business is not necessarily a Wise one.

Re: Using Consultants: Rolling the Dice?

Phil Simon — Wed, 27 May 2009 08:39:12 -0000

This is a great post. As a consultant for the last nine years, I have many times seen very able consultants simply put in poor decisions. On one recent gig, a very prestigious firm sent in three consultants with very little experience with the client's systems. These consultants had to lean on me, compromising the very independence and audit capabilities that they were supposed to provide.

As I mention in my book, different types of consulting firms tend to deploy very different types of consultants.

Re: Using Consultants: Rolling the Dice?

Ilya Bogorad — Fri, 22 May 2009 09:43:37 -0000

Organizations hire consultants for various reasons. Some og them you have described and this is a type of work that I personally would never take on.

But there is an enormous value in working with someone with a broader perspective, who tells you what you need to hear, not what you want to hear - something that internal people can never do for the fear of retribution. Finally, this person brings the expertise that you simply don't have internally.

Personally, I wouldn't be in this business if I felt that I don't deliver high value to my clients.

Re: Using Consultants: Rolling the Dice?

Derek E. Weeks — Tue, 19 May 2009 17:05:13 -0000

Our firm recognized this downside to bringing in consultants and not being guaranteed value. In today's economy, IT managers are watching budgets ever more closely (if the budgets haven't been eliminated all together).

We offer VMware capacity assessment and optimization services. We decided to put our money where our mouth was at Systar for these services. We offer our clients a SOW but also discuss specific results they want to achieve through our engagement with them. We set a timeline and then work with them to achieve the expected result. By agreeing to the result upfront, people are ore comfortable inviting our team in. At the end of the day, if the result is not achieved, the customer does not pay.

Of course, this means that we and they have to be specific with the intended result up front. We have to set realistic expectations, but we also set a short time objective to achieve the results. This allows value to be recognized quickly.

So far, our customers are quite pleased with this approach.

Re: Using Consultants: Rolling the Dice?

David Wright — Tue, 19 May 2009 17:01:42 -0000

Consultants can fill roles that a company does not keep permanent employees. Otherwise, measure what employees on projects actually do compared to their job description; a lot of overhead and waiting goes on.

Consultants have no overhead and (inherently, I agree) are never kept waiting. As for consultants being gone after the project ends, check in a year and see how many employees are still associated with its results; change happens.

People coming back to their old employer are contractors, not consultants; there's a difference.

Neither choice, consultant or employee, is right all the time. Blending the two appropriately is the sign of a successful company.