Interesting view on whether business needs more or less regulation. You could argue either way but more important for me is whether or not regulations can be enforced. Worth a look at the update from the 2020UK team What’s new at 2020uk today.
Interesting view on whether business needs more or less regulation. You could argue either way but more important for me is whether or not regulations can be enforced. Worth a look at the update from the 2020UK team What’s new at 2020uk today.
There are a few simple reasons why IT projects big and small tend to crash and burn or end up being implemented, and fail to deliver to expectations.
Requirements aren’t clear or even in place
I know this one’s simple but I have in the past embarked on a reasonable size public sector project for which the sole initial requirement was to refresh the existing equipment to make use of new services. The new services weren’t actually defined at the point of order, so were added as the project went along. Far from ideal but there happened to be a third party involved which leads me on to the next point.
Management consultants get involved
Not always a bad thing but if the basic business requirements aren’t defined before engagement then a project or initiative will end up with a growing community of consultants who sit between the client and their suppliers. I’ve come across a couple of occasions where I’ve been working with consultants on an agreed set of project parameters that were in fact different to those agreed between the consultants and the client. It did make the project meetings very interesting for a time but didn’t help the end client to achieve their results. Professional services companies by their very nature will do all they can to sell in additional people and services which will make any project more complex and ramp up the number of in-flight changes. There is a space for Professional Services companies to fill gaps in the client side organisation but these need to be scoped in some detail before engagement. It’s always a perceived safer option as well to go for a big player but there’s usually better value from using niche specialists who have the relevant systems or business experience.
The ‘Man from Del Monte’ culture within suppliers
When JFK committed the US to going to the moon he had quite a bit of money to throw at the problem and awful lot of resources. I don’t know of any IT company that has a lot of cash or experts on hand so why do they commit their businesses to delivering a system that they have little chance of building, delivering or supporting?
The simple answer is that for large projects the decision is taken at a strategic level without the understanding of the true cost of delivery or the impact of supporting that service on the business once implemented. This is where IT seems to differ from other specialist areas. If a tender went out to build a tunnel between say the Wales and Southern Ireland the first pass would be a feasibility study which would go into a great deal of detail about the rock strata, tunnel locations & support infrastructure. If the experts agreed that it could be technically done within a notional budget figure it would move to the next stage. Of course if it isn’t feasible this is fed back and the project shelved. In the IT world it appears that if the experts highlight that something isn’t feasible then the sales teams and senior management override them and press ahead. I have had numerous uncomfortable discussions over the years with clients and legal teams where a supplier has over promised and under delivered.
Suppliers tendency to say Yes can be driven by short term incentive plans, nothing more or nothing less. Most management and sales teams are remunerated when the contract is put in place and very rarely on the on-going performance of that deal. If a deal of £3m is sold but the actual cost of delivery over that term is the same then it’s not profitable business. Often deals are taken on this basis to bring in other contracts, which can be strategically beneficial but then compensation should only really be paid when those new contracts are signed, sealed and delivered.
Everyone is an expert
My personal feeling is that IT experts are looked on as being less important than technicians within other disciplines. This is probably due to the fact that most people can now drive a computer without a second thought, so assume that creating a Database for 30 million records is as simple as popping a DVD in the drive and downloading some software. If it’s not that easy how difficult can it be? It’s a slightly strange situation as we all drive cars but not many of us can now fix them and even less design and build one from scratch but we assume that this can be the case for IT.
These are the main reasons for me at least as to why I have seen large IT projects fail over the last twenty five years or so and I am sure there are a whole lot more. The biggest issue by far though is the real amount of taxpayers money that is being wasted day in day out on Public Sector IT projects and the seeming lack of informed people that are making the contractual and procurement decisions. Is there a better way of providing more effective governance of Public Sector IT spend?
I have been a reasonably successful manager over the last few years (or at least my LinkedIn recommendations seem to say this) but have often been seen by my peers as not being on the same page as they are. Normally I wouldn’t use this type of management language but in this instance it actually works.
The difference in view comes down to the way that I manage people. I happen to think that most Performance Management is just there as an expensive self serving distraction and doesn’t help anyone fulfil their job role. Some performance management tends to dictate that you set objectives over and above the job role but why is this? If someone is looking for a promotion then fair enough they may seek training and experience to help them achieve this but what if you enjoy the role you’re doing and have no ambition to change grades. I know as a manager that piling stretch objectives on the latter will only introduce stress which will impact on their ability to do the job and more importantly on the way that they feel doing the job. So in effect then I took the approach to manage people as individuals and not as points on a bell-curve. Oddly enough most of my peers seemed to think that this was the wrong approach and went off to raise the performance bar and manage people out who dropped off the end of the scale.
From my point of view it is crucial to have a variety of skills and capabilities in a team and having all the same type of personality in the same group doesn’t work well at all. As an aside, this is why a lot of senior management teams and boards are particularly ineffective. I would include most politicians here as well. Typical performance management tends to promote behaviours of a couple of personality types over above the rest of the team, which potentially has a negative impact by dis-enfranchising those people with other traits. These people often do a fantastic job but are not married to the company, and they also don’t see that performing their role has any similarity with the dedication and focus of olympic athletes. For me everyone is an individual and their needs change on a daily basis so the trick of good management is to recognise this and have some empathy with your team whilst delivering value within your business. I don’t think a rigid performance management structure takes individuality into account and often removes the manager from their team by enforcement of compulsory one to one meetings at set times. A manager should be aware of a team members performance at all times and be dealing with issues as they arise and not once every six months or so.
The constant need to improve performance also goes against what people are really about. So Usain Bolt can run really fast and has broken record after record but we seem to use his talents as a view that people can do anything, and that everything is indeed possible. In theory we can probably do anything if we set our minds to it, but as an example I am a pretty dire guitar player, and acknowledge that even with practicing 8 hours a day I wouldn’t be able to challenge Jimmy Page. A friend of mine who’s an NLP coach reckons that I can achieve such six string virtuosity but he also hasn’t factored in external matters such as the need to earn money for food and shelter and of course the need to do the ironing. In the work environment we seem to be setting stretch objectives and optimising employees based on the ‘Can Do’ culture whilst ignoring environmental factors and more importantly the fact they we are all individuals with different motivators. I believe that we make too many assumptions around behaviours of team members and this really does impact the success of the organisation.
Just for the record I haven’t always thought this way. Some years back I was programme managing a set of projects to bring together three businesses and there was a very tight deadline. Getting caught up in the culture of the organisation I pushed the team and myself extremely hard and we got the job done. However, at the end of the programme I managed to collapse with exhaustion but what hit me hardest was that I had pushed a member of the team well past their limits. In fact the person involved was so stressed he developed a heart condition and the phone conversation with his partner blaming me personally for his condition was uncomfortable to say the least. It is something I would never ever want to repeat so if I get asked to do the impossible now I will always respond with what’s possible. It’s Ok sometimes to drive fast when appropriate but you do need to know when and where to use the brakes.
There must be thousands of books on management and the bit that worries me most about this situation is the fact that they are actually books. I have managed people for around 25 years and something that never ceases to amaze me is the amount of complexity that has built up over this time. I firmly believe that complex systems are negatively impacting businesses and organisations due to ill-advised target setting and over blown HR processes. My belief is therefore that we need to simplify as much as we can, so instead of a book here are my 8 Simple, Straightforward Guidelines for Successful Managers;
If you read this and disagree then that’s really cool but I also bet that you won’t comment either and dismiss this post as naive, and may be taking a too simplistic view of the art of management. Happy to have the debate.
On the flip side if you agree with some, or all of this post I’d like your comments and anecdotal observations as that would be really helpful. Who knows I might even write a book………….
Simple Straightforward & Successful
At the end of an audio conference yesterday evening there was a heated debate on Apple’s view of subscriptions which led to an equally charged discussion on the restrictions it places on developers. The three of us engaged in this conversation have combined experience in IT of 75 years plus so you can guess that it was quite lively. However at the heart of the discussion was our different requirements and expectations from our ICT which got me thinking….
In the press the last few days there has been a backlash against apple and even the Independent went all The Sun on us and called it a Mac-Lash which wasn’t very PC. Some of this is down to the media feeling aggrieved by the subscription cut of 30% levied by Apple when the transaction is carried out in-app but Apple allow subscriptions to be done outside the app so not sure what the problem is here. For smaller publications though it may make a lot of sense as the e-commerce pain is taken away, and it’s easier for potential customers to hook up with the service. The key point here is that you choose a service that fits your business model and therefore meets your requirements.
So I use Mac’s for business and most of my customers use Windows, but up to this point I have had no problems exchanging documents or collaborating on projects, so at the level we use our diverse technologies there are no issues. However, if more specialist applications are required that run on one specific platform then there would be an issue. If that was the case my business model would be different and there would be a set of very specific requirements that need to be fulfilled. These requirements would in most instances dictate the platform I would buy, so as long as I followed these to the letter I can be pretty sure that the system chosen would meet my needs.
For consumers then the same thought process should still apply, but in a way they are perhaps more complex, as there are greater number of potential uses than there is within a business. Here’s a few questions and answers as an example.
Q. What’s my budget
A. Good question!!!
Q. Which applications do I use
A. Word Processing, Spreadsheet, Video Editing, Photography, Music, Browsing, E-Mail, Social Media
Q Where do I use these applications
A. Home: WP, Spreadsheet, Video Editing, Photography
A. Home & Away: Music, Internet, Browsing, E-Mail, Social MediaA Away: Music, Browsing, E-Mail, Social Media
Q. Mobile phone integration
A. Yes I would like it to be integrated
Q. Will you be buying all Music, Applications and Media from a limited number of suppliers
A. Yes
Q. How much control do I need over the system
A. Happy to let the system do all the work
This is a really simplified view but it could start to lead you in a certain direction on the technologies you need to meet your requirements. So to me it looks like a Desktop system allied with a smartphone and the last question tends to steer towards a Windows PC with a Windows Phone or a MAC with an iPhone. If the answer was no to mobile phone integration then this could be a steer towards a tablet for mobile needs.
So is the Android vs. Apple vs Windows argument irrelevant. My view is that it is and the most important thing is to understand the requirements and what you want to get for your cash. We all do this when buying cars, you wouldn’t buy a Mazda MX-5 if you needed four seats, but it does appear that we don’t do this when buying technology.
The Art of Strategy
I have had many discussions around organisational strategies over the last 25 years or so and keep coming back to the Sun Tzu’s Art of War as a good example of how to create and deploy a workable strategy. I mentioned this to a client the other day and got a quizzical look so I thought I would adapt the summary on wikipedia for The Art of War as a bit of an illustration. At a high level this seems to work really well so I thought I would just throw this out there for comment at this early stage in its development. I am planning to expand and refine this further over the next six months or whenever time permits so please look out for updates. The original wiki text and link are included below for reference.
Simple Change Strategies for Organisations
Extract from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_War
The Art of War – Chapter Summary
Formats for music are always going to change and I think we have got to the point where the industry is in danger of distancing itself completely from its customers and of course the artists. The basic principle for me is that if I am buying a song or a longer classical piece then I want to be able to play that song on multiple formats. In the past I would buy an LP and tape it so I could listen to it in the car which was technically illegal in the eyes of the record companies. In practice though why would you buy the song twice just so you could listen to it in different places? You just wouldn’t unless you had money to burn.
With the advent of CD’s there was a gradual move away from Vinyl with most people putting their record players in the attic. So I guess most people re-purchased their favourites on the new media and paid again for something they already had. I’ve done this, as often it was a cheaper way to get vinyl converted to MP3 or AAC as well and I don’t really fancy playing my entire record collection and recording via USB to a computer. With storage getting cheaper lossless encoding becomes a possibility as well so the tracks already bought on MP3 will become available as lossless file. Do we need to pay again, I think not.
Here’s what I would like to personally to see happen in the future;
The purchasing options would then be to use your licence to;
Of course when new formats become available you should be able to upgrade for the price of the media,
I am hoping this would help artists as the licence fee would go straight to them with the media overheads being covered by the download/CD costs which would be generic. Stores could offer additional extras such as interviews etc. and be more flexible than they are today with use of space. As Vinyl is making a comeback more space could be allocated to records for instance. I know that the devil is in the detail but some vision is required or else the industry will fail and we will lose out on all the great music that is out there today and in the future
What makes a good business networking event and how best to pick and choose the ones where you’re likely to pick up some worthwhile contacts. There is probably a deeper rooted set of questions around this subject, the first of which is what type of businesses have the most success at these events? The second question is whether people feel comfortable at networking events if they are asked to do a sixty second pitch for example. I know for my business we can either do a twenty second pitch, which is a succinct view of the services we provide, or go to the next step which is a twenty minute conversation.
I have been to a few events and at a couple I have procured services from contacts and these have been really valuable. For me then networking has proved to work when I am actively looking for specific services, but I would suspect I am in the minority when doing this. The flip side is that I haven’t actually managed to pick up any business so I’m not sure if my area of business is unsuited to this type of event or I’m not selling well enough. To be honest I suspect the latter but I have no baseline information really to provide me with a definitive answer.
So I’m interested in your views and I would like to take the debate a bit further into Virtual Business Networks such as LinkedIN and Focus. I don’t believe that anything can really replace a face to face meeting but if are there any success stories out there in the virtual world, I would like to know.