Comments on: Does Enterprise 2.0 actually mean a bigger IT Department?

By: Chris

Chris — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 21:50:26 +0000

I work in the Quality department in one of the plants of a very large manufacturing company.
We are a global company with a fairly large internal corporate-based IT department. We have over a dozen fairly large non-integrated software systems and numerous other smaller systems. Our “Corporate” headquarters mandates that we use these systems even though the actual users at the plant level are very upset with the anti-user-friendliness of some of these systems coupled with the need to enter the same data in multiple locations because of the non-integration issues. On top of that, we have constantly changing management and customer needs that require us to change data entry fields and reporting structures. Our IT is very, very slow and uncooperative with our requests for changes. In the cases where they say they want to help, they say that the canned (and very expensive) systems cannot be customized to our needs. Consequently, most users have resorted to developing their own MS Access and MS Excel “side” systems to meet their ever changing needs and worse yet, some of the users have resorted back to using hard copy/paper forms and processes.
IT has repeatedly beat me down to a pulp when I have tried to introduce new and inexpensive Open-Source solutions saying that nothing is free and giving other reasons why they won’t allow the new systems to be introduced. They end up spending months trying to convince me to drop my ideas.
When I have insisted on the solutions, they have offered to “help” me by taking months to document requirements only to end up telling me that I must use the current systems that the company has invested in. And by the way, I can only have “6 out of the 10” things that I need because the systems that they have “approved” can not do everything that I want. In the cases where they have exhausted me to the point of accepting their “6 out of 10 things”, they have then said that all they need is for me to write a project to get the money and they can proceed. Usually, the money is not available and the project dies. Worse yet, the IT department has then walked away claiming that they were successful in killing but yet another situation where the users were stirring everybody up for nothing.
In addition, the IT department continues to search and destroy anyone’s efforts in developing anything “on the side” stating that they need to approve everything.
The problem is that they don’t realize that the users are creating stuff on their own and complaing about their systems because there are legitimate problems.
I am extremely frustrated and I would like your advice on how to resolve my concerns.

Thank you.

By: ewH

ewH — Fri, 20 Jul 2007 14:59:29 +0000

Great post, Jevon. I would consider myself a hybrid manager/developer, and while the concept is spot on, you have to be careful to not fall into a traditional management mindset. Management is a black hole that can suck you into meeting hell and make you forget that there is actually more value in doing things, not just talking about them.

Brilliant!
-ewH

By: Chuck Pendell

Chuck Pendell — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 19:20:12 +0000

First, let me divulge that we are a vendor in this area. Our company is called Connectbeam. We believe that there is a tremendous area in the middle of the SaaS approach, and the internal (double your IT department) approach. Specifically, the appliance approach to new “managed” applications, which retain all firewall protection, which provide the same SaaS level of application management, but do not require the IT department to double in size. The benefits are numerous, and include cost, time to market (20 minute installation), no training required, maintenance, monthly cash flow, etc.

By: Michael Clarke

Michael Clarke — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 15:53:17 +0000

That’s pretty much where (through a process of extreme trial and error) we’ve ended up. The project list is more a ‘problems to be solved’ list and the team is expected to move around our different offices talking to stakeholders and joining dots. One caveat I’d add though is the idea of promoting your best developers to managers – that can be utterly disastrous. Sometimes management and project management talent coincides in the same developer body – but a lot of the time it doesn’t. That’s not something intrinsic to developers – it’s intrinsic to people. Some of the most effective leaders I’ve encountered in technical teams are actually not the best developers – but they are the people who’ve stood out as being the best organisers and best relationship managers.

By: Barbara Thomas

Barbara Thomas — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 01:08:37 +0000

What an interesting, creative suggestion. I believe there are hordes of people locked away in IT Departments who would embrace this way of working wholeheartedly.

However, I think there’s one more critical cultural change that organisations need to face up to.

Stop making IT responsible for the way people acquire and look after corporate information.

Once that responsibility finds its rightful owners in the business, the IT ancien regime of hindrance in the name of governance will disappear. IT people would be free to use their talents to help people in the business create the apps they want. Within guidelines set by the business.

Better for everyone.