Certainly, Herbjör, human factor in the business organisation is one of the most powerful ones.
>From another hand, there is a difference between the case of available >methodology/solution that leads to more stable prosperity and the case where >everybody tests the road hoping for finding such solution. If we can formulate >the solution that others, who understood, would follow and more successfully >compete with those who did not, I would consider my 'mission' complete. Business nature of ad-hock actions has its own 'philosophy' and it is OK until it starts to threat the well-being of others. (For example, I think that offering credit cards to high school students and people over 80 y.o. was a crime that had to be punished). There are effective means of fighting recklessness that represent a danger (e.g. a law about drugs in Singapore) and I do not agree to suffer only because an idiot in management drives me into troubles. Yes, IT has plenty of things to do in the years to come as well as Business does (if it wants to survive) - Michael ________________________________ From: Herbjörn Wilhelmsen <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2009 3:47:29 PM Subject: Re: [service-orientated-architecture] Re: [ZapFlash] Preventing the Demise of the IT Department Hi Michael, Yes IT has also contributed to the problems in many organizations over they years. But the business doesn't HAVE TO discuss more thing with IT. We may think they should för a number of reasons, but they can continue creating problems like shadow IT and then suffer the consequences. That is an option too - and a option that numerous organizations have chosen year after year. This is has to do with how humans behave - not with doing thing the "best" way. What is the best way will depend on your perspective - and even when people have the same perspective they tend to disagree. I think we can agree that IT will have plenty of things to do in the years to come... /Herbjörn 2009/5/10, Michael Poulin <m3pou...@yahoo. com>: > Herbjörn, > > I think that IT tried many times to get out from the shadow... and failed. > The question is it is only IT fault? There is no doubts that IT has to do a > a lot, but somebody (?) leaves IT with no funds and resources... > > I agree with your questions to IT but think that Business has to start with > itself. For example, why Business asks about something today and not 3 month > before? Does Business really needs what it asks for or it is a 'wish' of a > business manager? Does the Business know/has estimated the consequences of > the change it asks for for the Business itself? > > IT will be in troubles all the time if it continues play a follower role. > Business has to start treating IT as a partner to capitalize on the IT > capabilities. This is not a theoretical statement; it directly correlates to > the speed of changes Business has to accommodate with the help of IT. It is > known fact that IT adopts changes 2-3 times slower than Business itself. > That is, IT has to be able to observe directions and coming changes 2-3 > times earlier than Business. It is impossible for a follower. > > Cloud does not help in this problem - changes in Cloud will go even slower > due to separate organisational ownership. So, I think that IT is second in > fault after Business. > > - Michael > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > From: Herbjörn Wilhelmsen <herbjorn.wilhelmsen @gmail.com> > To: service-orientated- architecture@ yahoogroups. com > Sent: Saturday, May 9, 2009 1:49:15 PM > Subject: Re: [service-orientated -architecture] Re: [ZapFlash] Preventing the > Demise of the IT Department > > > > > > When IT cannot provide suitable solutions fast enough business people will > get what they want elsewhere. This is true in our modern cloud- enabled > world, it was also true before the cloud was worth its name. > > After a while business people will start asking IT some questions: How can > we connect those two things together? Whatever happened to that information? > Who wrote this? How can we limit access to that information? How can we use > information in those three applications to make our decisions? How can we do > our job without waiting for 45 minutes? How can I share a piece of this > information with only those individuals that have this special relations to > us? > > There is a term for this: Shadow IT. IT that grew in the shadow of the "real > IT" - meaning that the IT department had no clue about it or at least no > control over it. Shadow IT came about long before the cloud. > > IT must be prepared to solve two kinds of tasks: Create new functionality. > Clean up the mess when business users shopped what they want and met with > big trouble. > > IT will have a lot to do in the years to come.... > > /Herbjörn > > > 2009/5/9 mikomatsumura <mikomatsumura@ yahoo.com> > > > > > I'm always amused by how naive some IT people are about the agendas of > various groups within the IT ecosystem. > > I think it's because IT people have a natural inclination to think of the > problem from a technical perspective- -and thus think of the problem as one > of (as Mr. Spock would say) "pure logic". > > Well, if you look at the large cost inefficiencies in IT, you can see how > individual risks are being mitigated while Enterprise risk is sometimes > increased--there are always these amazing and expensive large scale IT > failures within which individual CYA (Cover Your umm Butt) behavior > contributed significantly to raising the risk for the whole shooting match. > > In any event, I'm always amazed when internal IT people dont realize that > their jobs are likely to be wholesale outsourced to big IT services > companies/vendors and how little they understand the need to fight back. > > My 2 cents, > Miko > > > > > -- > Med vänliga hälsningar > Herbjörn Wilhelmsen > > > > > -- Med vänliga hälsningar Herbjörn Wilhelmsen
