1 2 3 4 ... 9 Previous Next

Articles

123 Posts tagged with the innovation tag

AnthonyJBoscoJr.jpg

 

One of the largest privately held companies in the United States, Day & Zimmermann, which has annual revenues of $2.2 billion, provides government agencies and 60 percent of the Fortune 500 with contingent employees and services in the following areas:  engineering and construction, security, information technology, office administration, architecture, maritime, reprographics, and munitions.

Handling the paperwork to pay 24,000 employees who work for 1,300 customers at 150 worldwide locations can stretch the muscles of most IT departments. However, Anthony J. Bosco, Jr., the CIO and a 28-year veteran of Day & Zimmermann, has managed to outpace his competitors by using technology to automate a lot of employee paperwork, to speed up cost accounting of projects to customers, and to collect monies from customers sooner.  Bosco also spearheaded a system consolidation using SAP, which dramatically reduced overhead and interest costs.  In fact, the Yoh Exchange, a portal Bosco's group built for one of the company's operating businesses, received an Impact Award in 2004 from the America's SAP Users' Group.

Enterpriseleadership.org recently sat down with Bosco to talk about how the e-commerce initiatives have driven the company forward, and how the company has become more agile and innovative.  Here's what he had to say.

EL: Can you describe some of the IT initiatives that are making your company more customer centric?


AJB: In 2003, we built the Yoh Exchange, a SAP-based portal that exploits the entire supply chain and supplier management process.  It allows customers to see what's happening with their existing workforce in terms of time, expense, recording, and approval. It also delivers specific content to the workforce that may be particular to projects they're working on, or the location they're working at. We've been doing well for many years.

We've automated, not only the transaction flow between the customer and us, but us and the management of a number of subsuppliers who provide talent to our customer. We act as a clearinghouse. With one push of a button, we now disseminate information, everything from invoices to talent requisitions to a number of sub suppliers. The subsuppliers can only see their information.  It is from our perspective all within the same portal so the customer can see the activity, and we can see the activity. We've taken the management of the entire contingent workforce out of the email box, and put it in a portal that gives customers end-to-end transparency based on who they are, and where they are in the staffing process.

EL: Can you be more specific about the role of the sub supplier?

AJB: Subsuppliers can be competitors of ours. Large companies have a very diverse and extensive contingent workforce. One of our lines of business manages that contingent workforce on behalf of our customers. About 20 years ago, many companies decided to go with vendor consolidation. The process involves one key vendor entering into contractual relationships with the other suppliers, and thus eliminated the need for customers to deal with many subcontracts and subcontractors. As the managing vendor, we deal directly with all of the administration of the other contingent labor vendors that supply our customers. By negotiating the price, we enable customers to control their spend.

EL: How have you automated the requirements and approval process for getting talent?

AJB: A major customer might have anywhere from a dozen to 50 other staffing companies competing to fill that role. When we first built the Yoh Exchange, we provided a consolidated invoice. However, the requirement process and the approval process were still decentralized. In fact, if a customer got a huge invoice, department managers often argued that a purchase order hadn't been augmented. We enhanced the portal to enter requirements gathering, candidate sourcing, both from our internal database as well as our subsuppliers. We also disseminate the appropriate information back to the individual department managers.

The most important thing is that we put the best people in front of our customers quickly, and we can start evaluating how well our vendors are performing. For example, vendor one provides a customer with three resumes within a day, and each resume meets 90 percent of the customer's requirements. Meanwhile, within two hours, vendor two provides 10 resumes, which meet 20 percent of the requirements. It's obvious who is the better supplier. We track all of those types of statistics so we know who's performing and who is just throwing out resumes to customers.

EL: Can you customize the Yoh Exchange portal for specific customers?

AJB: We can customize the customer's view of the portal to go beyond transaction processing to include services that empower the contingent workforce. For example, we supply contingent security guards for one of the largest petrochemical companies in the world.  Safety is the number one concern of the guards who staff the company's refineries, plants, and office buildings.  The guards use the portal to process all types of OSHA violations and other types of security incidents. Depending on the type of issue and the location, the information flashes in a real time across the dashboard of key security personnel.

In addition to transaction processing information, the NBC portal provides continent workers with content they might need on the job. It could include the signup to visit a particular studio or particular site, or orientation information for a new employee at a specific site. We can push that content out so when that employee goes to the site, he or she knows what to expect.

When NBC was covering the 2004 Olympics, people found the portal to be a good way to communicate with others working at different location. For some engineering and construction companies, we made certain equipment manuals, drawings, and collateral available through the portal. When an employee goes to work at that location, he or she doesn't have to search the Web or to look internally for specific documents they might need.

EL: Where are you getting this information from for the customizing of a customer's portal?

AJB: Some of the information comes from the customers. Some of it comes from work we've done, such as proprietary designs we've built. We might provide links to customer sites for particular collateral that exits. Again, people can find information on their own. If we know the content they need exists, we'll make it available. We believe that employees should have the tools to work more effectively and more successfully.

EL: Does the portal create more revenue for your company?

AJB: We don't typically charge extra for the portal service. It creates more revenue for us because it enables us to differentiate ourselves from our competitors. When you're competing for a job, you need to present good talent that meets the customer's requirements.  We can attract high quality employees who know they can be more successful here than the company down the street.

EL: What changes did you make in IT processes to drive innovation and agility?

AJB: We changed our IT structure from shared services, to decentralized services, back to shared services and now to selective shared services. Because of this process, we've become very mature with a time-tested IT infrastructure. We can retrofit a process very quickly. We can do what is best for our customers or our business during a particular time in the economy or a cycle of a business.

For example, we took the hands-off, forms-based recruiting process and created an online recruiting system where candidates submit their resumes online. As an applicant, you can have an account with us. A manager can see the status of how many jobs have come in, how many candidates have been screened, how many candidates are waiting for interviews, and where we are with background checks or drug screens. We've made this process more transparent.

EL: How are you driving cost out of the organization?


AJB: We don't have a manufacturing system where we can change a process and drive dramatic cost savings. As a service organization, we have to focus on transparency so people act more productive. Our business depends on speed and accuracy of information. We've been able to increase our asset turns by 30 percent where our number of days' sales outstanding has dropped by 35 percent or 40 percent. This decrease has resulted in major economic benefit. By eliminating some departments, we've been able to drive down the cost of our internal processing. We continue to tweak it.

The various improvements we've made have given everyone from business unit managers to project mangers the right kind of organizational transparency into what's happening in the organization. In fact, transparency into everything from an employee-related issue to a supplier matter, not only raises the level of accountability, but it enables us to mitigate issues before they get out of hand.

EL: How do you measure the effectiveness of your organization?


AJB: Our tools and the techniques have helped us to cut the time of customer projects, such as building a refinery. I have a whole set of tools and templates we use. Every internal project has a SharePoint site. We have certain templates we follow. We use project-based tools and techniques that have been around the construction industry for years. All of our projects have critical path methods.

I have a bet with some of our businesses that they can acquire a company similar to us, and we can implement a core ERP system, which goes from core financials to procure, in 60 days.

Our basic business metric is asset turns. We know that our technology enables us to build faster, and to provide more accurate information.  If you're accurate, you'll get paid faster. IT is part of our business strategy. Our IT metrics look at how much money we spend on innovation and front-facing issues versus how much it costs us to operate and keep the lights on. In 2008, we cracked the 55 percent level of how much goes for innovation and front-facing business support of the customer.  I won't be happy until we get to 60 percent. Business transaction processing has nothing to do with keeping the lights on. It's about creating customer value beyond what you think of for IT.

We spend less than one percent of the company's revenue on IT, but we have a 55 percent level of spend for innovation and the like. I challenge my CFO colleague to spend less on financial processing in the organization than I do for IT. We have an internal initiative where we look at process improvement as a way to exploit some of the features in our technology toolset to drive the CFO's cost down. There was a point in time where our costs as a percent of revenue were at par with one another. The CFO's costs have crept up and mine have gone down.

--

Additional Reading - Sponsor Link:
Managing the Business of IT: Maximizing the Power of Service Resource Planning, the Next Step in Business Service Management
Understanding ITIL® Service Portfolio Management and the Service Catalog

 

Elizabeth M. Ferrarini - She is a free-lance writer and IT consultant from Boston, Massachusetts. Reach her at elizabethferrarini@yahoo.com.

| More
1,101 Views 0 Comments 0 References Permalink Tags: article, best_practices, innovation, strategy

GaryCantrell.jpg When Gary Cantrell became chief information officer at Textron in early 2006, the company was almost three-quarters of the way through a six-year transformation of the information technology organization. Over the years, Textron had become an $11 billion global, multi-industry organization by acquiring aircraft companies and industrial firms. Some of the Textron brand companies include Cessna Aircraft, Lycoming Engines, and Bell Helicopter.

 

By leveraging formal best practices and governance, Cantrell and his team have continued to streamline the IT infrastructure across all of the Textron companies. He says, "We're doing things faster, better, cheaper."

 

Recently, enterpriseleadership.org spoke with Cantrell about how the IT organization is structured, what initiatives were key to the transformation, and what were some of the lessons learned from this process. Here's what he had to say:

 

EL: You've taken a kind of matrix approach to your IT organization. Can you describe it? 

 

GC: We have a federated model with nine divisional CIOs. They focus on delivering application services and support, but are also accountable for the infrastructure. Our shared services model for IT comprises six Centers of Expertise (COEs) including infrastructure, security, enterprise initiatives and strategic planning, collaboration, SAP, and PeopleSoft. Each COE has a leader. For example, the CTO who reports to me oversees the infrastructure COE. The collaboration COE is working on how we handle virtual teaming across all 400 Textron locations.

 

EL: How does your governance structure work?

 

GC: We have two ways to manage the governance process. Our information management council comprises the nine CIOs, all of the COE leaders, and me. This group provides our strategic direction, the corporate business unit alignment, and then our integrated planning activities. Below this group, we have started to organize tactical review boards staffed by people who report to the COE leaders. For example, we have an architecture review board.

 

The Textron executive management committee has five members, including the CEO. Below that, there is the Textron Transformation Leadership Team, which consists of all the business unit presidents. All IT capital issues, such as deploying SAP, would go through the TLT. If something affects the business, I might go to the executive management committee. I don't have to go to either committee for everything that happens in IT. Neither one of these committees works on IT issues independent of my involvement.

 

EL: Textron has undergone a six-year transformation in process improvements. Can you talk about some of the key IT process improvements?

 

GC: We call our transformation process "systems modernization." Like a lot of companies, we've acquired several companies over the years, nine in our case. SAP has been a big part of our IT modernization.

 

We're trying to clean up the portfolio of acquisitions. Six Sigma has helped us to reduce the variation in our environment, and Lean has helped us to move a little faster. That's where Lean fits in. You still have to deliver high quality and value, but you have to find innovative ways to do it.

 

EL: Can you describe the specific areas of IT modernization where these best practices have helped you improve processes?

 

GC: Using Lean processes and with the help of an outsourcer, CSC, we restructured nine different infrastructures and architectures where we took out dozens of data centers. We also restructured our email service from 150 servers in 70 locations to 40 servers in six locations. Now we have the redundancy and backup capabilities we need on the network backbone.

 

We also put in a new manufacturing system across the enterprise. However, some of our business units use specific applications that complement the manufacturing system. We leverage these applications across the enterprise also.

 

EL: Do you use the IT Infrastructure Library, CobIT, or the Balanced Scorecard?

 

GC: We've tied use of the Balanced Scorecards in with our Six Sigma gold deployment that we used in the beginning of the IT modernization. We're now working on integrating CobIT into some of our process maturity initiatives with Six Sigma. We've pretty much standardized on a plan for using CobIT for the next few years. We have a little bit more work to do on our tactical action plan.

 

Some of the business units have become very advanced CobIT users. We used the Lean manufacturing philosophy of Shigeo Shingo for one assessment we went through. In some cases, we've gone from silver to gold; in other areas, we're at the basic level moving to bronze. We're working aggressively on having a standard implementation methodology and assessment methodology for driving our maturity. Over the next 24 months, we will get the horses all lined up and get the enterprise on the same level footing.

 

EL: What kind of certification levels do you have in place?

 

GC: Right now we have two Six Sigma black belts for every 100 people on our IT staff and on the CSC staff. The ratio of Six Sigma black belts is higher on the corporate side. This year, we're pushing to have 60 percent of the first two levels of IT professionals green-belt certified in Six Sigma. The goal for 2008 is to have 100 percent of these folks green-belt certified.

 

EL: You have been quoted in the trade press saying that Textron's IT strategy resembles General Electric's IT strategy. How are they similar?

 

GC: When I was CIO of Honeywell, I had some first-hand exposure to GE. That company has a core corporate IT function similar to our COEs. GE's IT organization also has a fairly strong presence in their business units similar to us.

 

On the other hand, GE is larger than us and its business units have more scale that ours. We have a more standardized, rigid infrastructure, which provides us speed and efficiency and a lot of leverage. Also, our architecture review process is more rigorous that GE's. We try to do as much enterprise standardization as we can.

 

EL: Do you think IT can be run as a business?

 

GC: We had these conversations at both Honeywell and Bank of America. As far as I'm concerned, IT is a support function, enabling the business units to generate revenue and generate support for their customer. If you're an IT provider such as CSC or IBM, then you can argue about running IT as a business. Internally, IT is a cost center. It might not be a core competency in each business unit, but it's critical to support the work of each business unit. To this end, my charter is very simple -- help give each business unit a competitive edge and to achieve customer satisfaction.

 

EL: What do you get out of venues such as the CIO Executive Summit?

 

GC: Venues such as the by-invitation-only CIO Executive Summit give me tremendous network opportunities. That's the most important thing that comes out of it. Second, I get to discuss common challenges or technologies or industry threats. The most common discussion among peers deals with the latest virus threat on the horizon. These venues also expose you to lot of new IT talent or new suppliers. If you select your venues wisely, you can spend several days looking at a lot of new technologies. This process eliminates the need to have vendors parade through your office.

 

EL: You spoke at the Hackett Group's 17th Annual Best Practices Conference. What did you have to tell attendees?

 

GC: We've used the Hackett Group to benchmark some of the processes we are doing, as well as to assess how well we are doing with some of our best practices. This year I spoke about Textron's IT transformation and the best practices we deployed. The group of 100 really wanted to know what best practices worked and what best practices didn't work in our environment and why.

 

EL: So what things didn't work?

 

GC: We had a strong business case for many of the things we planned to do. Communication seems to be fairly robust. On the other hand, we grossly underestimated employees'

resistance to change. We had to do a lot of front-end work on change management. If I had to do things over again, I would've put more emphasis on this.

 

EL: What best practices did you find to be ineffective?

 

GC: Our change management process, which is based on Six Sigma, worked very well. This seven-phase-gate approach requires you to define everything from business case to stakeholder involvement. It worked well for the high-risk, high-changes areas. When it came to routine activities, it didn't hold up for us. That's where we could've done a better job of selecting a better methodology.

 

EL: One of your IT teams is looking at virtual teaming. What are your thoughts about 3D virtual worlds such as Second Life?

 

GC: I'm not sure what to do with it. It's not based on reality in the first place. If someone can help me understand the applications for Second Life, I'd be glad to listen.

 

EL: You were one of the nominees for the Information Security Executive Award from this year’s Northeast division of the ISE. What initiative did you get nominated for?

 

GC: We've had a comprehensive push on consolidating perimeter security, along with improving other areas of security. The nine acquisitions Textron made presented IT with the challenge of how to handle disparate approaches to security. We also focused on how to extend secure wireless connectivity to all of our Textron locations. Here, we sewed up all of the areas for possible data loss. Next, we overwhelmed our disaster recovery and business continuity programs to focus on our consolidated data centers. We also carried out a program to educate employees about security.

--

Additional Reading - Sponsor Links:
Unlock the Hidden IT Opportunities in Troubled Economic Times
Pink Elephant and BMC Software Survey Results: ITIL® Best Practices in SAP Environments

 

Elizabeth M. Ferrarini is a writer from Boston, Massachusetts. Reach her at elizabethferrarini@yahoo.com.

| More
1,093 Views 0 Comments 0 References Permalink Tags: article, best_practices, governance, innovation, it_management, security

MarkDLutchen.jpg

 

Mark D. Lutchen knows what it takes to unleash the full potential of IT so that organizations can derive the maximum benefit from it. As the former global CIO at PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), one of the largest professional business services firms in the world, Lutchen oversaw an IT organization of more than 2,500 professionals serving more than 120,000 employees in 144 countries. Today, Lutchen is a senior practices partner in PwC's IT Effectiveness Practice, where he helps clients get more value from their IT investments and their IT strategies. In 2004, he wrote Managing IT as a Business - A Survival Guide for CEO's. Many graduate school professors have used his book in MBA courses on IT management. Lutchen says that the basics IT management principles in his book haven't changed much since it was published.

 

Enterpriseleadership.org recently spoke with Lutchen, for the second time, to discuss what disciplines CIOs must put in place if they want to run IT like a successful company. This is what he had to say:

EL: Why did you write the book in the first place?

 

ML: I wrote the book because the IT clients I worked with seemed to have similar issues. It became clear that technology wasn't the problem. Instead, it was about managing IT and being disciplined about doing it. If you look at the failures that have occurred, you start to see some of the patterns. People have not instilled within IT the disciplines we use in other parts of the business. If you're a CIO running a billion dollar IT organization or even a half billion IT organization, that's the equivalent of running a business. To this end, you need all of the kinds of things in place for running a business. The book was to put this idea into context.

 

EL: Why did you decide to title the book as A Survival Guide for CEOs and not CIOs?

 

ML: The book is really for the C-level executives. I wrote it from a business orientation. If you look at the role of the CIO five years to 10 years from now, you'll find the CIO of a major corporation acting more like a CEO of a business around IT.

 

Many of the IT books that have come out in the past two years have redefined the CIOs role. That's what I did, except I redefined the CIO role as that of a CEO. I also wanted other people in the business, such as the CFO and the COO, to understand what happens in an IT organization from both the IT and the business side.

 

EL: Since your book came out, have CIOs become better at developing IT strategies that meld with the overall corporate strategy, as well as the needs of the business units? If not, how can they be doing a better job.

 

ML: Some of them have been trying to do that. Upfront in the book I address the issue that IT doesn't provide the one process or the one tool to take care of everything. Instead, if you want to do things right, you always need to be working on about 13 or 14 competency areas. All of competencies have to be at the right level for your organization. If you have the world's greatest technology but you don't have the ability to motivate your skilled people, then you're going to have an imbalance, and the technology won't perform the way you want it to. On the other hand, you have the technology spirit and the people with the right skills but you don't interact with the business units effectively. In other words, you don't set goals, prioritize things, or make sure you're linked to the business strategy. If this's the case, the technology you have, the way you put it in, and the skills you use to support it might be completely off target for the business units.

 

EL: So how do you get all of this to balance?

 

ML: People have had a desire to do it, but they have to work hard at it. In some cases, it requires ripping up what's there, and dramatically changing the culture. It also requires having a good base of quality and credible data, visibility, and transparency around what's going in the IT organization. You really need to look at the how the IT spend and IT performance support the business. People tend to work on parts of the problem. They really need a program to work on all the parts. It never ends. People have tried to make progress. It's been expensive.

 

The tighter money becomes, people begin to say that they don't need the disciplines they put in place, and thus start to cut costs here. For example, they might say no to rolling out an IT dashboard because they have the perception that it won't add value. Of course, an IT dashboard will add value much the same way, as you need a CFO to run a billion dollar business.

 

EL: What are some of the effective criteria processes C-level executives, including CIOs, and other business leaders or other constituents should consider in deciding on the mix of IT investments?

 

ML: People can't look at these as just IT investments or just IT spend. The companies making good progress have begun to understand that other than certain specific things, such as infrastructure, these aren't IT projects any more, but business projects with strong IT components. You need to approach things differently by saying that we, as an organization, need to decide on the mix of the total investments. Before you start making any decisions, you need a set of criteria for determining if the investment is a mandatory item, or if it is a regulatory item. Once you get that criteria agreed with by the business unit, then you can start to define the IT components, and to lay them in place. You also need to have a business measurement.

 

If the project has many business components and one IT component, then the business should unit own the entire project. Once you have structured the process and have agreed upon the criteria, you can start to have an intelligent discussion about which business projects must take priority over others. This discussion drives the platform of the portfolio of business projects you're going to do, and defines the IT components needed to support each project.

 

When the project gets going, you need to have a way to assess the results and to measure the benefits. At certain intervals, you need to stop and to make sure you can meet the targeted benefits. You can't wait a year or two years to see if there is any benefit. If you can't reach the first set of benefits in the first time interval, why would you let the project go forward?

 

EL: Where are companies falling short in finding IT dollars to invest in areas such as innovation?

 

ML: Companies that understand the activities what drive their costs, and make the effort to reduce unnecessary costs are more prone to have a mix of IT investments. On the other hand, if a company understands that 90 percent of its spend is tied up in legacy systems, then it's playing a zero sum game by having to spend money on maintaining these systems. If the company doesn't shift gears, it's costs will increase. You can't stand still. The older your systems get, the more they cost to maintain. People view this spend as a water faucet that they can turn off and turn on as needed. This saw tooth approach adds to the capital expenditure.

 

You need to understand how you spend capital to reduce costs to keep rolling forward. That translates to how do I free up cash if I'm not going to get any more money to be able to fund innovation? It gets back to perception. Do you have a group that just focuses on innovative things or innovative uses of technology for the rest of the organization or within anyone business unit? Many people view that has a luxury. It's a necessity. You don't always have to be on the leading edge, but you have to be on the edge of certain things, and to understand how these things would help the business to do something better, or to help the IT organization lowers its costs.

 

EL: What are the hot IT areas your clients are investing?

 

ML: This's an area where I'm going to tread lightly on. If you think back over the last couple of years, everyone was pushing service-oriented architecture. It was perceived as a major breakthrough in Web-based delivery of IT services. I haven't seen much about that lately. I lot of it was hype as opposed to the basic set of blocking and tackling you need when a new technology comes out.

 

Several years ago, we saw many companies heavily investing in customer relationship management systems. CRM had the same problems ERP had. People charged ahead and put in very large, global standardized systems to accomplish some objective. Many of these systems failed because of other factors. Some people, still to this day. haven't dealt with certain infrastructure issues that could remove large pockets of costs and make things more efficient. Using a tool as simple as virtual asset management, you can cut costs and improve efficiencies. If you don't understand your asset base, how are you going to understand how to move within a different direction?

 

Within the business itself, the use of things on the Internet and the Web have reached a certain plateau. We're doing more wireless activities. To this end, we need to have better wireless security and a better way to keep these wireless systems running.

 

EL: How should a company go about seeing if it can benefit from a new technology?

 

ML: You need to work with parties that help you to experiment with new technologies so you can evaluate how you can apply them in your organization.

 

Let me turn back the clock to 1995 when PriceWaterhouseCoopers had 100,000 of PCs and 1,000s of employees traveling all over the world each day. These people used to connect to the office via phone lines to get their Lotus Notes email. Broadband didn't exist at the time. Their calls would go from a server to a modem bank in the office. This service was expensive and the security wasn't where it should've been.

 

We decided to look at how we could provide connectivity that wouldn't drop calls, would require just a local call or a local connection, and would provide more security. We essentially laid the groundwork for our virtual private network. We asked MCI if it would work with us to develop the VPN. We needed a partner to help us to keep our costs in line. Our need to reduce the costs and to improve the security drove this innovation.

 

Today VPN is a staple. There are many other things like that out there. We couldn't have done that ourselves. The communications companies didn't understand what we were talking about when we first started speaking with them. You have to work collaboratively with other parties to get some of that innovation going.

--

Additional Reading - Sponsor Link:
Unlock the Hidden IT Opportunities in Troubled Economic Times


Author: Elizabeth M. Ferrarini - She is a technology writer from Boston, Massachusetts. Reach her at elizabethferrarini@yahoo.com.

| More
863 Views 0 Comments 0 References Permalink Tags: article, innovation, it_investment, it_strategy

No one can deny that Jerry McElhatton has mastered many successful IT moments. During his 10 years as CIO with MasterCard International, McElhatton spearheaded a five-year, $160 million upgrade of the company's global processing system into one unified, single messaging standard. Even more impressively, he delivered this enormous undertaking on time and within the budget. The systems support more than 15,000 customers worldwide, handle more than 40 million transactions daily worth more than $1 trillion annually, and are linked to 800,000 ATMs globally. Also during his tenure, McElhatton oversaw the building of a $135 million, 52-acre campus for MasterCard's primary IT team.

 

In March 2005, McElhatton retired from MasterCard, where he had anywhere from 1,600 to 3,200 IT professionals under his leadership. Enterpriseleadership.org recently spoke with McElhatton about what his experiences managing an IT organization that could make or break MasterCard's success.

 

EL: What are you doing now?

 

JM: After 10 years with MasterCard, I retired to start Virtual Resources, a company that does consulting for organizations in the payments area, and for some architectural engineering firms. I also sit on the boards of directors for several technology companies, where I set up advisory committees to provide feedback on the company's products and examine what competitors are doing. I spend my free time tinkering with a massive model training collection, which my four grandchildren love. I almost forgot: I write articles for business publications, such as CIO Decisions.

 

EL: Now that you've retired from MasterCard, would you advise other near-retirement CIO's to go off and keep their hands in IT?

 

JM: Why not? I'm enjoying helping companies understand the cost benefits of technology. I've successfully gotten people to look at their cost structures, to put some best practices in place, to help them evaluate some future cost-effective architectures, and to get them to be more responsive to business needs.

 

EL: Looking back at the technology overhaul you implemented at MasterCard, what things really made it happen?

 

JM: The credit goes to my great team. The company had some very mature systems that did a nice job, but it took too long to bring new products to market. New and better technology could simplify things and reduce our infrastructure costs. My assignment included restructuring, rewriting, and redeveloping the core systems. It took five years of changes to give those systems the scalability and flexibility they needed to meet best business practices. We completed that project within the assigned budget and ahead of schedule.

 

EL: What were some of the best practices that were put into place?

 

JM: We put reusable systems code and architectures in place. When it came to databases and data warehousing, we made sure we captured the data correctly and could easily segment it. Our key members had to analyze this data to help them build their marketshare.

 

At MasterCard, I had the unique position of being responsible for all technology, all IT operations, and both IT security and physical security. Fraud is a big problem in the credit card business. For example, I oversaw all of the risk systems that enabled our members to report fraud to us so we could stop it. We gave them information to make them aware of certain types of fraud that were taking place or had the potential to take place. We spent a lot of time reworking those systems. We put together things that would give us an advantage in identifying some characteristics and traits of fraud.

 

JM: Yes, the entire security team reported to me. I was also responsible for the access control side of physical security. The entire team that guarded our campus buildings reported to me. These folks did a lot of investigations internally to make sure employees did not access unauthorized areas.

 

EL: What was the business model for MasterCard when you were there?

 

JM: Simply, we worked very closely with the business units to help them define priorities, to help them move marketshare and generate income, and to help them reduce operational expenses. As a member of the operations and policy committee, I looked at how we could leverage technology to get the biggest payback.

 

EL: What was your IT model at MasterCard?

 

JM: MasterCard's technology generates a significant amount of revenue on what's called a "quick charge." We have charges for authorization, clearing, settlement, and also charges on our risk systems. On some of the systems, we had profit and loss residing with the operations and technology group. And on the others, we had direct chargeback to the marketing group for the cost and expense of generating that revenue.

 

EL: Did you folks use anything like Six Sigma?

 

JM: It's an interesting concept that has to do with the definition of root cause analysis and definition of quality standards. Eighty-five percent of the program we used consisted of Six Sigma and the benefits associated with it.

We measured everything, and we drove staffing and quality off those numbers. In our system, we posted implementation reviews, and whenever we had a problem, we did a root cause analysis to determine where to patch the problem. So, our systems got stronger over time. The performance of MasterCard as a company became outstanding because of the work we'd done to engineer the system.

 

EL: How successful were you in combating fraud?

 

JM: It was very good. We did a lot of proactive things to put people on notice. In the credit card business, fraud often happens at the merchant location and at some of the processors. If someone doesn't follow the rules, you might do routine audits, but an IT security audit is only good for the day you do it. Someone can make a change the next day, and thus, put a hole in the system. You might not catch it until you do another audit, or you might not catch it until you have a problem. We did a lot of proactive work to identify potential fraud. We not only used our systems, but we had cooperative efforts with others, and we used their systems, so we had a significant reduction in fraud.

 

EL: Do you have any comments on Oracle's recent buying spree?

 

JM: On the one hand, Oracle will have a strong product offering. On the other hand, as with all technology mergers/acquisitions, IT departments no longer have a lot of product choice; they'll lose their ability to negotiate on price, and service levels.

 

EL: Are you writing a book?

 

JM: I've thought about it. My working title is, 101 Easy Lessons Learned the Hard Way. IT folks today have similar sets of issues and problems as their counterparts five or 10 years ago. Yes, there might be more flexible ways to solve these problems, but every generation seems to have to touch the top of the stove to see if it's hot. I have a lot of advice to give about how to avoid some of the mistakes other IT people have made in the past.

 

EL: What's the biggest mistake people make in climbing the career ladder?

 

JM: IT people are smart people, but they don't often have a sense of how to budget for projects and how to meet the deliverables. IT people often make things harder than they really are.

 

At MasterCard, we learned how to eat a big marshmallow without getting sick. The answer is a bite at a time. We broke down projects into very significant deliverables that we measured and monitored.

 

IT people have to first learn to commit to a project, and then stick to the schedule, the budget, and the deliverables.

 

EL: Do you think the CIO role should be rotational?

 

JM: Some companies might be better off if they went in that direction. If someone has been a CIO for 10 or more years, then that person might be stuck in that role. Let me tell you what helped me at MasterCard. For example, at one time I was assigned to run the process change team. We took more than $100 million out of the systems by leveraging technology, and leveraging people's skillsets. This experience helped me to grow closer to the business units. I had some other great business opportunities.

 

If you want to cultivate stronger IT professionals, then assign them both business problems and technology problems. This process enables IT professionals to gain a more realistic view of how the business uses technology, and how they should use it to solve problems.

 

EL: Have you read Nicholas Carr's book, Does IT Matter, or his Harvard Business Review article, "IT Doesn't Matter?"

 

JM: I've read the book. I've been in businesses where technology has made a big difference. At MasterCard, we leveraged a lot of technology to get good business results. Carr perceives technology as a commodity -- spending a lot of money on IT doesn't necessarily translate to creating competitive differential. For example, if an IT department is late with deliverables, then the company can loose its competitive edge. At MasterCard, we won a lot of new business by being the first to deliver new, working systems, and to continue to enhance those systems. The other guys had a hard time catching up with us.

--

 

Additional Reading - Sponsor Link:
Managing the Business of IT: Maximizing the Power of Service Resource Planning, the Next Step in Business Service Management

 

Elizabeth M. Ferrarini is an IT consultant from Boston, Massachusetts. Reach her at elizabethferrarini@yahoo.com.

| More
1,151 Views 0 Comments 0 References Permalink Tags: article, best_practices, compliance, governance, innovation, it_management, itil, open_source, security, strategy

LemLasher.jpg

 

When Dan Hill, CIO of Exelon Energy, the $14 billion owner of two of the nation's largest electricity utilities, decided to outsource a major project, he evaluated several companies and then awarded the contract to Computer Sciences Corp. (CSC), a global $16 billion IT services company with more than 90,000 employees in 80 countries. According to Lem Lasher, CSC's chief innovation officer and president of CSC's global business solutions, says that Hill was impressed with depth and breathe of CSC's Office of Innovation. "Hill said that's what played a key role in earning his business.

 

Lasher has every right to blow his horn about CSC's Office of Innovation. In 2007, the American Productivity and Quality Center (APQC), the organization that sponsors the Malcolm Baldridge Award, did an independent benchmarking study of companies with programs to embed innovation within the organization. Lasher says, "Our competitors, such as IBM, Accenture, and Hewlett-Packard, funded the study. We didn't." After reviewing CSC's innovation programs on the company's Web site, APQC interviewed Lasher and his team, and then audited all of CSC's innovation programs. As a result, CSC received one of APQC's five Best Practice awards. The other winners included four product companies -- HP Printing and Imaging, Efficon Endosurgery, Boston Scientific, and Air Products. He says, "We were the only professional services firm to get this award. It has given us a huge competitive advantage."

 

Recently, enterpriseleadership.org sat down with Lasher to discuss the many programs that comprise CSC's Office of Innovation. Here is what he had to say:

 

EL. Why did CSC decide to create an  Office of Innovation?

 

LL. We needed to do something different about the way we operated. We wanted to bring about a change that would reflect an appropriate innovation agenda for our customers and for the business. We began by reorganizing a number of activities and programs we ran across the enterprise. In April 2005, we set up the Office of Innovation to establish an explicit global innovation agenda within the company from idea generation through solutions development. The Office of Innovation functions as a funded corporate department which runs with unified governance and management structure responsible for CSC's innovation agenda to run the business.

 

EL. How does your office carry out thought-leadership programs  for your customers?

 

LL. The Leading Edge Forum is the Office of Innovation's front-end piece where we do our basic research and development for thought leadership and business idea. This forum has two program activities. The executive program provides the thought leadership agenda for CIOs. The technology programs address socialization of intellectual capital rewards and recognition among the employees, and engagements with our customers.

 

EL. What do your customers' CIOs get from your innovation  program?

 

LL. We'll create an account innovation program that we tailor to each customer. We have a formal taxonomy or a formal way of setting up those programs that includes agreed upon definition of innovation, objectives, governance, processes we'll put in place, funding mechanisms, commercial terms and conditions, and underlying technologies and tools that support that. Each program is unique and specific to each customer. My team spends much time with customers, designing account innovation programs that an account team runs and my office supports.

EL. Does your  office have any type of a research component?

 

LL. Our internal research network comprises a group of individuals who do market-based analysis and research for CSC employees. We might use this group's findings for making investment decisions, for making offshore location decisions, for doing competitive analysis, and for investigating various types of technologies and products. This global research covers all of CSC's business lines and verticals.

EL. How do get  ideas flowing from both employees and customers?

 

LL. The Office of Innovation program called CSC Collective Intelligence runs ideation campaigns for customers, for employees, for internal organizational challenges, or for specific account issues we have. We have a good record running these programs.

EL. Can you explain how an  ideation campaign works?

 

LL. We view ideation as something done in a short-term, project setting that focuses on solving a particular problem. We call this activity a campaign. We'll identify a particular problem we want to solve, and then we'll create the appropriate executive ownership, the appropriate executive governance, and the taxonomy for triage of the ideas that come in. Each campaign ends with a solution that customers or employees can carry out. We do measure the results of the campaign. It's not a standing suggestion box.

EL. Can you discuss the  strategic aspect of your office?

 

LL. Our Global Service Offerings (GSO) group runs the programs office for the development of all of our global strategic offerings. This office abstracts the taxonomy, and maintains the repository, the portfolio, the business case, and all of the governance associated with how we make strategic investments in service offerings across the business.

 

The people who run these programs engage directly with customers for validation of concepts, for explaining to them what those propositions are and for helping them to shape those concepts around particular solutions.

 

EL. Does your office have specific  programs that leverage intellectual capital?

 

LL. The Intellectual Capital and Knowledge Management program supports all of the CSC communities by harvesting, storing, and leveraging intellectual capital. This intellectual capital has been explicitly articulated and put in the repository. This program also provides technical support for groups of individuals who want to form communities across the business.

 

EL. How do you handle intellectual property for things that you  develop in conjunction with a customer?

 

LL. We regard intellectual property as intellectual capital that we've protected in such as way to make it proprietary to CSC. As a services company, we aren't interested in acquiring intellectual property for patents. We have flexibility on the terms and conditions of how we would develop and use IT. We'll go through an analysis that says this particular intellectual capital warrants this level of protection and this position. If we've invested in something that would give us a competitive edge in the marketplace, we might be prone to get a patent on it. If we did something with a customer, we'd negotiate on a case-by-base basis about the ownership of the intellectual property.

 

EL. I haven't heard you mention breakthrough innovations or disruptive innovation. How much emphasis does your office put on them?

 

LL. We don't focus on breakthrough innovations, nor do we have an efficient way of managing them. Those types of innovations usually happen in a product company. We look at something we call the amplitude of innovation. It's the functional intersect between something being new to the company or being new to the marketplace. We look at the incremental and the adjacent innovations that result in leveraging a way to do something different to provide more economic value to our customers. If we came up with something we consider breakthrough, we'd probably figure out what to do with it. We're better off focusing our innovation activities on incremental and adjacent.

 

EL. What types of  centers of excellence programs do you have?

 

LL. We refer to these programs as socialization of intellectual capital. We have centers of excellence and we have innovation centers. The 18 centers of excellence all have physical locations, have a dedicated team, and have a commitment from a group president to fund the center's activities for up to two years. Each center may or not focus on innovation, but each center has deep domain expertise. My office certifies each center of excellence as a way of establishing its importance to constituents within and outside the organizations. Each center's work must undergo a peer review process.

 

My office also runs some of the innovation centers in India, in Australia, and in the UK. The business groups supports the innovation center in Sweden and the U.S. We support those programs. These facilities do sandbox prototyping, workshops, and solutions demonstration showing vendor's products and technologies. Each center varies according to its geographical region. The centers share resources and communicate with each other. My office leverages the intellectual capital these centers provide. The centers run under their own governance structure.

 

EL. How do you reward employees  for innovation?

 

LL. Our award programs run the gamut from an at'a boy to an at'a boy with stock options. Specifically, we have a paper's program, a grant's program, and the Chairman's Award for Excellence.

 

Employees can submit their original papers to the paper's program. If the peer reviewers come across an outstanding paper, it will get an award at the end of the year.

 

The grant's program funds both directed and non-directed work. We fund between 10 to 12 projects each year. For directed projects, we tell employees what we want them to research. In contrast, with undirected projects, employees tell us what they think they should research. Both types of research are subject to peer review. Although the grant's program doesn't offer any monetary reward, employees completing this program receive more recognition than those receiving a paper's program award.

 

The Chairman's award is the highest award employees can get for innovation. It's also the hardest award to win. Each year, the global division presidents nominate their respective candidates who've done an outstanding job on a project. Keep in mind, we do more than 10,000 projects a year. We narrow down between 100 to 150 nominations to 12 finalists, and then down to the six winners. The winners get stock options in CSC, and an invitation to a senior management award's meeting. We make up videos and issue employees a crystal glass reward.

 

EL. Do you also extend your office to academics?

 

LL. Our Leading Edge Forum manages relationships with professors at about 20 universities around the world. We look for universities where we can work with the leading professor whose innovative research is in an area germane to our business. We engage with those professors either on a contractual or on a retainer basis to do research work with us. We'll frequently rotate the list of universities we work with

 

EL. How do your work with David McCue, the CIO, to make IT  investment decisions?

 

LL. My office's GSO group has a portfolio governance board that oversees the investment decisions we made. McCue is a member of this board. He is current with all the decisions we've made. He uses that as input for the kinds of things that make sense for him to do. He is a non-voting member of the board, but he sits on the board. The other people on the board include all of the global group presidents. They make the overall decisions for investments. The board of directors isn't involved at the service offering level. I negotiate a budget with the CEO, and have funds made available to me. I'm the custodian for this governance board. We vote that money in. Democracy rules! Each group president has one vote. We meet each month to discuss where we need to make investments and approve funding for some of them.

 

My office monitors and tracks those investments. For example, we track the revenue that comes in from the investments. We know what our rate of return is on investments.

 

We have some tools. I can't say off the top of  my head what they are, but they aren't Excel spreadsheets.

 

Author: Elizabeth M. Ferrarini - She is a technology writer  from Boston, Massachusetts. Reach her at elizabethferrarini@yahoo.com.

| More
1,053 Views 0 Comments 0 References Permalink Tags: article, centers_of_excellence, innovation, intellectual_capital, intellectual_property, it_investments

DavidMcCune.jpg

 

In 2003, Zurich Financial Services, one of the world's largest insurance companies, decided to transform its highly centralized IT organization to a highly decentralized managed by a small internal staff and a major outsourcing partner. After evaluating several global outsourcing companies, Zurich Financial signed a $1.3 billion outsourcing agreement with Computer Sciences Corporation or CSC.


Many large, global companies, such as Zurich Financial and Chrysler, have turned to CSC for innovation IT services in one of these areas: outsourcing, systems integration, and consulting. Founded in 1960, CSC has more than 90,000 employees in 80 countries and annual revenues exceeding $16 billion. CSC's service span most vertical industry segments and many horizontal lines of IT services, such as outsourcing and supply chain.

 

Recently, David McCue, CSCs's CIO and vice president, got named to Computerworld's 2008 Premier 200 IT leaders list, a carefully selected group of IT executives selected for their leadership capabilities in managing and executing IT strategies. enterpriseleadership.org recently said down with McCue to learn more about how he makes technology decisions that affect both the internal IT organization but also customers. Here's what he had to say:

 

EL. Can you provide an  overview of your IT organization, especially what makes it unique?

 

DM. Our IT organization combines a blend of a federated model and a centralized model to achieve the best results for the business. Each of the main revenue areas has an embedded technology staff CIO. These staff CIOs represent the requirements of that particular area, such as a vertical like manufacturing or a horizontal like applications. The aspects of our business that fall into a central shared services type of model include, email, security, content for repositories, and portals. We use SAP to handle all of our financials.

 

I treat things that we do for ourselves, such as payroll, messaging, collaboration, customer relations management, financials, and business analytics, as if we were an outsourcer account with CSC global. We have about 1,250 people assigned to the CSC IT account. We're one of the largest IT customers of CSC global, the vendor.

 

Our CIO council comprises the embedded CIOs, along with some individuals. For example, I've appointed people to global HR, supply chain, and financial functions. Each area of the business has an advocate. The council does planning, strategy, and final review of policies. Some of the subcommittees will review policies in certain areas and report any changes to the CIO council.

 

EL. Does the company's  outsourcing model complement your IT business model?

 

DM. We think of the CSC IT account as having several serious buckets of activities. The account needs these items. For example, we use SAP instead of Oracle. If I need Oracle expertise, then I'll leverage the capabilities of CSC, the outsourcing vendor. I'm the 800 gorilla customer. We have buckets of activities or commodities, which the entire business equally shared. I have a leverage capability that wouldn't be available if we didn't have our business model for IT. Every time we win an outsourcing deal, we gain a certain amount of infrastructure. We then rationalize and normalize it through the outsourcing process. We can re-deploy this excess infrastructure to other accounts that can use it. My cash expenditure doesn't actually represent the actual value of total services that I own, control, and direct. Leveraging what we've acquired changes our cash expenditure in terms of where it shows up on the balance sheet.

 

EL. Can you describe how your governance process  goes works for getting projects and investments approved?

 

DM. I sit on two sides of the tables. I report to the chairman and attend his staff meetings. My peers include group revenue-unit presidents and the corporate vice presidents for each of the major functions. Our program governance board comprises the group president and me. We decide the research and development investments for the business. We take a blended approach toward governance.

 

From an axiom viewpoint, I put forward the business case, the strategic direction, and evaluation. Our go-to-market revenue decisions don't, in themselves, dictate internal choice and direction. A decision that we make for ourselves, such as a business case to go in a certain direction, has to make sense and pass hard dollar and soft benefits hurdles on its own, independent of alliances, partnerships, and go to market revenues. If selling something is the only reason for the business case, then it fails. If I have multiple choice business case decisions to make, I'll select the ones that can stand on their own, that have good relationships, and that have revenue potential. At the end of the day, we go to market, given the nature of our business, with all of the major players.

 

EL. How do you decide  what technologies would be good fit for IT?

 

DM. Just because I run SAP, doesn't mean that I don't have a robust Oracle practice. I have to do what makes sense for our IT our account and the best practices. I can't possibly run everything. I can't run SAP for financials and Oracle for payroll. The same thing happens when we go to market. We might have multiple solutions within similar areas based upon the intellectual property needs, and the unique requirements and specifics of different verticals. For example, processing insurance claims has some similarities to handling returns in a manufacturing environment. However, the products used in each of these areas have some practical differences. Everyone would like to run every solution. That's not practical! Because we'd incur additional excessive expenses, it wouldn't be in the best interests of our stockholders to run every solution.

 

EL. How much of a say do  stakeholders have in how you make technology investment decisions?

 

DM. Stakeholders always have had the ability to voice their views. We have command and control and there's direction. Any time we make a decision between choices, we can't always achieve a win-win scenario for everyone. Having a hybrid or central and federated model helps us to ensure a dialog to talk about all of the cards on the table. Our common services have to scale globally to provide attractive economies.

 

We do the traditional set of roadmaps for a specific number of years, and we review those roadmaps routinely to look at different technologies, best practices, or changes in functional requirements.

 

Those embedded individuals represent their stakeholders' internal needs, as they're appropriate to the larger revenue customer base. We don't do business in isolation. We know what we're doing in the market. I sit on the research and development governance board. I look at the business cases for things we're developing as potential go-to-market solutions. I work closely with our general counsel and with the president of our global marketing organization. We take all of that into account and bring that into the mix.

 

EL. Have you automated your governance and your  portfolio process for investments?

 

DM. I don't run a single portfolio project management dashboard type of product. We've automated the reporting of variety aspects of that through different schedules. One schedule lists projects for each fiscal year. Each project goes through a multiple cycle process. If a project passes the business case review, we then release the funds to start that project. Each project has various reporting milestones. These milestones differ in their degree of specificity, timeliness and risk tolerance. The sponsoring business units do quarterly reviews and reporting of the overall portfolio of the projects. Monthly monitoring and reporting at the application or infrastructure level also supplement these quarterly project reviews.

 

EL. How does CSC handle  innovation?

 

DM. We have a corporate office of innovation, which expands all aspects of CSC's environment, including go-to-market strategies. It has a concentrated, managed set of projects, programs, and strategies. It runs a leading-edge forum, conducts various conferences, give innovation awards to employees, and operates centers of excellence. I belong to the office of innovation steering committee. We leverage this organization as an approach to innovation for IT.

 

EL. What  automated processes have you put in place to handle emergency communications  with your customers?

 

DM. Our emergency crisis notation system can quickly mobilize key people from around the world to act on a critical situation. They get notified through SMS, text messaging, or whatever other media they use for critical situations. As a global outsourcer, we have formal processes if a situation arises, such as a data center going off the grid or an application fails. Once we assemble the restoration team, we establish multiple audio bridges which the customer and the technical people. Our management people review these audio bridges every one or two hours for updates. Once the customer's problem has been resolved, such as data center brought online, we go through a mandatory root-cause analysis process, which my staff reviews.

 

EL. Can you provide examples of some of your converged  platforms to get closer to your customers?

 

DM. Our CSC account and our customers use some of the same applications, such as GCARS, a controlled release to production review-type application. We all use it whether the item released to production relates to the customer account's own equipment, or will run on a customer's account on our leveraged equipment. We have a variety of converged platforms like that one. Both our employees and our main customers have access to our global portals. Of course, it has areas restricted to specific accounts and customers.

 

Author: Elizabeth M. Ferrarini - She is a technology writer  from Boston, Massachusetts. Reach her at elizabethferrarini@yahoo.com.

| More
763 Views 0 Comments 0 References Permalink Tags: applications, article, governance, infrastructure, innovation, outsourcing, stakeholders, strategy, technology_investment

CKPrahalad.jpg

 

Core Competency. Many business leaders use the term core competency to describe where their companies put most of their efforts. Few of these people might be aware that C.K. Prahalad coined that term in 1989.  This university professor's best selling books, Competing for the Future, and The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid, have changed the way CEOs think about business strategy.

 

Now C. K. Prahalad, the Paul and Ruth McCracken Distinguished University Professor of Strategy at the University of Michigan's Ross School of Business, has set out to change the way CIOs think about business strategy and their enterprise architecture as new business models force their companies to become more consumer-driven or customer-focused in a global economy. His new book, The New Age of Innovation: Driving Co-Created Value Through Global Network, provides CIOs with both a blueprint of Prahalad's strategy and a host of examples of how it is already in work on some of today's best companies.

 

Prahalad says, "Established companies can no longer think of themselves as just selling discrete products, but how these products can provide customers with a unique experience." He cites the example of how Unilever, a traditional multinational company, encourages Ponds' skin care customers to specify their budget and their skin type to create a customized set of skin care products."

 

Recently, enterpriseleadership.org saw down with Prahalad to talk about how these new business models with alter the CIO's role, and what can both CIOs and other business leaders do to avoid any disconnects between IT and businesses processes. Here's what he had to say:

 

EL. Ten years  from now, how will the CIO's role be different from what it is today?

 

CP. Within the next 10 years, the CIO's role will change because the CIO in a major company will sit on a major source of competitive advantage for the company. Flexible, adaptive, and response business practices will become a key source of competitive advantage. At the same time, focused analytics, which will allow managers to define the behavior of one person or one supplier at a time among millions of consumers, will offer another source of competitive advantage. To this end, the CIO plays a critical role in building the new information communications technology (ICT) architecture, which looks at these opportunities, and then it rethinks the way you can collaborate and be flexible. IT is going to matter significantly.

 

EL. What  must CIOs and business leaders do to avoid any disconnects between IT and the  business?

 

CP. In the book, we talk a lot about the emerging disconnect between business leaders and CIOs. Yes, CIOs need to have good technical expertise. However, CIOs must begin to have a distinct and clear point of view about where the business is going. They must begin to start talking the language of the business and to understand the possible directions of the business. Likewise, the business unit leaders must take responsibility for understanding the opportunities that the information communications technology architecture provides. CIOs will miss the boat if they continue to gravitate mostly to managing IT more efficiently, and if all of the return on investment calculations are based on savings in the IT organization rather than profit growth in the business.

 

EL. Do CIOs really understand the economic impact that IT has on the business? To be more specific, how many CIOs think in terms on how a change will affect the gross margins?

 

CP. Some do, but most of them don't.  The architecture of the company has it exists today can become an impediment for the growth of business. Therefore, we need to establish a new dialogue between business unit leaders and CIOs. This's inevitable. If the current CIOs don't want to engage in that debate, they'll loose out and just become technology managers, not partners in creating new business opportunities.

 

EL. How many companies  really have the business strategy and IT strategy in one  entity?

 

CP. If you think of ICIC example in my book, I'd see that no one in senior management at that company thinks of the IT strategy and the business strategy as two distinct spheres. They can't isolate IT from the business strategy and the business from the IT strategy. They think of it as one in the same.

 

In the financial services industry, the IT strategy and the business strategy should be one in the same. The interesting question is this: Can you be a strategist and a business leader in a company like MasterCard, VISA, or Wells Fargo without a good understanding of not only where the technology capabilities are, but where it is likely to go?

 

On the other hand, if you're a CIO in one of these companies, can you participate in business discussions without a deep understanding of where the business is going? The technology strategy, the HR strategy (what we call the social architecture), and the business strategy are facets of one in the same. You can't do one without the other. So, how we start seeing the three sides of the same problem using different lens, but recognizing it's the same thing we're looking at and describing.

EL. What's the most important  requirement a company needs in order to innovate?

 

CP. You can't innovate unless you have a point of view. N=1, which says companies must co-create value with each customer individually, and R=G, which says that access to global resources is a key factor in continuous innovation, are points of view.  It's very simple. You can draw a simple decision tree if you agree that convergence, connectivity, social networks, and digitization are taking place. If you deny all of them, which is totally factual, you can't dispute the existence of an installed base of three billion cell phones. We can argue that it's 2.9 billion or 3.1 billion. With digitization the cost goes down. That's a fact. If you say yes, then you ask an interesting question:  Will the natural relationship between the consumer and the form change or not change? That's where the dispute is. If the answer is yes, it has to change. If so, then you look at what I call the new age companies, such as google and ebay, and Netflix. These companies didn't have to start with legacy. They could go right to N=1 and R=G, directly.

 

The second question is this: Can the same transformation take place in traditional business which has a 100-year history? That's why we took the cautious approach in the first chapter to avoid talking about companies such as google. If we did, readers would dismiss it and say but my industry makes tires or provides insurance. Instead, this chapter talks about what a Goodyear or Bridgestone can do to change its business model.

 

We need to do to develop a point of view and then say, 'If that is the point of view, than how does the role of the CIO change?' If CIOs stay on the same path, you'll see them wallowing in the same activities - a little more efficiency here, and a little more reorganization there. 

EL. Many  companies talk about innovation, but how many really understand what it is?

 

CP. Many people talk about innovation, but few really have a deep understanding about how it works. To understand innovation, you need to do a lot of blocking and tackling about how things work at the ground level. People easily forget that innovation at the ground level is very different. If you're in a large company, you can create any type of strategic idea. On the other hand, if you want to make it happen, you still have to figure out the business model and business processes.

 

EL. Aren't a  company's businesses processes apparent to managers?

 

CP. Business processes can easily get lost in most large companies. They become orphans without anyone to take of them. Here's an interesting example. Look at order to cash which cuts across so many processes. Ask 10 business managers from random companies to write down how the order to cash process works in their company or in their business. If you can get anyone to give you an 80 percent accurate answer, then give the person a metal. y deserve a metal. I don't know too many people who can do this. This functions if delegated deep down in the organization. No one pays attention to how it works.

 

Look at all of the big problems Sony has always had. Sony couldn't change its business model and didn't understand how to do micro billing. Likewise, Napster didn't understand how to do it either. Napster built the business for ITIL, but drove out the business model and micro billing.  It's a business model innovation resulting in a business process innovation, or it's a business process innovation allowing them to a business model innovation. That's how simple it is at one level and how complicated it is at another level.

 

Author: Elizabeth M. Ferrarini - She is a technology writer  from Boston, Massachusetts. Reach her at elizabethferrarini@yahoo.com.

| More
769 Views 0 Comments 0 References Permalink Tags: article, business_process, enterprise_architecture, business_strategy, innovation

BernSchmitt.jpg

 

Marketing. Information Technology. Engineering. If companies truly want to succeed, then people from different disciplines within those organizations need to work together to develop competitive strategies. Bernd Schmitt, the Robert D. Calkins Professor of International Business at Columbia Business School, says they also need to become big, bold thinkers. Schmitt has called the concept Big Think, an innovative approach to thinking, creating business models, and marketing. Schmitt says, "Big Think enables business leaders to stay relevant, infuse their companies with fresh, revolutionary ideas, leaving competitors scrambling."

 

Schmitt's latest book, Big Think Strategy, outlines how companies such as MySpace, IBM, Apple, Whole Foods, and General Motors have benefited from Think Big strategies. Schmitt has either authored or co-authored seven books, including the acclaimed Experiential Marketing and Customer Experience Management. He has done consulting work for Eli Lilly, Volkswagen, Siemens, and Vodafone.

 

Recently, enterpriseleadership.org sat down with Professor Schmitt to learn more about how IT professionals can become Big Thinkers. Here is what he had to say:

 

EL: Can you briefly summarize the  differences between Small Think versus Big Think?

 

BS: Small think sets in when middle managers become very risk adverse. They use the same old procedures, checking everything with a step-by-step analytical approach. Before they can launch a new venture, they have to double check with their superiors, and they're afraid to do anything new and innovative.

 

On the other hand, Big Think is about visionary leadership, thinking out of the box, and taking risks. This leadership style has certain kinds of thinking, such as looking into the future, and doing things differently from what is happening currently in your industry. Big Think is also a behavioral style. You manage projects by focusing on making a major impact on the marketplace, and looking at where you want to take things in the future.

 

Many companies, which start with an entrepreneurial spirit often, get  stuck doing the same procedures repeatedly.

 

EL: What are some of  the Big Think strategy types?

 

BS: Big Think has four strategy types. With integration, you add seemingly incompatible concepts, proving they're really compatible. For example, amazon.com demonstrated it could offer great customer service without the need for a human touch. Opposition assumes a contrarian viewpoint. For example, Dove's advertising campaign for real beauty celebrates older women, not the 20-something perfect models. Essence takes the essential characteristic of a strategy to an extreme. For example, Wal-Mart uses it massive distribution system to keep driving down costs. Transcendence goes beyond the established boundaries. The Blackberry is an example of transcendence.

 

EL: Some companies say they that innovation is built into their culture, but some of these companies can't score more than one homerun. Why?

 

BS: The executive team communicates corporate culture, which can be key to innovation. However, this team has to keep getting the innovative message out, even after the company has a major breakthrough. Take Motorola's very successful Razr cell phone. It had a great product launch. On the other hand, what else is happening at Motorola?  Organizations that have one innovative success don't necessarily have Big Think cultures. Many of these organizations are lucky enough to have a very energetic team behind the innovation.

 

EL: How do you create a  Big Think culture?

 

BS: To create a corporate culture to sustain Big Think, organizations need to hire people from a diverse talent pool, to provide them with the right environment, and to set up teams and to provide them with challenging projects. Organizations need to stimulate these people mentally so they'll get excited about taking the projects forward.

 

I've worked with many siloed organizations. When I do a project on Big Think and innovation, I always set up cross-functional teams. Research shows that innovation can benefit from cross-functional teams.  However, most companies lock cross-functional teams in siloes. Government agencies know the benefit of using cross-functional teams or multidisciplinary teams for solving problems such as global warming.

 

EL: Can you provide an example  of the innovative ideas developed by a cross-functional team you set up?

 

BS: I've done many projects with Vodafone in Europe. We put together cross-functional teams of Vodafone people from IT and marketing. These teams started with a project WOW initiative that was suppose to create innovative ideas that could delight customers. One particular project focused on developing more innovative mobile phone services, but also providing more innovative treatment of customers in the call center, on the Web site, and in the stores.

 

For example, Vodafone in Portugal came up the pizza delivery concept of getting a new cell phone. The goal was to get a cell phone into a customer's hand within a half hour after they called in. With a GPS, the company could track where the customer is, and have a representative get on a motorbike and deliver the phone to the customer. The representative could explain the phone's feature to the customer, as well as to synchronize information from the customer's old telephone to the new one.

 

EL: Can you provide another example of a company that has  benefited from your Think Big strategy?

 

BS: Samsung is doing very well these days with its brand.  A few years, Samsung Electronic offered poor quality projects in the U.S. That company made a major change to improve the quality of its product. In fact, in some ratings Samsung has surpassed its key competitors, such as Sony, in innovative product design and quality.

 

Samsung has also focused more on the consumer experience rather than just their products and technologies. How did this happen? A few years ago, the chairman of Samsung set up cross-functional teams comprised of people from marketing, product design, and information technology. These teams went around the world studying how consumers in different parts of the world live, and what kinds of products they needed for their homes and their work. We've seen a dramatic success here. Samsung has aligned its new initiative, called creative management, with Big Think. Now that Samsung has an edge on its competitors, it has to figure out how it will stay ahead through continuous innovation.

 

EL: What affect does timing and marketplace trends  have on Big Think ideas?

 

BS: Big Thinking is not just about having this big idea, but you have to take it to the marketplace. Big Think ideas very often work best if they click with some trend that's happening in the current consumer environment.  Take the wellness trend, which has caused an explosion in spa services and in spa products, which have unusual ingredients no one heard about 10 years ago. If you want to come up with an innovative skincare product line or some new spa massage services, you have to do it fast. These trends come and go. Who knows if American consumers in five to 10 years will want to go to spas. You have to cut the bureaucracy and other things that are preventing bold ideas to come about.

 

EL: Can you  briefly summarize the differences between Small Think versus Big  Think?

 

BS: Small think sets in when middle managers become very risk adverse. They use the same old procedures, checking everything with a step-by-step analytical approach. Before they can launch a new venture, they have to double check with their superiors, and they're afraid to do anything new and innovative.

 

On the other hand, Big Think is about visionary leadership, thinking out of the box, and taking risks. This leadership style has certain kinds of thinking, such as looking into the future, and doing things differently from what is happening currently in your industry. Big Think is also a behavioral style. You manage projects by focusing on making a major impact on the marketplace, and looking at where you want to take things in the future.

 

Many companies, which start with an entrepreneurial spirit often, get  stuck doing the same procedures repeatedly.

 

EL: What are some of  the Big Think strategy types?

 

BS: Big Think has four strategy types. With integration, you add seemingly incompatible concepts, proving they're really compatible. For example, amazon.com demonstrated it could offer great customer service without the need for a human touch. Opposition assumes a contrarian viewpoint. For example, Dove's advertising campaign for real beauty celebrates older women, not the 20-something perfect models. Essence takes the essential characteristic of a strategy to an extreme. For example, Wal-Mart uses it massive distribution system to keep driving down costs. Transcendence goes beyond the established boundaries. The Blackberry is an example of transcendence.

 

EL: Some companies say they that innovation is built into their culture, but some of these companies can't score more than one homerun.  Why?
BS: The executive team communicates corporate culture, which can be key to innovation. However, this team has to keep getting the innovative message out, even after the company has a major breakthrough. Take Motorola's very successful Razr cell phone. It had a great product launch. On the other hand, what else is happening at Motorola?  Organizations that have one innovative success don't necessarily have Big Think cultures. Many of these organizations are lucky enough to have a very energetic team behind the innovation.

 

EL: How do you create a Big Think  culture?

 

BS: To create a corporate culture to sustain Big Think, organizations need to hire people from a diverse talent pool, to provide them with the right environment, and to set up teams and to provide them with challenging projects. Organizations need to stimulate these people mentally so they'll get excited about taking the projects forward.

 

I've worked with many siloed organizations. When I do a project on Big Think and innovation, I always set up cross-functional teams. Research shows that innovation can benefit from cross-functional teams.  However, most companies lock cross-functional teams in siloes. Government agencies know the benefit of using cross-functional teams or multidisciplinary teams for solving problems such as global warming.

 

EL: Can you provide an example of the  innovative ideas developed by a cross-functional team you set up?

 

BS: I've done many projects with Vodafone in Europe. We put together cross-functional teams of Vodafone people from IT and marketing. These teams started with a project WOW initiative that was suppose to create innovative ideas that could delight customers. One particular project focused on developing more innovative mobile phone services, but also providing more innovative treatment of customers in the call center, on the Web site, and in the stores.

 

For example, Vodafone in Portugal came up the pizza delivery concept of getting a new cell phone. The goal was to get a cell phone into a customer's hand within a half hour after they called in. With a GPS, the company could track where the customer is, and have a representative get on a motorbike and deliver the phone to the customer. The representative could explain the phone's feature to the customer, as well as to synchronize information from the customer's old telephone to the new one.

 

EL: Can you provide another example of a company that has  benefited from your Think Big strategy?

 

BS: Samsung is doing very well these days with its brand.  A few years, Samsung Electronic offered poor quality projects in the U.S. That company made a major change to improve the quality of its product. In fact, in some ratings Samsung has surpassed its key competitors, such as Sony, in innovative product design and quality.

 

Samsung has also focused more on the consumer experience rather than just their products and technologies. How did this happen? A few years ago, the chairman of Samsung set up cross-functional teams comprised of people from marketing, product design, and information technology. These teams went around the world studying how consumers in different parts of the world live, and what kinds of products they needed for their homes and their work. We've seen a dramatic success here. Samsung has aligned its new initiative, called creative management, with Big Think. Now that Samsung has an edge on its competitors, it has to figure out how it will stay ahead through continuous innovation.

 

EL: What affect does timing and marketplace trends  have on Big Think ideas?

 

BS: Big Thinking is not just about having this big idea, but you have to take it to the marketplace. Big Think ideas very often work best if they click with some trend that's happening in the current consumer environment.  Take the wellness trend, which has caused an explosion in spa services and in spa products, which have unusual ingredients no one heard about 10 years ago. If you want to come up with an innovative skincare product line or some new spa massage services, you have to do it fast. These trends come and go. Who knows if American consumers in five to 10 years will want to go to spas. You have to cut the bureaucracy and other things that are preventing bold ideas to come about.

 

EL: What  personal characteristics do people need to have or to develop if they want to be  successful Big Thinkers?

 

BS: The key thing is to create something that's exciting and new. When I work with companies, we always do creativity exercises. It's just not the analytical side you need to appeal to. Whenever I discuss what's required to get someone to be a Big Thinker, I mention having a lot of guts because many people might perceive your ideas as risky and want to kill them. If anything needs to be killed, it's those sacred organizational cows. You need to come up with alternative current processes. That takes guts. It also takes passion and perseverance to see a project completed. As a leader, you also need to expose yourself to many different things. Most company people are very narrow-minded and are only interested in certain things. They are experts at some things, but they don't often see the bigger picture. As individuals, they don't expose themselves to different things, such as sports, museums, or travel. When you're on a business trip, just don't sit in your hotel room. Try to see what's outside. Some creative ideas might emerge.

 

EL: What role can IT departments  play in innovation or enhancing a company's brand if  any?

 

BS: I've seen IT departments that have done a tremendous job of helping call centers better understand the needs of customers.  Call center representatives need to have at their fingertips all of the relevant customers information. The challenge is how do you turn a transactional approach into a true CRM. Most call center systems have nothing to do with building relationships, they are purely transactional.  Say a call center person has access to a database service that shows, not only when the customer bought the product, but also what concerns a customer had when he or she last called, and what suggestions that customer received. An integrated database system like this can help increase brand awareness because it provides a way to connect emotionally with customers.
What personal characteristics  do people need to have or to develop if they want to be successful Big  Thinkers?

 

The key thing is to create something that's exciting and new. When I work with companies, we always do creativity exercises. It's just not the analytical side you need to appeal to. Whenever I discuss what's required to get someone to be a Big Thinker, I mention having a lot of guts because many people might perceive your ideas as risky and want to kill them. If anything needs to be killed, it's those sacred organizational cows. You need to come up with alternative current processes. That takes guts. It also takes passion and perseverance to see a project completed. As a leader, you also need to expose yourself to many different things. Most company people are very narrow-minded and are only interested in certain things. They are experts at some things, but they don't often see the bigger picture. As individuals, they don't expose themselves to different things, such as sports, museums, or travel. When you're on a business trip, just don't sit in your hotel room. Try to see what's outside. Some creative ideas might emerge.

 

EL: What role can IT  departments play in innovation or enhancing a company's brand if  any?

 

BS: I've seen IT departments that have done a tremendous job of helping call centers better understand the needs of customers.  Call center representatives need to have at their fingertips all of the relevant customers information. The challenge is how do you turn a transactional approach into a true CRM. Most call center systems have nothing to do with building relationships, they are purely transactional.  Say a call center person has access to a database service that shows, not only when the customer bought the product, but also what concerns a customer had when he or she last called, and what suggestions that customer received. An integrated database system like this can help increase brand awareness because it provides a way to connect emotionally with customers.

 

Author: Elizabeth M. Ferrarini - She is a technology writer  from Boston, Massachusetts. Reach her at elizabethferrarini@yahoo.com.

| More
464 Views 0 Comments 0 References Permalink Tags: article, creativity, cross-functional_teams, innovation, strategy

ZackHicks.jpg

 

If you want to know why people buy Toyota, just ask someone who drives one. Some people have put as many as 300,000 miles of their vehicles. That emphasis on quality comes through in every commercial about Toyota. However, quality resonates through just about every function, especially IT, at a Toyota company. But this hasn't always been the case. In 2002, executives at Toyota Motors Sales, USA, Inc. complained about how IT was unresponsive, and about where all of the money spent on IT projects went. Barbra Cooper, the CIO, undertook a massive restructuring of IT to better align strategically to better align with the needs of the business units and to better align with the company's culture of quality and continuous improvement.

 

Recently, enterpriseleadership.org sat down with Zackery Hicks, a corporate manager from the Office of the CIO at Toyota Motor Sales, USA to talk about how IT meets project goals, innovates, maintains quality, and develops talent. Here's what he had to say:

 

EL: Can you provide an overview of your IT organization?

 

ZH: Barbra Cooper, our CIO, also oversees the University of Toyota, which is a global responsibility. Our IT organization has a federated model, consisting of about 400 employees. The office of the CIO oversees the transparency, governance, and the business enablement. We have aligned a divisional information officer or DIO with each of our business units. Each DIO has a staff of direct IT reports. Each DIO sits with his/her business line and attends that business unit's staff meetings. At review time and throughout the year, the business executives provide feedback on DIO performance to the CIOs. DIOs have a dotted line to their divisional executives.

 

Within my domain, I have IT strategy, finance, governance, resource management, and vendor management. I also have security, privacy and compliance.

 

EL: Is that structure a model for all of IT within Toyota?

 

ZH: For some divisions of Toyota, IT has the same structure as us. The manufacturing divisions have a flatter IT structure than ours because of their
specialized business needs.

EL: Did Barbara Cooper develop this structure for the IT organization?

 

ZH: She did. Barbara likes to say she called the police on herself. Before joining Toyota, she has been a change agent CIO, transforming new companies and then moving on. Her longest tenure as a CIO has been at Toyota. Several years ago, she felt that it was time to transform IT here because people perceived IT as more of an order taker. Cooper wanted us to be thought of as a respected strategic partner. She took us on the journey to achieve this goal.

 

EL: Where does the Toyota Motor Sales IT organization fit into the global Toyota IT?

 

ZH: We are a separate company from Toyota Motor Corp in Japan. However, all the supply chains interconnect with each other. In fact, all of our systems connect with those of our other affiliated companies. We have
a close relationship with the other IT organizations within Toyota.

 

EL: Can you describe the governance structure by which the DIOs operate?

 

ZH: The Office of the CIO facilitates the executive steering committee. We have many project portfolios recommended by each division for committee approval and for provisioning.  Each division and each DIO has his/her own local governance. You can liken it to state and federal government.

 

We decided to empower DIOs with all of the resources needed to meet their business units' needs.  We did this because we didn't want DIOs turning into relationship managers.  Furthermore, we wanted them to strive to be successful. As a result, we empower them to respond quickly to their evolving business units' needs. We have a threshold for what they can decide
locally.  Beyond that local approval level, they have to rise up to enterprise governance.

 

EL: Do the DIOs have to reach project objectives before funds are released?

 

ZH: We have a business case for each project. We look at the ROI and the total cost of ownership. We also want to have a portfolio view so it isn't just only based on ROI. Some projects that might help us with innovation or help us in our continual quest for better quality might have a lower threshold. In the overall picture of the company, these projects have value. We take more of a portfolio view, but we absolutely do look at securing a return. In the Toyota Way of Plan-Do-Check-Act, we ask each project team to come back after completion to verify whether or not the project reached its objectives.

 

EL: Can you describe the metrics or methodology the business units can judge the success of IT projects?

 

ZH: The business case at the initial start states these objectives. At the beginning of the year, we do an annual plan. We agree upon what the enterprise goals are going to be. What does each DIO or direct report have in common with the things we agreed upon? What are our targets? What things are going to be done locally? What are the local plans that we are going to achieve that year? The annual plan must address all of these questions.

 

By the time the business case comes forward, we already have awareness on what projects we can expect. We do have funding gates at appropriate phases of the project. Before we begin construction, we look to have a completed ROI analysis and a full cost of ownership for a five-year plan. We want ideas to get off the ground. We make it very easy for the different
business sponsors who have ideas for something new. We'll fund the idea, give the team a pre-determined amount of time to go off and think about the idea, and to vent the idea out with IT and any other affected groups to see if the idea has some legs. If it does and the team comes back, then we'll give them more seed money to get through high level requirements. We continue down this path before they get to construction. We want to encourage good ideas that help the business. We also want to limit our exposure by investing in the wrong things. Before we give them money to begin construction, we want to make sure all of the risks and the returns are vented out.

 

EL: Toyota is known for being a leader in sustainable innovation and breakthrough innovation. Can you give me one or two examples of how IT has contributed to innovation?

 

ZH: We're proud of our dealer extranet. Two disparate systems used to burden most of our dealerships. They used to enter their factory order requests in with their factory system and then run their office via their dealer management system. The interface we created enables our dealerships to work on either the factory system or the dealer management system without
ever rekeying any input. A vehicle entered as sold in the factory system would automatically update their inventory systems as purchased on their own. This innovation tore down the silos between the automation that existed. The extranet provided the dealerships with more flexibility. They now could see the vehicles to them in their pipeline, and can trade with other dealerships before the vehicle arrive to the dealership. This capability gives dealers the ability to get the right car, to the right place, and at the right time for the right customer.

 

Quality is another aspect of innovation for us. It's part of our focus on and part of our culture. Quality shouldn't be limited to our vehicles. Our systems should also have that quality. We've been innovating by providing our engineers, regardless of where they are in the world, the ability to view any part of a vehicle that is not performing as designed. Our Toyota dealerships have this capability for servicing vehicles.

 

EL: What quality practices are you using in IT?

 

ZH: Toyota is Lean. We have our own culture on Lean thinking and continuous improvement. Cooper made them a big priority when she reorganized IT. We wanted to better align IT with the Toyota culture. Our mantra says that we're not a public corporate IT shop; we're a corporate in-house IT department which knows what our business wants and mirror that. We needed to move upstream and to understand our business better. We achieved this posture through Lean thinking and the continuous improvement or Kaizen. We absolutely incorporate these quality practices in everything we do in IT.

EL: How does IT meet the objectives of the Toyota Production System?

 

ZH: We're the sales and manufacturing arm of that. IT uses the same principles used in manufacturing. The methodology is the same. You can't see everything that IT does. On the other hand, if you walk by a vehicle assembly line, you can observe how much wasted time is expended. We mirror our production system by using dashboard and process documentation to visualize and to enable people to see what's doing on in it and to improve upon it. This visualization is all part of our continuous improvement.

 

EL: What types of IT career development programs do?

 

ZH: At my previous companies, you were labeled either an IT person or a business person. At Toyota, you have opportunity rotate through different areas of the business.  I started at Toyota in corporate services. Because I had IT experience, I had the opportunity to move into IT. However, people have to demonstrate the talent to move to another functional area, as well as to have the desire to do so.

 

EL: Is there a formal leadership program at Toyota?

 

ZH: It's based on different levels. Our University of Toyota functions as a center for dealers and for our employees to learn business skills, communication skills, to uplift the organization's abilities, and to prepare for the future. This center is also open to IT people. In addition, while working with the University of Toyota, we developed our own career path within IT based on the changes occurring in this industry. In the 1980s, a good programmer could count on becoming a manager. Today, a lot of programming happens offshore. An IT manager today needs to oversee relationships with disparate vendors, and a disparate workforce across the globe. 

EL: Can you describe the performance goals set for senior IT people?

 

ZH: We focus a lot on achieving our goals by building employee performance incentives into our plans. We establish goals at the beginning of each year.
Throughout the year, we make sure we honor these goals, unless business conditions change. It's easy to get distracted because of all the complexity which comes with IT. Having objectives, having goals, and tracking our performance of those goals becomes important for keeping everyone on track.

 

The Office of the CIO has been successful in managing not only the day-to-day operations of IT, but enabling the CIO to have optimal business engagements and worry less about tactical part of IT.

 

EL: How have you handled the execution of IT strategy?

 

ZH: We put the portfolio of our current applications on one axis. On another axis, we looked at what business conditions are likely to occur. We wanted to see what would happen at the intersection of these two things. What would happen to our systems if we need to support more or less dealerships? Would our systems support the increasing variation of our vehicles? What affect does business complexity have on our systems? This process helped us to have a better dialogue with our business customers. We were able to go upstream by our increased ability to have a dialogue about changing business conditions and the potential impact of our application portfolio. Instead of being an order taker, we could anticipate if we needed to invest in new systems. This awareness helped us more in strategic planning.

 

Through the Office of the CIO we ensure that these potential projects or projects that support the business strategy rise to the top and get the needed funding, and get all of the executive support they need. We make sure they are tracked monthly through that visualization. We want everyone to have the same understanding of what is going on with the projects, to be able to help the projects as they are coming off the tracks, and to get projects back on track based on early warning signs.

 

EL: Can you describe some of your IT innovation programs?

 

ZH: We have several formal programs around innovation.  In fact, one of our top goals for 2006 and 2007 included innovation. I mentioned our annual planning process helps keep our associates focused on those areas where we want to make progress. Innovation was an area that's taking center state in our annual plans. We don't care if the submitted idea was actually carried out. We're more interested in how many ideas each executive brings forward from their team. We want to provide a clear path for any idea to rise to the top. We also have some local groups compete similar to a science fair. Their ideas don't have to be about Toyota per se.  Perhaps a submitted idea might be the muse for another associate in how it could benefit Toyota. We don't want to limit innovation. We hope to bring in some ideas that could drive some foothold here at Toyota. Each quarter we give out awards for innovation and continuous improvement. In fact, in 2007, IT allocated 100 percent of its continuous improvement fund to innovative ideas.

 

Note: Since this interview took place, Zack Hicks is now corporate manager of administrative services.

--

Additional Reading - Sponsor Links:
Managing the Business of IT: Maximizing the Power of Service Resource Planning, the Next Step in Business Service Management
Understanding ITIL® Service Portfolio Management and the Service Catalog


Author: Elizabeth M. Ferrarini - She is a technology writer from Boston, Massachusetts. Reach her at elizabethferrarini@yahoo.com.

| More
616 Views 0 Comments 0 References Permalink Tags: article, career_development, governance, innovation, strategy, transformation

MichaelHugos.jpg

 

If you ask a global CIO like Gary Cantrell of Textron to name you one of his goals for 2008, he'll tell you he wants his IT organization to become more agile. No one knows more about what Cantrell is trying to do than Michael Hugos.  Up until 2006, Hugos was the corporate CIO at Network Services Company, an $8 billion cooperative distributor of janitorial products and disposable food services items. He received a CIO magazine 100 Award in both 2003 and 2005 for improving the agility of Network Services' supply chain initiatives. He also received an InformationWeek 500 award in 2005 for innovative use of an IT wholesale distribution system.

 

Hugos now sports the titles of business agility mentor and CIO-at-large to several companies. He also writes books about supply chain management and business agility. The second edition of Essentials of Supply Chain has become the top selling book in its class on amazon.com. He recently published The Great Innovation Since the Assembly Line -- Powerful Strategies for Business Agility. In addition to writing books, Hugos often writes about agility in his Computerworld column and on his CIO magazine blog. He also conducts workshops on what he calls the 30-Day Blitz to becoming agile.

 

enterpriseleadership.org recently sat down with Michael Hugos to get a better understanding of business agility and IT agility.  Here's what he had to say:

 

EL: What exactly is agility and why what does it  offer an organization?

 

MH: Agility applies to a wider range of activities. Just as lean manufacturing advocates using easily reconfigured machines in flexible production sequences, agile methods advise the use of short and iterative development cycles for rapid response to changing conditions and customer demands. Agility also places a greater focus on customer satisfaction rather than internal operating efficiency.

 

EL: Can you explain what it  means for an organization to be lean and what is the relationship between lean  and agile?

MH: Lean grew out of the popular manufacturing principles in the Toyota Production System and Just-in-Time manufacturing process. It emphasizes two things: the elimination of non-value added activities that customers don’t pay you for, and the elimination of wait times where products or work in progress accumulates and waits. These ideas relate mostly to manufacturing or supply chain processes. However, lean also advocates ideas that overlap a lot with agility. For example, a rapid response to changing customer demands can occur through using appropriately sized and easily reconfigured machines, and placing those machines in flexible production sequences that can change quickly as situations change. These are very much agile ideas. 

 

EL: Apparently,  supply chain experts have merged lean and agility to create leagility.  What's  the story behind this term?

MH: Leagility applies mostly to the operations of lean and agile supply chains. We can discuss these concepts well enough with the words lean and agile. By making up a new word like leagility, you create more confusion in the discussion.

EL: What are some  of the characteristics of companies that are either agile or lean and agile?

 

MH: Lean and agile companies display a handful of key characteristics. The most important characteristics include decentralized decision making procedures, and individuals and autonomous operating units that are empowered to decide and to act on their own initiative. At lean and agile companies, senior management makes the goals clear to everyone, and trains and trusts employee to do the right things to accomplish those goals.

 

These characteristics have become necessary for agility. Why! We live in a world where things change quickly. People at the scene of the action need to assess events and act quickly in order to be agile. If they're required to pass information up the chain of command and wait for orders before they can act, they won't respond effectively because situations will change while they are waiting for orders. Opportunities will disappear. People will become frustrated and passive. This scenario creates the inertia and lethargic behavior that bureaucracies are so famous for.

 

EL: Can you provide  an example of an organization that has done a super job of becoming both lean  and agile?

 

MH: The United States Marine has done a good job of becoming both a lean and an agile organization. Its basic tactical unit consists of the 20 to 40 person autonomous platoon. Specific platoons of infantry, artillery, and armor become task forces to handle specific assignments. The commander issues mission orders which spell out what the platoon must do to accomplish its assignment. The senior commander doesn't tell people how to do their jobs. People closest to the scene have been trained and are trusted to figure out how to do what the commander wants, without asking permission before they act.

 

I'll admit business isn't war. Business creates opportunities; war destroys. You can learn many lessons for business by analyzing successful military operations. I've learned a lot about agility from reading U.S. Marine Corps' 110-page book called Warfighting. Everyone from the Commandant of the Marines to the newest recruit has to read and live by this book.

 

EL: When it comes to  agility, what company has a lot in common with the U.S. Marine  Corps?

 

MH: Both Whole Foods Market and the US Marines -- two very successful organizations -- use very similar operating models. They both consist of small, autonomous operating units, empowered to act on their own initiative. Senior management in both organizations says what they want but does not micromanage. Instead, they train and trust their people to figure out how to do their jobs. These two organizations come from very different lines of business and very different world philosophies.  Because they have both independently arrived at similar operating models, you can easily conclude that there some universal truths about agility and the way effective agile organizations operate.

 

EL: What are some of  the hurdles an IT organization has to overcome if it wants to improve its  agility?

 

MH: It needs to overcome three big interconnected and self-reinforcing hurdles, which are tough to break down. These hurdles include the tendency to use bureaucratic organization structures and operating procedures; the tendency to engage in long development cycles that last between 18 to -36 months, and the tendency to design and build very complex systems.

 

For centuries, people have used the bureaucratic operating model. Most companies today use this model, not just IT departments. Bureaucracies work well in situations which don't change that much. They can handle lots of details and complexity, and produce predictable results. Problems arise when we try to use the bureaucratic operating model to deal with situations that change all the time. The rapid pace of change can easily overwhelm these bureaucracies. They react by trying to slow things down. They become even more rigid and intransigent. IT and business must cope with rapid change. The rigid bureaucratic behavior of many IT groups really drives business people nuts. IT needs to adopt a decentralized and flexible operating model.

 

EL: What are some of the  programs with long system development?

 

MH: Traditionally people have the tendency to engage in long system development. Long development cycles work when things don’t change much, but they don’t work well in high change environments. The bureaucratic process don't respond very well to change, especially for the waterfall approach of collecting requirements, creating system specifications and then implementing the system. People first spend three to six months analyzing situations and collecting requirements. They next spend another 12 to 24 months developing systems or selecting and implementing packaged solutions.

 

During this time, significant changes will occur, and business people will want to come back and alter the system requirements to reflect the changes. This process starts up a whole dysfunctional cycle of behavior where bureaucratic IT project organizations resist the change requests, business people resent being put off, and nobody is happy. Because business people have a lot of political power and influence, IT usually gets the blame for whatever happens. IT needs to be able to get things done in shorter periods to respond well to change.

 

EL: So how do you deal  with the complexity hurdle?

 

MH: Because we organize ourselves in hierarchical bureaucracies, we then use bureaucratic procedures to do analysis and requirements gathering. We spend months analyzing things. And the more we analyze things, the more complexity we find, the more complexity we build into the specifications for the system we're developing. We become overwhelmed and intimidated by the apparent complexity. We attempt to design systems that can handle every eventuality, no matter how rarely it may occur. This practice leads to specifications for a very complex system, which you can't build on time or on budget. We need to work in shorter development cycles and deliver working systems that address the most pressing problems first, instead of trying to solve all problems at the same time.

 

EL: You say that an agile  organization is one with a network organization. Can you briefly explain?

 

MH: Agile organizations have a network organizational structure. It provides the best way for autonomous operating units to act quickly on their own initiative, to coordinate their activities with each other, and to deliver benefits for the entire organization. Network organization structures can make best use of an agile operating dynamic.

 

Traditional pyramid shaped hierarchies just move too slowly. They restrict decision making to those at the top of the pyramid. Since those people are several levels removed from the action, it takes them a while to analyze the reports they get and understand what is happening and then issue their orders. Merely putting in expensive business intelligence and reporting systems does not shorten the decision cycle enough or make the decisions that are made much more effective. Since the people who have to carry out the decisions where not involved in making them, people often make a half-hearted attempt to carry them out. To counter this tendency senior management often indulges in micromanagement of lower levels which only reinforces the dynamic because people have no initiative to think for themselves and are reduced to merely following orders.

 

EL: Many CIOs use metrics from scorecards, such as the Balanced Scorecard, to evaluate the effectiveness of IT process. What criteria (such as number of projects done on time, or number of projects done on budget) does an agile IT organization measure?

 

MH: As CIO at Network Services Company, I developed a suite of e-business and supply chain systems that we developed and iteratively enhanced for several years. The project office produced a simple set of weekly reports and scorecards that enabled me, as well as everyone else in the company, to track progress on projects and our performance against budgets. I needed to know how projects were doing as they progressed. I needed to see early on if problems had developed so I could get involved when necessary. Reporting should enable effective intervention and mid-course correction, not just keep score.  You shouldn't measure things, such as the number of projects done on budget, if they don't have any value to the business people who use the systems.

 

Author: Elizabeth M. Ferrarini - She is a technology writer  from Boston, Massachusetts. Reach her at elizabethferrarini@yahoo.com.

| More
536 Views 0 Comments 0 References Permalink Tags: agility, article, business_intelligence, innovation, metrics, strategy

ScottGriffin.jpg

 

Scott Griffin enjoyed every minute of his 28-year career at The Boeing Company, the world's leading aerospace company with capabilities in both commercial jetliners and military aircraft. From 1999 until he retired in June 2007, Griffin was the global CIO and vice president of Boeing IT.  His responsibilities included overseeing a staff of more than 5,000 people, and spearheading all of the IT strategy, systems, infrastructure, and architecture, The collaboration between his team and Boeing engineers around the world played an integral part in the design and the manufacture of the first Boeing's 787 Dreamliner.  In fact, a chapter in Evan Rosen's book, the Culture of Collaboration, chronicles Griffin's real-time interactions with other Boeing executives.

 

While Griffin retired from Boeing, he has no desire to retire from IT. In fact, he is pursuing a master's degree program in not-for-profit leadership at Seattle University.  He plans to start a not-for-profit company to do pro bono IT strategy consulting for other not-for-profit organizations.  He has served on the board of the Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce, and the Chicago Shakespeare Theater.

 

Recently, enterpriseleadership.org sat down with Scott Griffin to discuss his IT career at Boeing and his plans for the future. Here's what he had to say.

 

EL. When you talk to MBA students about IT, what leadership  qualities to your emphasize to them?

 

SG. I have a regular presentation about preparing MBA students to run organizations and to understand the power of IT to transform a business model. You can use a cookie cutter to stamp out CIOs who understand technology. They need to know how IT works and how to talk to business leaders about things that are important to the business.  That's number one. It made me successful at Boeing.

 

EL. How do  you acquire the skills that made you successful in your long career at  Boeing?

 

SG. I had three careers at Boeing. When I worked in customer service, we moved from paper to electronic media. Today Boeing delivers digital content to airlines around the world every day, as well as to the U.S. military. My second career was in avionics where I worked on classified software. When I joined the IT department, my third career, I understood the business process, the IT systems, and the data. I had the great fortune to be a business leader before I became an IT leader. I talked to people in the airlines, in the military and inside of Boeing.  I talked to each audience in language they understood. If the CIO doesn't have this, he or she is just a technical leader.

EL. Why did you decide to spend your retirement  years pursuing IT in the not-for-profit sector?

 

SG. Before I went to work for Boeing, my wife and I, both fresh out of Fresno State, moved to Seattle to work as house parents for a home for troubled teenage girls. This was my first experience dealing with a not-for-profit.  It was a truly rewarding one. The hill the home was on run down to the Boeing 747 plant. In fact, the home benefited from a Boeing fund.

 

I picked up Peter Drucker's book, Managing the Not-for-Profit Organization.  In it, Drucker talks about how not-for-profits have become the distinguished feature of American society. The book talks about how to get the most performance out an organization. The book ends with this profound question: What do you want to be remembered for?  That drew me back to my experience working at the not-for-profit.

 

EL.  How did you IT team react to your decision to retire and to go in this  direction?

 

SG. My staff wasn't surprised by my decision, just the timing of it. Recruiting a new CIO takes time.  We started the process five months before we announced my replacement, John Hinshaw. I still get a lot of questions about the initiatives my team started while I was CIO.  I left a well-run organization that had great people.

 

EL. What, if any,  reporting changes did you make to your IT organization?

 

SG. Before 2005, IT had a shared services model for the infrastructure group. The rest of the IT folks resided in various business across the company. In 2005, we brought everyone in IT together under one organization.  We even pulled the functional analysts in, engineers who sat on the boundary between being a design engineer and being an IT person. We needed those people because we build IT solutions for our customers. This move gave us a fresh start to figure out what was important to us. It was one of the strategies for Boeing IT.

 

EL. What challenges did you place driving innovation in  IT?

 

SG. When we looked at innovation, we always benchmarked against the top companies in the world, especially Toyota.  Concurrent design has a lot of complexity. You had people working on the same assembly, regardless if they are in Moscow or in Everett, Washington. We had these great pockets of innovation. Our money didn't match our strategy of innovation. Two- thirds of IT budget went to support the things already in place and one-third went to innovation. We created a strategy to fill this gap. We looked at how to have two-thirds go to the future and, one-third go to support the business. We were just embarking on that when I retired. .

 

We looked at how IT could help transform the business and innovate there, not where we thought IT was going.  This posed an interesting challenge. You need to have people thinking about how to do the business process differently. If you don't, they will become adverse to change. Unfortunately, even the best IT leaders over time can find themselves spending most of resources on improving the things already in place, not trying to create a breakthrough change the company. Collaboration became that breakthrough at Boeing.

 

We looked at the places where we had innovation. For example, we worked with our global suppliers as if they were part of the same company.  Cisco did this before Boeing.

 

We set out to work on those  areas we had ignored. I really don't want to elaborate on them. 

EL. Can you discuss the your philosophy behind your mantra to  innovate and to inspire?

 

SG. Inspire deals with who are the people looking for the change.  Is it the IT team?  No CIO is smart enough to know which inflection points are real, which are flash in the pan, and which IT company has the next great thing. You have to energize your entire team to work on these issues. When you inspire, you begin to remove the obstacles for the experts to do innovation. My leadership team spent a lot of time thinking about what people can really inspire other. We looked for a certain leadership style, which focuses on breaking down walls for your team so they can be most effective rather than leading the charge.

 

EL. What did you do to inspire  future IT leaders?

 

SG. This's one of the top roles of the CIO. It's the reason I was able to retire and to shift in providing IT to the nonprofit sector. You can judge the effectiveness of the former CIO by looking at the future leaders that CIO groomed. I can tell you the list of potential CIOs and why I selected them.
We had some great programs.  Every week the entire IT team, people located in about 60 countries, attended a virtual IT staff meeting. Our executive skills team met every week. We asked staff managers to ponder these questions: Who are our future leaders? What does the pipeline look like?  How diverse is it?

EL. How did you select candidates  for Boeing IT University?

 

SG. To look for candidates to attend the Boeing IT University, we would comb the pipeline for managers who had the potential to be executives, and staff people who had the potential to technical leaders. The program doesn't use university professors, but IT leaders teaching potential leaders. The curriculum consists of spending eight, 24-hour days discussing what  challenges face Boeing, how do these challenges translate to Boeing IT, and how these future leaders can contribute to the strategies of innovate and inspire. We give the participants a graduate-level case study, which we created. It presents the what if scenario about Boeing acquiring a company.  The participants must work through migrating the company into the existing IT structure. Using actual data and strategies from Boeing, participants, at the end of the week, have to give a present their findings to a board of directors comprised of the IT leader instructors. This experience has changed the way we relate the people in that pipeline. We get to know these future leaders. In turn, they have a safe place where they can present their ideas. They also write a business case. to do an ERP implementation.

 

EL. Do you use the center for excellence concept to fuel new  ideas?

 

SG. It's not a strategy for us. Most of my colleagues with centers of excellence didn't have a consolidated IT organization. We had the center for excellence strategy when IT was decentralized throughout the company. At that time, we said let's create and fund centrally a center of excellence for manufacturing engineering. Once we got all of the IT folks together, we still called them centers of excellence. I don't want to say that concept isn't a good strategy. Now the people who do manufacturing engineering systems now work on the same team as Boeing IT. Together, we begin to create the future process, systems, and data for those functions.

 

EL. Can  you describe how the Investment Board came about at Boeing?

 

SG. After the merger with McDonnell Douglas, we started to think about how we could move Boeing to common processes and where it makes sense for common systems. We couldn't do that if every cubicle had its own IT leader.  We had a shared services model where all of the transactional activities existed. The systems resided in the business unit.  If we wanted to move to common processes, we didn't have the right governance model. We didn't have our hands on the people that were learning today's systems and planning for tomorrow.

 

Our first move was to pull the IT people together. That was a lot of work. It presented all sorts of cultural challenges. We had shadow organizations all over the place. We had to change people's budgets so they couldn't create shadow organizations.

 

The 2B model was the IT investment portfolio. I made the decision that I shouldn't chair that. The CTO for Boeing assumed this responsibility We invited all of those businesses who owned their own IT, such as a design engineer on the 787 program on the 787 project had his/her own IT department. We pulled those people away. We offered to make the leader sit on the Investment Board.  Once we got the IT people and the functional leaders together, we could decide what investments we would make with Boeing's IT dollars. We were in the third year of it when I retired.

 

EL. What  changes did you make to the governance model because of the Investment Board.

 

SG. The governance model was slow to change. The functional leaders would come together on the front end and say, 'My program is totally unique from everyone's.' We weren't interested in having a discussion about building one ERP system. We rejected more than a $100 million dollars worth of good projects not aimed at the entire Boeing Company. When I left, that model had completely changed. We were still having an Investment Board meeting once a quarter. When people came to us, they knew that their project wouldn't be approved unless they had taken into account the entire Boeing Company.

 

Author: Elizabeth M. Ferrarini - She is a technology writer  from Boston, Massachusetts. Reach her at elizabethferrarini@yahoo.com.

| More
548 Views 0 Comments 0 References Permalink Tags: article, center_for_excellence, governance, infrastructure, innovation, shared_services_model

by Dana Farver

 

There's a quiet (r)evolution going on alongside globalization and technology advances, which could profoundly affect your business's bottom. New Web applications  that were once exclusively the tools of Net-savvy teens are finding their way into academia, government, philanthropy, and business. Ever heard of wikis, IM, or blogs? New tools like these may just capture the simplicity, creativity, and collaboration that the Web's original architects had in mind all along, at a cost that's downright cheap.       

The Internet Wave that Came Crashing Down

To understand the new Web wave that's finding its way into today's corporation, it's useful to go back to the Internet of the mid-1990s. Then, the Web was mastered by  specialists educated in Hypertext Markup Language (HTML) and File Transfer  Protocol (FTP). They created personal Web sites about their hobbies, family, and friends, and used hypertext links to reach out to other Web sites. It was an inexpensive, but powerful way to communicate with anyone else in the world who had a Web browser and Internet access.

 

As Internet infrastructure stabilized and expanded, some individuals decided to harness the Web to market products and services to customers globally. Companies like Amazon.com revolutionized the legacy bookseller business with a radically new model for Internet sales and supply-chain processes that quickly became a gold standard for other online businesses. As Internet commerce gained momentum, traditional "brick and mortar" companies like J.C. Penney and Ford realized that they, too, needed a Web presence, if not to sell directly to consumers, to provide information about the company and products, and to provide customer support.

 

By 2000, the first Internet age -- what Alan Greenspan has called the age of "irrational exuberance" -- was in full swing, complete with twenty-something, dot.com millionaires on the cover of Fortune magazine, and a new model of commerce that grew from a blip on the commercial radar to an ever-larger slice of the global economy.

 

But in 2001, the beautiful "dot.com bubble" burst. Almost overnight, Internet businesses with spectacular vision, but few business plans or profits, shuttered. Venture capitalists closed their checkbooks and bid a fast retreat from High Tech. Some pundits declared  that technology was (once again) just a commodity, like refrigerators or microwaves; Web commerce had all been a lot of hype, and the age of the Internet was over.

 

But, reports of the Internet's demise were  greatly exaggerated.

The Next Internet Age

In the fall of 2001, Tim O'Reilly, founder and CEO of O'Reilly Media, was trying to describe what he saw happening during the "nuclear winter" following the dot.com implosion. The irascible techies who'd engineered the first WWW iteration were quietly at it again, producing a new generation of software applications that were more collaborative, easier to use, and more easily updated and scaled to the requirements of any end user. Tools like wikis and blogs provided the means for  individuals worldwide to create together. It was quick and  easy to send an email to friends and colleagues; now, Instant Messaging  (IMing) easily enabled global communication instantly. Plone -- an open-source content management application -- provided rich functionality that was easy to use, powerful, and also, well, free. The early Web technology that had made it possible to build and "push" Web communication out to the world made way for applications like Real Simple Syndication  (RSS) that allowed individuals to "pull" information of their choice from the 'Net. The new applications were cheap, easy to use, and enabled not just Web site monologues, but Web conversations and community. The Web before the dot.com bubble was just "Web 1.0," said O'Reilly, and he dubbed the new, collaborative Web "Web 2.0."

 

It also became clear that Web commerce had not crept away in embarrassment. From the shake-up (and out) of online business emerged companies that were smarter, leaner, and more focused on the bottom line. Legacy corporations realized that consumers were eager for information (or, "content") and were becoming more comfortable with everything from online shopping to online banking. And, Amazon.com expanded to become a giant consumer marketplace for goods and services, even introducing features like a rating system enabling customers to share their experiences about purchases and service.

 

The concept of the Web site was itself changing into something more dynamic and conversational as people with common passions for a cause, a hobby, or even a product, formed Web "communities." Community members asked questions, shared information and endorsements, contributed content to the site, made suggestions about site enhancements, and worked together to make the community experience richer and more productive.

And Now for Enterprise 2.0

Web (1.0) was driven by individuals seeking inexpensive ways to communicate globally. Now, Web 2.0 is being driven by individuals using applications that enable, not only communication, but collaboration and community. Industry analyst groups such as Gartner are predicting that Web 2.0 software's simplicity and cost-effectiveness will spur employees to carry these applications with them into the corporation, creating a "bottom-up" transformation of enterprise IT.

 

Corporate users are turning to Instant Messaging to selectively communicate with each other in real time, and some companies are utilizing Voice Over Internet Protocol  (VOIP) to cut phone bills. Even old-fashioned radio shows are enjoying a  renaissance via "podcasting" that allows individuals to cheaply create digital recordings of interviews, dialogs, and presentations that can be offered up over the Web, downloaded into personal MP3 players, and listened to during airplane flights or over car radios on the way home from work.

 

Some corporate executives are even using blogs as tools to communicate with their employees, customers, and partners. Sun Microsystems's Jonathan Schwartz is on the  vanguard of this experiment in transparent communications, but other  companies like General Motors and BMC Software are following suit. Complexities and problems are inevitable with this new, open communication model, but thought leaders like Robert  Scoble are gradually developing advice and best practices to help corporations minimize missteps in utilizing this powerful, new tool.

Gradual Evolution versus Radical Revolution

Of course, even the best of best practices and the most "killer" of "killer apps" won't displace legacy, enterprise systems overnight - if at all. It's more likely that, at least initially, Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 software will exist in tandem, as complementary tools -- for example, email won't disappear, but instant messaging will be employed for more rapid and selective communication. Corporations will still have Web sites, but may gradually incorporate "community" tools like blogs, where customers can talk to each other and to the company with suggestions, kudos, and concerns. And as open-source CMS systems like Plone are upgraded and endorsed by users such as eBay, Lufthansa, and NASA/JPL, organizations will be tempted by its low cost, ease of use, and flexibility. In the end, the most likely scenario for the coming of Enterprise 2.0 will be, not a revolution, but a quiet evolution that just may change many of the relationship dynamics between customer and corporation.

| More
252 Views 0 Comments 0 References Permalink Tags: article, best_practices, innovation

by Deb Radcliff

 

Part 1  |  Part 2  |  Part  3

 

Tighten Control of the Handset

In the first  part of this three-part article, author Deb Radcliff outlined the rise of smart-phones risk, and why that risk has been less serious in the U.S. (so far). In part 2, you'll see how U.S. businesses are beginning to respond to this new threat to the enterprise, and how much still depends upon the user.

 

"A lot of carriers have the general idea that they're secure, given the threats out there. That may be true today. But moving forward, as you see more applications and features on cellular phones, business and personal data will be increasingly at risk," says Sandra Palumbo, senior analyst with the Yankee Group. "So, encryption is definitely a big area we need to address on feature-rich phones, especially as more and more people put personal and business-competitive data on their devices."

 

Businesses are handling encryption, authentication, and other important information protections in a piecemeal fashion with limited products that don't interoperate, she says. That is why a trusted hardware platform is sorely needed, says Janne Uusilehto, Chief Security Officer at Nokia and chairman of the Trusted  Computing Group's Mobile Phone Working Group. "We need a more reliable platform that is hard, or impossible, to crack by malicious software. But how do you realize security in a hardware device?"

 

As such, Uusilehto, together with industry heavyweights including Intel, Philips, Motorola, IBM, France Telecom, Vodaphone and others, are putting the finishing touches on a Mobile Platform Module based on the Trusted Computing Group's successful Trusted Computing Module for PCs, to be completed by mid-year.

 

The Mobile Platform Module sets standards that would enable network carriers to accurately identify and authenticate devices connecting into them, which is a big problem for carrier networks dealing with cloned phones today, he continues. It also enables applications like Public Key Encryption through secure key storage, digital signatures, and integrity checks of devices and applications.

 

"The trusted module provides a secure place to store secrets (keys) in a place they can't be compromised," says Lark Allen, VP of Wave Systems. "It also measures things, like a software module on your device, and compares that against a hash stored in its secure registers to see if it's been changed. It can also measure the configuration of the phone: Has it been altered? Is there malicious code? Are there unauthorized installs?"

 

With the mobile standards, he continues, carrier network operators and enterprise risk managers can exercise better controls over their valuable mobile devices. For example, they can package only approved applications with the phones, check the integrity of the telephone applications, and encrypt data that needs encrypting.

 

Wave Systems, which makes document encryption and secure storage products based on the Trusted Platform, demonstrated at RSA in February with Juniper and Nortel a proof-of-concept integrity check application on the Trusted Computing Platform that could do just that. With it, they measured patch level, status of anti-virus, and other security policy compliance points on a PC. Such an application can quickly convert to smart phone management once the mobile platform module is completed and security vendors start building against those standards, he adds.

 

"With a standard building block like the Trusted Mobile Platform Module, you can now put it into lots of platforms with a common security infrastructure to support all kinds of smart, feature-rich devices," Allen says. "In a mobile environment, this is important because every network operator has phones from a variety of different vendors that it needs to support."

 

In addition, as more robust handset applications are developed on the trusted mobile platform, companies such as F-Secure, Kaspersky, McAfee, Symantec, and others building anti-malware for smart devices will have more options for integrating their technologies into remotely-managed security platforms, which they're already deploying on PCs.

 

"That's the trick with mobile security. You want it to be easy for the end user or they'll ignore it. Users don't want to enter passwords to make calls. They don't want to manage their own encryption. And they don't want to deal with keeping their anti-virus signatures up to date," says Palumbo of the Yankee Group. "So a lot of this will have to be done by a gatekeeper."

Educate Users

Even if security is made easy, there will always be the problem of human error. Already, users are demonstrating the same gullibility they have demonstrated over PC-based social engineering attempts at getting them to click or load something and to turn over information that they shouldn't. What's to say they mobile phone users will be any different, asks Longstaff.

 

"We're seeing cases all over the place using Bluetooth (Cabir, Lasco, others) and Multi-Media Messaging Service (Comwarrior) to spread," he says. "That involves some level of social engineering to get people to accept them."

 

So the best defense is to set some type of responsible use policy -- one that can be enforced manually until we see further automation -- to educate users about safe cell phone usage in a way that they can understand, say experts.

 

"Just as in the PC world, we need to teach users not to accept applications and downloads that they didn't ask for. Same with links. And they should not give out personal information," says Nick Ianelli, Internet security analyst on mobile malware for US.CERT (Computer Emergency Response Team), based at Carnegie Mellon. "We need to show our users that their phones and the data on them are valuable. Get them familiar with its features."

 

The theory goes that someone could let loose a Bluetooth virus in a crowded stadium and spread itself throughout the crowd, adds Marcus Sachs, who directs the Cyber R&D Lab for the Department of Homeland Security. The reality is, you still have to get them to accept the download, he adds. And, even with the best of education, users will always have questions about Caller ID, authenticity of phone calls, and integrity of data being moved around, he contends.

 

"If it comes from someone they know and trust, they'll allow it (a download). If they're swept up in an event at a crowded stadium and their phones keep ringing up asking them to accept something, they'll download it. In fact, this has already happened. Someone let loose a Bluetooth worm that spread through the crowd at the World Cup," Sachs adds, referring to the Cabir worm, which spread  through the World Athletics Championships at the Olympic Stadium in  Helsinki, Finland in August, 2005.

 

Not to mention that it's only a matter of time before mobile malware stops playing nice by asking for permission to load, contends Nokia's Uusilehto. Soon, he says, criminals will try and spread their wares without the user's knowledge by using hiding and changing technologies to avoid even automated detection. (Already, we've seen Skulls.K attempt to do this last May by trying to disable security on the devices.)

 

The reason for all this trouble coming at our cellular phone users is because phones are essentially becoming PCs, say Sachs and others. This makes policy, education, and muti-layered protections just as vital to data and device protection as it is on networked PCs.

 

"The problem's not new: How do you handle all the consumer gadgets inside the enterprise?" he says. "You see this convergence of phone, e-mail, and entertainment, and soon, Voice over IP that communications providers are jockeying to bundle over a variety of devices. The smart enterprise would get ahead of this technology, embrace it, and actually lead the charge to drive that technology securely into the enterprise."

 

--

 

Deb Radcliff is an award-winning freelance writer, educator and speaker based in Northern California. She's been covering online crime and security ever since working as researcher on a book about infamous hacker, Kevin Mitnick back in 1995.

| More
939 Views 0 Comments 2 References Permalink Tags: article, best_practices, compliance, governance, innovation, it_management, itil, open_source, security, strategy

by Deb Radcliff

 

Part 1  |  Part 2  |  Part  3

 

Smart devices have become the latest attack vector for online criminals, putting intellectual property, regulated and personal financial information stored on them at risk. In this first of a three-part article, author Deb Radcliff explores these new attack vectors into the enterprise.

 

Dozens of viruses, worms, and Trojans have been written against smart phones and pocket PCs since 2004. And even though most of these are proof-of-concept and nuisance malware, experts are warning of more serious crimes to come.

 

More criminal elements are already stealing identities and other personal and private information of value in countries where Symbian-based mobile phones are being used as money, in business collaboration, and in other valuable e-commerce applications, says Danny de Temmerman, head of cybercrime and security for the European Commission's Directorate General for Justice, Freedom, and Security. While speaking on a cybercrime panel at the RSA Security Conference in February, he also said that crimes over cellular phones have now become a top law enforcement priority in Europe.

 

"We're seeing fraud, phishing, spam, spyware, and adware all over these smart phones in countries where phones hold information that could be monetized," adds Vincent Weafer, director of operations at Symantec's Security Response Center, which sifts millions of spam messages per day through its global content scanning systems. "And in India, they're real concerned about pedophiles getting to their kids through their smart devices."

 

Even in the U.S., today's smart phone malware poses more than just a nuisance. For example, there are real costs to enterprises that issue smart, and feature-rich devices being targeted by malware. For example, skyrocketing phone bills when Mosquitos malware enter company-issued smart devices through games and start messaging expensive toll numbers. Other malware, such as the RedBrowser Trojan, repetitively ring up $5 - $6 SMS calls. And Commwarrior blasts millions of MMS text-based spam messages, also wracking up huge telecommunications bills.

 

Indirect costs also abound. Consider the lost revenues when productive road warriors lose their customer data and contact lists because a worm turned their phones into useless "bricks". Such worms can already kill reboot (Fontal.A), crash the operating system (Locknut), and drop the operating system and other critical applications altogether (Skulls). There's also the cost of cleaning up the network when an infected smart phone synchs to a PC or connects to the network through the VPN.

 

Fortunately, there's also more security around U.S.-based smart phones, particularly in closed carrier networks where phones are issued and maintained by the network operators. But there's much room for improvement, particularly in developing standards around device authentication, application integrity, and data protection on the handset. And, as with PCs, users -- including the enterprise customers -- must do their part to avoid malware, spam, and fraudsters in the first place.

A Safer Gateway

Ask Verizon Wireless, and you'll get an earful about how the risks are blown out of proportion by vendors wanting to sell security on the handset. It's all in the network, says Jeffrey Nelson, Verizon Wireless Spokesman, echoing Verizon's marketing message.

 

His biggest beef with such dire portrayal of crimes to come to the U.S., he says, is that carrier networks have more control over their phones than they do in the U.S., where most phones are sold through closed-carrier networks, meaning carriers sell the phone and the service bundled together. This way, network operators can control the phones and the applications allowed on them.

 

"There's a huge difference in risk between the U.S. and Europe and Asia," Nelson adds. "In the United States, people buy wireless service from a company, while in Europe and Asia, you buy a phone you like, and then get service for it, then buy a carrier service. Then you slip in a SIM card, and walk into this dangerous, unprotected world."

 

With more control, carriers can lock down vulnerable applications like Bluetooth and manage downloads somewhat by, at the very least, working off a whitelist of approved vendors, and denying the rest.

 

In addition, any carrier network worth its salt is already filtering out malicious code and unwanted spam entering through their messaging and e-mail gateways, he continues. They should also be filtering content from loading directly off the Internet. For example, Nortel Networks is using Websense to block damaging and unwanted content from getting onto browsers from malicious Web sites.

 

There are other reasons we've not seen as much malicious activity in the U.S. as we have overseas, say experts. For starters, the U.S. has been slow to standardize on a single operating system; whereas Europe, Asia, and other heavy-use regions have standardized on Symbian. So, by defaut, Symbian has become the operating system to attack, says Thomas Longstaff, deputy director of technology, Network Systems Survivability for Carnegie Mellon's Software Engineering Institute.

 

Another reason is slower adoption of smart O/S-, and browser-enabled phones in the U.S., which currently make up12 percent of North America's cellular phone user base, according to the Yankee Group. But, by 2009, that number will rise to 46 percent. And, 87 percent of all U.S. cellular phones in circulation are already feature rich, according to Yankee. Where there are new features, there are also new vulnerabilities.

 

--

 

Deb Radcliff is an award-winning freelance writer, educator and speaker based in Northern California. She's been covering online crime and security ever since working as researcher on a book about infamous hacker, Kevin Mitnick back in 1995.

| More
1,583 Views 0 Comments 2 References Permalink Tags: article, best_practices, compliance, governance, innovation, it_management, itil, open_source, security, strategy

Movability is Power

Posted by Tom Parish Dec 9, 2007

So, what is "movability" and what makes it so powerful?


Movability  from a technology perspective is the science of packaging and delivering content  in re-publishable formats.

 

Can I get that piece of content  to-go?

 

From a content perspective, movability is much like a "to-go box" for information. Like a great meal at your favorite restaurant, when you find yourself stuffed, and can't eat another bite, your courteous waiter asks, "Would you like that to go?"

 

When people are pressed for time, partially distracted, and are mentally "stuffed" with information, will you give them a to-go box for the road?

 

I'm constantly amazed by marketing dollars wasted on weak commercials that fail to move people to act on a advertising message, or dead-end product pages with no call-to-action, and flat news stories that have the movability factor of a large kitchen stove.

 

Can you Digg it?

 

The common "actions" consist of a set of "vanity" icons that link off to "social bookmarking" sites and 1.5 "real" actions, such as emailing a piece of content. Most of the time the only other meaningful action presented to the user is the "print" action, which really doesn't print anything. Instead, it simply reformats the page. So, I count the traditional desktop "print" action as "half" an action. The "vanity icons" for social bookmarking sites draw more traffic to the content but do nothing to move the user closer to the content. Um, no, I don't want to "Digg this", I want to take it to-go.

 

I realize that I may appear to be coming down hard on what I call "real" actions. There is no better example than on the mobile versions of your favorite news sites. If they do provide an action, its usually a replica of the "email to friend" form from their desktop website. Here's a side note for my friends in the mobile developer community.

  1. Think mobile.
  2. Design for the context of use.
  3. When I'm mobile, I expect to do mobile things.

I'm sure the "social tools" icons row has its rightful place in certain circles. But for the 92% of Americans that are strictly concerned with reading what you have to say, let's give them something more meaningful.

 

So, what does any of this have to do with  movability?

 

Every action that can be taken on a piece of content  should move the user closer to the content, not further away from it.

 

Mary moves content to her calendar because it allows her to block off time to read it on her own terms, and it syncs with the devices in her life. Phillip moves audio clips from his favorite news sites to his personal mp3 player to listen to on his morning jog.

 

Stephanie stopped printing interesting content to the DeskJet printer down the hall and started "printing" content to her Yahoo Mail account because of greater movability. Cynthia sends SMS links to her phone to help her "re-find" information.

 

Are  you with me?

 

Movability gives users the power to move content freely between the various devices in their life. When so many marketing messages are being ignored, the victory will go to those brands that permeate the mind of the user by engaging them at multiple touch points. Brand XYZ is on their desktop calendar, on their Windows Mobile calendar, on their MP3 player, in their car stereo, in their SMS inbox on their mobile phone, in Outlook, in their Yahoo mail, in their e-Book reader, or in the printed sheets of paper sitting on the table next to a cup of coffee.

 

Are you a mover,  or shaker?

 

When it comes to information, there are what I call "movers" and "shakers". Movers give users affordances and handles to hold on to when navigating a piece of content. Shakers lack sufficient handles, provide nothing to hold on to, and repeatedly "shake off" users.

 

People tend to move closer towards content that moves them. Moving content is content that draws and emotional response from the reader. A smile, a frown, anger, a sense of compassion. laughter...you get the point. The reader "feels" it and is in some way "moved" by it.

 

Like a courteous waiter, offer them a to-go box  for their "content", and let them get on with their life.

| More
239 Views 0 Comments 0 References Permalink Tags: article, innovation, mobile_content_distribution, mobile_publishing, multi-channel_marketing
1 2 3 4 ... 9 Previous Next

Actions