Executive Summary

We are in the midst of a rapid growth of IT management systems  capability, responding to changing business needs. IT management systems are  beginning to address the needs of additional layers of management  accountability.

At the same time, they are expanding the range of functionality offered at  each layer. Harnessing the full potential of these IT management systems  will require significant organizational change.

More fundamentally, the real economic value of these IT management systems  will not be realized until we can more effectively create explicit linkages between the performance of elements of the IT infrastructure and the operational and financial performance of the business.

Rather than full transparency of performance data, we need much more  selective and highly targeted visibility into the performance of our  IT systems, shaped by a deep understanding of the economic leverage  points of our business.

Business needs to force  major architectural shifts

Around the world, competitive pressures are intensifying. The current recessionary environment in key regions of the world certainly doesn't help matters. But this is isn't about recessions. As painful as they may be,  they are only temporary.

Something much more fundamental is going on. Forces that have been at work for decades are reshaping the business landscape. In particular, continued technology innovation and broad-based public policy shifts favoring freer markets are making it easier for companies to challenge each other around the world. The bottom line? A lot more uncertainty, the need for continued cost reduction and the imperative to find new sources of growth to continue to create economic value.

To respond to these needs, senior executives are finding that they must  design and manage very different businesses. They seek much more flexibility within their own operations to cope with uncertainty. They also find that they must increasingly rely on other companies to supplement their own capabilities and add more value to their customers. The scope of coordination no longer stops at the edge of the enterprise. In fact, it often extends through several levels of business partners.

Flexibility and collaboration -- that's challenging enough. Layer on top of that the need for real-time management capabilities. This in part is a requirement for flexibility -- companies need to reduce the lead-time required to respond to unanticipated changes in the environment. But, more fundamentally, it is about reducing cycle times across all operations to deliver  operating savings and greater customer satisfaction.

These needs are forcing a fundamental shift in IT architectures. No sooner have we started to become comfortable with an "n-tier" architecture than we find that a new architecture is emerging to respond to these new business needs. This new architecture -- a distributed service-oriented architecture -- is  only in its earliest stages of development.

Companies are finding that flexibility and efficiency both require that IT resources be made available as services -- accessible anywhere whether these resources are local, in distant reaches of the enterprise, in business partners or located in specialized third party service providers.

We are no longer dealing with IT architectures that are defined by the boundaries of the firm -- to be effective, they need to extend across a broad range of enterprises. This new architecture enables virtualization of resources -- making resources available as needed. In the process, it promotes more efficient utilization of resources since these resources can be allocated dynamically to the areas of highest demand.

IT management systems will need to adapt

This shift in IT architectures poses significant challenges for IT management systems. These management systems will need to evolve rapidly to keep pace with the demands of the new architecture.

Services built upon virtualized and distributed IT resources significantly increase the complexity of problem identification and resolution. At the same time complexity is going up, the time available to address and resolve problems is shrinking. Real-time enterprise operations are highly sensitive to any downtime.

IT management systems will need to adapt to the demands along two very  different vectors:

Expanding management focus

We are all familiar with the paradox: we have too much data to effectively use and, when we need it, the right data rarely seems to be available. One way to resolve this paradox is to focus on understanding the specific needs of various types of decision-makers. Rather than trying to provide overall transparency, a much more effective approach is to provide focused visibility into the data that matters the most at the appropriate time. Of course, focused visibility assumes that one clearly understands the needs of various categories of data users. This will be a central challenge for IT management system providers over the next several years.

NSM platforms: IT management systems have evolved significantly already. Emerging from discrete tools to manage performance of specific elements of the IT infrastructure, these systems now provide integrated views of performance across broad segments of the IT infrastructure. These Network and  Systems Management (NSM) platforms still focus on the performance of individual elements in the IT infrastructure, but help to aggregate the performance view for managers of IT operations. They are very effective in providing quick alerts regarding performance issues and helping managers of specific IT elements to trouble-shoot the problems.

TSM platforms: Technology Service Management (TSM) platforms expand the scope of management focus. Rather than focusing on the performance of individual elements of the IT infrastructure, these TSM platforms provide  views of performance of specific IT services from an end-user  perspective.

Take the example of an "available to promise" service provided to the sales force. Many companies run into two issues as the focus shifts to service-level performance. First, what is the expected level of performance for specific  services? Service-level agreements (SLAs) help to make these end-user expectations explicit and provide benchmarks against which to measure performance. Second, this service might cross multiple networks, draw on several databases, rely upon many servers, and invoke more than one application along the way. If the service does not offer performance consistent with SLAs, few companies today have the capability to tie the service to all the elements of the IT infrastructure involved in delivering the service. The result is long delays in diagnosing the problem, much less making the service functional again.

The primary user of these platforms is the service "owner" in the IT  group who is accountable for delivering performance as specified by an SLA. Many IT management system providers are seeking to address this need today. Two of the most significant opportunities here are IT service view tools and SLA compliance tools. IT service view tools help IT managers to automate the process of identifying the various elements in the IT infrastructure that support delivery of a specific IT service. SLA compliance tools help to automatically monitor SLA-defined performance metrics and send alerts when performance begins to vary outside the prescribed range.

BPPM platforms: But the scope of management focus needs to expand even  further. Companies need Business Process Performance Management (BPPM) platforms.These are not platforms to manage the business process itself -- there's a host of Business Process Management platforms available to do that.

Instead, these BPPM platforms are designed to rapidly identify performance issues among the various IT services coming together to support specific business processes.

The "available to promise" service is only one of many services that support a Lead to Order business process. As indicated earlier, real-time enterprise performance demands faster problem diagnosis and resolution -- operational cycle times are compressed, information access demands rise, and operations need to respond more quickly to unanticipated changes. If any of the technology services supporting a business process go down, the economic impact on the business is far greater than in the past.

The user of these platforms would be the operations managers "owning" key business processes and accountable for their smooth functioning. Unlike the two lower layers of management platforms, non-IT managers will use this management platform, and it must be designed to address their needs.

BOPM platforms. There's even a broader scope of management focus.  Business Operations Performance Management (BOPM) platforms provide an integrated view of all the resources required to support the operations of a business. Once again, these platforms are not designed to manage the operations -- they provide the capability to monitor financial and  operational key performance indicators of the business.

For example, they might help senior management to determine that a growing turnover rate in certain customer segments is due to manufacturing production slippages in specific assembly plants and that these are, in turn, due to the introduction of a new product that has not been appropriately calibrated in the automated assembly equipment. The platform would provide a rapid assessment of the financial impact of these operating issues and help to troubleshoot the source of the problem.

We are no longer talking about narrowly defined IT management systems -- these BOPM platforms would cover a much broader scope than simply the IT services required to run the business. These BOPM platforms will draw heavily upon the functionality offered by business intelligence systems, but they will provide additional value by tying key operating and financial performance indicators to underlying IT services and other operating resources.

This will help the users of these BOPM platforms to not only identify performance issues, but to pinpoint the actions required to address these performance issues. The users of this platform will be chief operating officers and chief financial officers seeking to spot broad performance issues that cut across the core processes of the business.

These layers of IT management systems act like geological sediments, with the lower layers supporting the upper layers. For example, as Technology Service Management platforms emerge, they will not replace NSM platforms. Instead, they will provide an additional layer of management that actively draws upon the resources and information of the NSM platforms. In fact, the upper layers of IT management systems could not operate without the lower layers already in place. Put another way, these are nested platforms that build upon the resources and capabilities of the lower layers.

Expanding  functionality in each layer

We have just discussed IT management systems in terms of the need to provide a steadily expanding scope of management focus addressing the needs of more senior executives within the company. At the same time, each layer of IT management systems will need to steadily expand the range of functionality offered to help identify and address performance problems.

Automating problem resolution: Today, NSM platforms provide a robust set of tools to identify performance issues among individual elements of the IT infrastructure and to discover the root causes of the performance issues. These systems are much more limited in terms of their capability to either offer transitional workarounds or to fix the problems causing the performance issues. Often, these steps require expensive and time-consuming manual labor. While we will never take human intervention completely out of the equation, there are significant opportunities to automate the problem-resolution phase. At the first level, NSM platforms can provide enhanced tools to recommend specific problem-resolution actions based on problem-resolution histories and knowledge bases. Automating the resolution itself will likely take longer, especially in cases when additional elements of IT infrastructure need to be provisioned and configured. By automating this phase, however, NSM platforms could substantially reduce the cost of problem resolution and to shorten the time necessary to restore performance to acceptable levels.

Moving from reactive to proactive problem identification: NSM platforms were largely designed to help IT managers address problems as they surfaced. As these systems accumulate more performance histories of elements in the IT infrastructure in specific kinds of operating environments, management platforms can offer more proactive approaches to problem identification. By providing appropriate analytical tools, these performance histories can be assessed to identify conditions that are likely to create certain kinds of performance issues. Management can then take the appropriate steps to either modify the conditions or to adapt the IT infrastructure to the conditions so that performance issues can be averted.

Expanding beyond enterprise boundaries: NSM platforms do a great job of monitoring performance of IT elements within the enterprise. As business processes extend across enterprises, managers have a growing need to assess performance of IT elements in infrastructures of other enterprises. Currently, NSM platforms have a difficult time providing this level of visibility.

Prioritizing problem resolution: We all have scarce resources, especially these days. One of the key business challenges in this environment is to prioritize our efforts so that we maximize financial impact given the resources available. This is certainly true in the domain of IT system and service management. But, there is a problem. How do we know which are the most critical elements in the IT infrastructure to focus on when multiple elements malfunction at the same time? IT managers may have a rough intuitive sense of priority in more static IT architectures, but what tools do they have to prioritize in more dynamic architectures? Today, this server may be used to support a mission-critical, supply-chain operation, while tomorrow the same server may be deployed to support an employee survey regarding cafeteria offerings.

In many respects, this functionality is the most challenging to provide. Here is where the two dimensions of functionality improvement for IT management systems come together. The NSM layer of management systems cannot provide robust prioritization tools until the other layers in the management systems stack have been deployed. To prioritize problem resolution at the level of individual elements of the IT infrastructure, managers must first understand how the various elements knit together to support specific IT services; they must then understand the role that these services play in supporting specific business processes, and, finally, they must understand the impact of these business processes on the financial performance of the corporation.

To deliver this prioritization capability, IT management systems will need to simultaneously pursue a bottom-up, and top-down management approach. The top-down approach is essential to define the broad business context and performance impact of IT systems. The bottom-up approach is necessary to provide the granularity required at the level of individual IT elements to address and resolve performance issues. Neither approach in isolation can deliver the functionality required by management. This is especially true as IT architectures become much more dynamic and the relationships across elements change rapidly to deliver specific IT services.

Most of the preceding discussion focused on the expansion of functionality at the NSM layer of IT management systems. Of course, this same expansion of functionality will be required at each additional layer of IT management systems.

New organizational  approaches will be required to facilitate enhanced IT management

The expanded functionality of IT management systems discussed above will not  deliver real business impact unless it is accompanied by significant  organizational change. New management roles, governance structures, and skills will be required to harness the economic value offered by these more robust management systems.

Management roles: Most IT organizations today focus on defining clear management accountability for individual elements of the IT infrastructure. Far fewer organizations have systematically assigned management accountability for IT services defined from an end-user perspective -- for example, the "available to promise" IT service mentioned earlier. These IT service managers would have responsibility for negotiating SLAs with appropriate business users of IT services and then managing the performance of the IT services to ensure they remain within the prescribed ranges.

Increasingly, these IT service managers will need to be adept at negotiating SLAs, not only within their enterprise, but also with managers in other enterprises. Users in business partners will often access IT services offered by a company. For example, the "available to promise" service discussed earlier might be used not only by the sales force within the enterprise, but also by sales people within various third party distribution channels. Many of the elements required to deliver the IT service may be outsourced to third parties so the IT service manager will also need to negotiate SLAs with these service providers as well.

At an even higher level, organizations will need to assign explicit IT  management accountability and business management accountability for core operating processes within the business. The IT manager and the business manager of a core operating process like customer relationship management need to work closely together to ensure that business performance objectives are met. As these core processes span a growing number of business partners, these core process managers will also need to become adept at coordinating activities and IT services in a much more loosely coupled manner.

Without these management roles firmly in place, it will be hard to find the right decision-makers for each of the layers of IT management systems described earlier. Without the right decision-makers operating the platforms, the data provided will not result in the management actions required to deliver maximum business impact.

Governance structures: Centralized, top-down management structures have prevailed within IT organizations. Effective use of the enhanced functionality of IT management systems will require a very different governance structure that builds much more on federation principles. In any federation, decision-making authority is lodged in the lowest layers possible. Clear distinctions are made between what is local and what must be escalated to higher levels for resolution. Adhering to the principle of the least escalation possible, appropriate escalation and conflict resolution procedures are explicitly defined in advance.

Centralized, top-down IT management systems will find it impossible to cope with the growing complexity as IT architectures become more distributed and dynamic. Single, centralized correlation engines cannot perform all the analytics required. Even if this were technically possible, this single centralized correlation function would not be feasible in distributed IT architectures spanning multiple enterprises.

Federation arrangements -- both in the IT management systems and in the broader organization -- are the only way to accommodate the reality of multiple decision-making nodes. The distinct layers of IT management systems accountability outlined earlier can help to support a federated management model, provided that these layers are designed so that decision-making and action are kept as decentralized as possible. The role of the upper layers of IT management systems is to provide guidance regarding prioritization and insight regarding interdependencies. It is not primarily to perform problem identification and problem resolution.

Federated IT management systems will, of course, have a hard time functioning if they are inserted into highly centralized organizations. Organizations will need to define and implement corresponding federation arrangements, both within individual companies and across companies that are becoming more linked in terms of IT infrastructure.

Skill building: Harnessing the economic value of these new IT management system capabilities will require new organizational skills as well. As new layers of IT management systems accountability are defined, it will be harder and harder to draw the line between IT management skills and business management skills. Even at the layer of technical services management, the ability to define services and SLAs in end-user terms will require both deep IT skills and a deep understanding of the business context.

IT skills will also need to evolve. The ability to map elements of the IT infrastructure to specific services is difficult enough in a static, n-tier IT architecture. It becomes far more challenging in a dynamic, service-oriented architecture when the various elements required to support a service may change with each instance of service delivery.

Web services technology will play a significant role in accelerating the move to a dynamic, service-oriented architecture. This same technology can help to define standardized interfaces between applications and IT management systems, and thereby simplify the task of connecting into various elements of the IT infrastructure. Unfortunately, few organizations today have deep Web services technology skills. Even fewer have deep service-oriented-architecture skills. Both of these skill sets will need to be developed to realize the potential of new IT management system capabilities.

Need to move in rapid incremental  stages

Few organizations today have the systems or capabilities outlined above. There is, in fact, a significant gap between the systems in place now and the capabilities and potential that will be achieved in the years ahead. To effectively exploit this potential, companies need to have a clear vision of the systems and capabilities required. Very few companies today even have an explicit vision of the potential, so this is a necessary ingredient of any program to develop these capabilities.

But vision alone is useless -- in fact, it can become a distraction and excuse for lack of action. Many IT managers fall victim to the "architecture trap": they insist that, if detailed architectural blueprints are not fully defined, then any near-term initiatives should be put on hold until this is done. They also begin to believe that the entire architecture must be in place before any business value can be delivered. If they're not careful, these architectural initiatives can morph into ten-year mega-projects that rarely deliver the expected returns. What companies need is a broad architectural vision regarding IT management systems capability that can help to focus their near-term initiatives. If the blueprints get too detailed, they run the risk of becoming obsolete before they are complete.

Real impact is achieved when a high-level architectural vision regarding IT management systems capability is coupled with a strategy of rapid incrementalism. This approach focuses on defining short-term initiatives (at most, with a six- to twelve-month horizon) with clear business impact that can accelerate movement towards the longer-term architectural vision. These short-term initiatives speed up learning and, in turn, help to refine the longer-term architectural vision based on the new learning. The key is to stage the architectural migration in a way that delivers tangible business value at each step. This helps to build conviction and support for later stage initiatives. In an ideal world, the architectural migration becomes self-funding, although in practice this is difficult to achieve fully.

Of course, doing this effectively requires a deep understanding of the business context and the various ways in which IT systems management capability can deliver tangible business value. For example, as companies move to develop more technical service management capability, the real challenge is to understand which services have the most significant impact on the operational and financial performance of the firm.

Don't try to move to technical service management across the board -- start narrowly with a core business process and figure out where technical services become key leverage points in the performance of the process.

At the early stages, it may even be necessary to use back of the envelope calculations since detailed operational and financial data may not be available in a form that is helpful. Remember the old Pareto rule? Find the 20% of the services that deliver the 80% of the economic value to the process. At this point, figure out which of these 20% of the services are easiest to manage -- both in terms of the ability to map to the underlying elements of the IT infrastructure and the ability to affect SLA performance through enhanced problem identification and resolution tools. Start here. Depending on how evolved the IT management capabilities are today, it may even be necessary to define appropriate SLAs as a first step.

The key is to figure out what can be realistically done in a six to twelve  month time frame and what specific business benefits can be delivered at the end of this period. In this economic environment, the more the business benefits can be framed in terms of operating savings -- operating cost reduction or operating asset savings -- the more likely the short-term initiatives will be funded. Quantify the business benefits and then measure them. If these benefits materialized, document it and publicize it. Build support for the next wave of initiatives. If these benefits did not materialize, then figure out why not and incorporate this learning into the next wave of initiatives. Be clear about what has been learned and why the next wave of initiatives is more likely to produce the expected results.

The high level architectural vision will be very helpful in focusing the near-term efforts so that they produce both near-term business benefits and accelerate the movement towards a much more powerful IT systems management architecture. It helps to prevent scatter-shot initiatives, none of which receive sufficient resources or attention to have real impact. On the other hand, the discipline of seeking six to twelve month tangible business benefits helps to reduce the risk of feature creep or mega-project black holes. The key is to get started, but to have some idea of where you are headed.

IT management  performance diagnostic

Action Plan

First month

Assemble a team focused on upgrading your company's IT management system  capabilities

Conduct a diagnostic of current IT management system capabilities, focusing  on

Develop a high level IT management system architectural vision along the two dimensions outlined above -- layers of management accountability and categories of functionality available at each layer

Second month

Meet with senior IT and business management to build alignment around the high level IT management system architectural vision -- refine the architectural vision as required

Identify a series of initiatives designed to accelerate movement toward this architectural vision while at the same time delivering tangible business benefits within a six to twelve month time frame -- be sure to include organizational initiatives designed to address major capability gaps.

Third month

Create a portfolio of near-term initiatives prioritized based on magnitude of business impact and amount of effort and resources required to support the initiatives

Develop a business case for each of the near-term initiatives, quantifying  anticipated business impact

Define business impact milestones for each of the near-term initiatives and quantify the base line performance for later measurement of impact

Launch first wave of initiatives

More information is available at www.johnhagel.com; contact John Hagel at john@johnhagel.com.

Part  1  |  Part 2

III. Thou shalt build and cultivate relationships inside and outside the  enterprise.

Good relationships are critical for good partnerships. Relationships need to be continually nurtured, and to become institutionalized. Relationships need to grow, beyond individual relationships, to departmental relationships, and it must be viewed as value-added. Within the relationship, each partner's perspective and needs must be anticipated; a good partner answers a question before it is asked.

Relationships, while strongly encouraged on an individual level, need to be understood on a group level. For example, if a particularly difficult partner has been unable to form a relationship with technology staff, the technology department must recognize this and take steps to forge the right relationships. Senior technology managers may have to identify the sources of the relationship problem and proactively correct them. This may involve issues of competence, mutual respect, credibility, business knowledge and perspective, or communications, and so on. Relationships are not built overnight, and require patience and consistency.

IV. Thou shalt design the appropriate infrastructure.

IT will need to design a methodology similar to the time-tested SDLC methodology, which focuses primarily on software development activities. However, this new methodology focuses on addressing infrastructure-related issues. I refer to it as Infrastructure Development Life Cycle (IDLC^TM). The phases are similar to SDLC, but its focus is on the  infrastructure:

• Planning
• Analysis
• Design
• Construction (Test & QA)
• Deployment
• Ongoing operations

But there's more; IDLC^TM resolves the lack of effective communication practices between Applications Development and Operations. It integrates both groups to meet a common objective for every mission-critical application. Before IT can be a viable business partner, there must be alignment within IT first via the IDLC^TM.

Focus on mission critical

Structuring the infrastructure organization is to focus on mission-critical systems, not the technology. The first step is to define the scope of production. Split your infrastructure support organization into two parts: mission critical and non-mission critical. It's up to you and your customers to determine what's mission critical and what's not. How much revenue will be lost if that system is down for N number of minutes? But don't proclaim everything as mission critical; be frugal. If you try to take on the world, you will surely fail.

So many companies structure their organization to support a particular technology. Whether you run your business on NT, UNIX, or other, never structure to focus on a particular technology. This is one of the most common mistakes in IT. IT should always structure to support RAS (Reliable, Available, Serviceable) while focusing on customer service. RAS was, and still should be, synonymous with mission critical. With RAS and customer service as the focus of your organization, the entire computing environment will flourish.

V. Thou shalt honor time-tested disciplines (standards, processes).

Whether your company has a mainframe environment or not, it is crucial to understand the importance of mainframe disciplines, processes, procedures, standards, and guidelines. In the age of network computing, disciplines are more important than ever. But you cannot simply impose mainframe disciplines on network computing technology. You need to:

• Customize and streamline these disciplines
• Implement the minimum, yet sufficient, set of disciplines
• Maintain centralized control of enterprise-wide system management processes  (disciplines)

By necessity, the mainframe environment was large, complex, and enjoyed the luxury of timely planning. Today's computing environments need the same type of structure and discipline, with more streamlining.

There are many system management processes to implement, but please don't attempt to take on all of them unless you have an unlimited resource pool. Implement the handful that is most critical to your environment. From the companies I've assessed, very few have the most critical set of processes, and if they do, they're not very effective. Three of the most critical set of processes in my opinion are:

• Release Management
• Change Management
• Problem Management

Develop minimum, yet sufficient, enterprise-wide standards, architectures, documentation, and so on, for each area of IT (e.g., the network, data center, desktops, development tools, nomadic computers, servers). You need standards for today, and clear statements of direction for your standards, environments, platforms, paradigms, or architectures (you pick the buzzword) for the future.

Centralized control means controlling costs by developing architectures, and deploying standards from a central location; for example:

• Global Standard Network
• Global Standard Desktop Hardware
• Global Standard Desktop Operating System
• Global Standard Desktop Application Suite
• Global Standard Virus Scanning
• Global Standard Server Hardware
• Global Standard Server Operating System
• Global Standard Data Backup
• Global Standard Messaging and Collaboration Platform
• Global Standard Monitoring
• Global Standard Remote Access
• Global Standard Development Database
• Global Standard Application Distribution Platform
• Global Standard Development Methods and Tools

Without standards and centralized control of key enterprise-wide processes, it will be futile to attempt to build a cost-effective world-class organization.

VI. Thou shalt identify, measure, and benchmark your services  portfolio.

The first step is the easiest: Identify your services. To market those services and demonstrate the value of IT to the enterprise will be more challenging. And the key success factor is measurement; IT performance needs to be measured, so there is a benchmark to improve against. Metrics by themselves provide little value -- it's how the metrics are implemented, reported, and acted on that differentiates successful measurement programs from failures. In the latter case, measures are used that imply value, whether that value is expressed in reducing the cost of doing business or in new revenue streams that are the direct result of an investment in information technology. All services should be measurable and have a positive impact on revenues, customer satisfaction, productivity, and so on. Services should also be responsive, available, relevant, and closely aligned with business outcomes.

VII. Thou shalt demonstrate and convey the value of IT throughout the  enterprise.

Today, IT professionals need to walk with the great unwashed and communicate with customers. We need to schmooze, sell, and otherwise promote its services. IT organizations need to sell to their business colleagues the fact that IT can, and should, be leveraged for business value and growth. True commitment requires educated understanding, and it is the job of the CIO to demonstrate the relationship between the understanding of strategic technology initiatives and the long-term success of the firm. If executive management fails to see the value of their involvement, it is the CIO's role to change that perception or to think about his next career move.

Value should be quantifiable and measurable. It is best to communicate value  in its simplest recognizable form. For example:

Value is best communicated to the enterprise by IT's business partners. The right relationship and recognition of value leads to the ideal situation of business partners becoming evangelists. At a fundamental level, IT needs to be understood (without having to say so) that underpinning the entire process of value creation is the partnering relationship. All members of IT need to be educated to recognize their business contributions. All need to understand their business partner's concerns and address them both formally and informally.

VIII. Thou shalt establish and uphold a common set of shared values.

Values are guiding principles, basic beliefs that are the fundamental assumptions upon which all subsequent actions are based. Quality of life leads to success. As a whole, values define the personality and character of an individual or a group. Values are the essence of an individual or group and provide guidelines by which to make consistent decisions. In reality, values are ideals that are indicative of one's vision of how the world should work. These values form a contract between the individuals and the group.

• If all staff members are making decisions based upon the same values, it is more likely that delegation of responsibility and authority will function effectively.
• If all staff members are making decisions based upon the same values, it is more likely that thousands of individual decisions will converge in a consistent strategy.
• If all staff members are making decisions based upon the same values, it is  more likely that synergies will be realized.
• If all staff members are making decisions based upon the same values, it is  more likely that partnerships will prosper.
• If all staff members are making decisions based upon the same values, it is  more likely that productivity will accelerate.
• If all staff members are making decisions based upon the same values, it is  more likely that retention will never be a problem.
• If all staff members are making decisions based upon the same values, it is  more likely that the firm will reap large profits.

Appropriate values inexorably lead to principled actions and a high quality of life. Such values guide hiring decisions, establish a common culture, foster strategic decision-making (even short-term tactical decisions made by guiding principles are strategic), and they lay the groundwork for internal consistency.

IX. Thou shalt know and manage your vendors.

Vendors should be aligned with your services, processes, assets, and staff. Many IT organizations that have to deal with numerous assets and dozens, if not hundreds, of vendors are establishing a Vendor Management Office (VMO). The VMO has better control of your technology buying process, seeks higher levels of services, and achieves cost savings. The VMO assists executives in making educated decisions about which vendor can offer the best service at the lowest cost for any given project. The VMO also helps executives manage relationships with various vendors, track metrics and performance on these vendors, and negotiate the appropriate discounts for projects, products, and services.

X. Thou shalt continuously gauge effectiveness of the organization.

As stated throughout this article, IT is a different beast. IT executives need to be proactive and gauge the temperature of the total environment, not just the technology aspect. I recommend that IT hold quarterly organization checkups, or what I formally refer to as an organization planning and development workshop, to address the evolving and growing list of issues.

The workshop should not be one of those typical offsite management-planning sessions. This program should be designed to bring key contributors, both technical and management, from all areas of the organization,  into one room to brainstorm the issues, prioritize the issues, and develop a  playbook to resolve the issues. This is an action plan with associated milestones; responsibilities clearly noted with due dates that everyone, including the CIO, has bought into -- one plan that the entire  organization has bought into! And when I say buy-in, I mean  commitment to execute on the plan on behalf of the entire organization. One-hundred-percent support and approval must come from the CIO to the technical staff if massive improvements are to take place. The primary objectives of the workshop are to:

• Highlight, categorize, and prioritize the top three to five IT-related  issues.
• Develop an action plan to address the top issues.
• Get buy-in and commitment from all IT (staff, management,  executive management).
• Improve communication between the groups (team  building).

This ensures that IT focuses with the same intensity on people, the organization structure, and process components as they do on technology and development!

--

Harris Kern is a renowned American author, publisher, lecturer, and IT consultant, who focuses his considerable talents on simplifying IT -- and making it work. Through the Harris Kern Enterprise Computing Institute (www.harriskern.com), he has developed a powerful resource for building competitive IT organizations. Under the umbrella of the Institute, IT professionals from many of the world's leading companies come together to take advantage of leading edge disciplines and strategies for improving the IT industry.