In the last few weeks there has been a lot
of publicity and visibility on the fact that CIOs are being or going to be measured
on business metrics, many of which they do not control or influence directly or
indirectly. This sparked many a debates on various forums that attract CIOs,
social media sites and groups that are dedicated to IT leaders. Not that anyone
tried to contain it, the fever spread globally very quickly with reactions that
spanned the spectrum of emotions.
Traditionally IT was measured on three
aspects; operational efficiency, budgets, and delivery of projects. The
connected world also added information security. Disaster recovery and business
continuity surfaced and made it to the dashboard. Somewhere business benefit
crept in and then projects were also reviewed from a business angle. Regulatory
compliance required significant IT support and thus edged in. But revenue,
profitability, customer acquisition or retention, product availability ?
How does the CIO influence any of these ?
Can better IT deliver additional growth ? Will technology drive profitability ?
What can the CIO do to acquire new customers or retain existing ones ? And what
about product quality or availability ? If cash flow is an issue, how will
systems ease it ? Competition has a better and cheaper product or a great
marketing strategy, can IT or the CIO counter it in any way ? If the answer to
one or more is no, then why link performance or compensation to these
measurements ?
I know some of the CIOs who have been there
done that, evolved beyond technology and/or taken additional business roles
will say that the CIO can indeed contribute and influence most of the measures
above. This is achieved with systems that create operational efficiency,
business process management, information visibility, business intelligence and
analytical models, and even enabling new models of engagement with the new
trends and hyped technology troika, Big Data, Mobility, and Social Media. Cloud
and Outsourcing are passé; everyone has done it or is doing it
It is evident that this piece of news has
many people worried, and not all of them are CIOs; they are propagating the
message that if I cannot control something, I should have the choice to
determine if my performance is likely to be impacted. Fair point if the
organization worked in perfect silos. In business and life uncertainty is
certain and thus even the metrics that seem to be under control have
dependencies – internal and external – which are beyond one’s power of
influence.
Does the CEO control how the industry will
behave ? Can the CFO control interest rates or liquidity crunch ? If the
customer does not buy, what can the CMO do ? Rhetorical questions ? They are
not helpless, but there is a limit to their ability to influence the outcome. They
do play a role and they depend on the rest of the CXOs to work lock-step in
achieving success. CPO (Chief People Officer) has to help hire and retain the
best talent, CIO has to ensure information availability to key stakeholders for
decision making and analysis. That’s what the C-suite is all about.
So if the CIO stakes claim to the table, it
comes with a set of obligations and responsibilities; it comes with the territory;
all CXOs are jointly and individually responsible for the success of the
enterprise. It is not about “I have done my part and now you go figure”; I
believe that CIOs should and does actively seek this responsibility and then
works with others in shaping the future. The C-suite has to take this
variability risk. Only then can the CIO aspire to take a position on the Board
or become a CEO.
Very true and pertinent questions
ReplyDelete