Old proverb “Silence is golden” does not apply to the corporate world !

He was much sought after due to his position in the industry built over a period of time with credible success across his stints in various industries. The companies he collected were big brands that added value to partners who provided solutions and basked in reflected glory. The industry loved him for his articulate style and ability to engage in discussions across a wide range of subjects. Oft quoted and a frequent speaker, he build a brand for himself which also brought him accolades internally and externally.

People reached out to him to seek advice, listen to his lateral thoughts, introduce new ideas and solutions, bounce off theories and hypothesis, new startup pitches; the flood of requests ensured that his time was always packed from dawn to dusk. His Assistant acted as a gatekeeper to whatever extent she could, a task made difficult because of his popularity and direct access that he allowed to many. He always responded back to cold calls, unsolicited emails, or requests received through the peer network.

It did not matter whether the company was big or small or a startup, same applied to whether the solution was relevant to his industry and company; he empathized with the troops of sales people who were always in a spot when attempting to approach CXOs. He gave them half an hour to present their pitch, listened and gave them candid feedback on applicability of their wares to his company and industry. He was approachable but at the same time maintained professional distance in his dealings.

She was always busy and rarely had time for anyone – internally or externally; her career of similar length had been built without any fanfare or evidence of noticeable contribution. And then suddenly she was in a position of high visibility which required her to connect across levels and participate in industry gatherings to represent the company’s interests. Speculation was rife on her rise while her past remained a mystery, in the position she now occupied she was expected to learn the ropes and hit the ground running.

Business leaders within her company sought her audience to discuss new opportunities, solutions to existing problems, solve operational challenges faced with her team; she was always accompanied by another team member who was left to field the questions and face the heat while half way into the meeting she would disappear as the phone rang. It is not that she did not have the expertise required for her function, her colleagues realized that her unorganized way of working resulted in double booking and general chaos.

Vendors, partners and solution providers too did not have any success, she was reluctant to meet with them and whenever she did, they met with similar fate ! She rescheduled or canceled meetings at the last moment, or she would turn up late to the meeting and then again excuse herself with the phone coming to the rescue. The smaller vendors hungry for the business continued their attempts at getting her attention, the larger players decided to focus their attention on other more professional customers.

Industry events fared no better with token attendance at best in a rare appearance; her company was one of the leaders and thus there was always participation by other functions in their relevant meetings. Unfortunately her team was also rarely found in such gatherings following the example set by her and the infrequent approvals for the same. The enigma lived on with resultant adverse impact on the company reputation and ability to leverage the innovation network that competition gained from.

The two personas represent stark opposites with some exaggeration to bring out the differences; the former is not someone you find easily while many traits of the latter exist in the corporate world. Unanswered phone calls and emails – especially cold calls and emails – have become the norm for the busy executive who is largely running from one fire to another or shuffling priorities between the urgent and the important. This results in overcrowding of mail boxes with reminders and follow ups from the seekers.

1.      Best way to avoid a meeting ? Don’t respond !

2.      Don’t want to do business with someone ? Don’t answer calls, messages, or communication !

3.      Confirm when someone is insistent, back out later citing urgent/important exigency !

The list can go on; in a hyper connected world, communication failure is rampant ! Respect for time is disappearing. What is the impact of this on corporate performance, cost of follow up, cost of waiting for others to turn up, opportunity cost, and finally individual credibility and reputation ?

Building a partnership

It does not matter if the vendor is big or small, local or global, domain centric or broad based, custom solutions developer or provides package implementation services, hardware products or software licences, or any kind of service provider; they all want you to believe that they all are worthy of being anointed as a preferred and trusted partner to your IT and business initiatives. Everyone without exception believes that they imbibe behaviours that qualify them for this elevated position.

I am not sure when the transition happened but sometime in the recent decade the term partner replaced the vendor or provider. I think people went back to basics in the early part of the millennium driven by the slowdown, started focusing on leveraging existing ones and building new relationships. Business was tough to come and choices plenty which is where people made the difference. This subtle transition eased into our way of working and no one objected to the new reality.

Today we have partners providing total outsourcing, specialized domain specific or business process outsourcing, desk side support, apart from the various categories listed above. Many of these who have put in their heart and blood into delivering products/services irrespective of the contract or commercial arrangement are truly partners to a CIO and the enterprise; my respects to them. We also have partners providing toner cartridges, USB sticks, printing paper where price is typically the determinant factor !

Recently a CIO friend narrated a story where she met a new vendor where the discussion started with the intent that we would like to be your partners in success and not keep it transactional. The CEO and the team downward demonstrated high passion and commitment at the discussion table. They got engaged in a few projects as a precursor to what could be bigger things and achieve the status of a trusted partner. With many vying for the same business, it was seen as a prestigious win.

The slip between intent and execution has many horror stories spread across the industry. Senior teams from vendors attempt to build relationships with the CIOs, the sales team works with the domain specialists and the next level, and the delivery team which typically has no connect with the process starts discussions with the project managers and the users of the proposed solutions. And that is what transpired here too; one project was delivered well enough, the other killed the relationship.

What appeared to be a dream run became a moon race with surprises all through the journey ! The initial effort estimates did not fit the project reality; either the team who did the initial study did not understand the complexity and expectations or her inputs were ignored in the proposal. So there was an attempt to restrict scope to fit the resources allotted. That upset everyone involved; the CEO made a visit, so did others involved in the initial discussion. Much water had flowed and a dam was essential.

Restoring some sanity to the project with the vendor CEO approving the additional investment and some hit on the CIOs side too, the project looked like being back on track; but that was a false positive. The lack of trust made success elusive; the potential partnership gained adversarial tones with each pinning the blame on the other. It took some effort to bring everyone to a common understanding and move ahead.

Partnership is built over a period of time and is a function of delivering to promise consistently across the layers. It takes effort to sustain it and requires investments and transparency from everyone. Everyone hates escalations which result due to lack of communication and assumptions. In my experience I have found partnerships that have stood the travails of time when there is no gap in expectations on both sides. Sales transactions do not build partnership, they only address tactical need.

The long and short of IT

People with goals succeed because they know where they are going. This has never been so true in the current economic uncertainty; companies struggling for growth put their employees in peculiar situations. They are expected to deliver monthly and quarterly targets whereas the discussions are expected to be strategic and long term. This is challenging for the CIO and the IT team where typically projects do last beyond a quarter (with agile exceptions) and investments require a 3-5 year horizon.

When I met with the management team of a large enterprise vendor selling applications and technology solutions, there was a paradoxical discussion on my long-term needs and their short-term requirements. They wanted me to present the Business and IT roadmap for the next 3 years and initiatives where technology was a critical component, which I did leading to discussions on technologies and partner solutions that would become projects in the future. They had their team and many partners listen in.

The sales team and some of the leaders from partner companies wanted to know who they should connect with in my team and when they can come over for a detailed discussion. They came in different avatars, confident, cocky, arrogant, tentative, all types made up the discussions on the possibilities. I intuitively liked some, was intrigued by a few and did not see value in the rest keeping in mind my priorities.  Their interest was to strike at the opportunity and if they can meet their monthly or quarterly targets.

I don’t mind helping when I can, however the gap between the talk and the walk was evident. How can a discussion at two different planes be aligned and create value ? My timeline was not aligned to their urgency to sell. So I advised them which some took in the right spirit while a few found it difficult to accept that I did not want their solution/technology. They espoused the efficiency, potential saving, the best in class nature of their wares showing incredulous surprise that I was rejecting their pitch.

How do we align expectations that all stakeholders have the same shared vision of the future and the direction being taken ? What should CIOs do to set the groundwork ? It is a difficult discussion in many cases with hierarchical selling that puts pressure on the CIO while s/he has to balance the set of internal priorities and needs. Balancing tactical with the strategic is a fine skill that very few are adept at. To have a bird’s eye view with ability to pick the target like an eagle separates the good from the best.

I have found that in most cases plain speak is the best option; be upfront with what are your priorities, what you need, how you will evaluate the options across different vendors; essentially what is the decision making criteria and the timeline, who will be involved etc. you get the point. Most vendors find this transparency a great starting point and they are willing to work with you. There will be exceptions when they try despite the open communication; they need to be managed with a firm hand.

So coming back to the discussion that transpired; it took some effort to not get upset with the blatant disregard for the stated intent and objectives. I could finally prevail upon the recalcitrant vendors to align to my priorities and reality. Over a drink later in the evening there was camaraderie between us and everyone acknowledged the candidness though they had found it difficult. Does it mean that CIOs do not always do this or vendors need to learn how to listen better ?

Why CIOs don't like Jalebi

Happy Diwali to everyone !

Jalebi is an Indian sweet (also eaten as dessert) extremely popular in the northern part of the country though now available internationally in Indian restaurants. It has a complex circular structure; the photo is one such representation of what a Jalebi can look like. In recent times, Jalebi was made famous by a Bollywood actress with the character named Jalebi bai. I have always been fond of Jalebi though in recent times have reduced my indulgence.

The CIO had great expectations when meeting the team from the most popular tablet vendor in the world who were pitching for an innovative solution. The large team comprising tab vendor, sales partner, and solution provider looked brazenly confident and rightly so considering the aspirational value of their product. Rarely were they in situations where they had to discuss the merits and advantages of their device; everyone justified internally why they wanted their solution and they just made truckloads of money

The internal customers were already sold on the device not the solution despite its shortcomings for the specific business need which required significant internal change. The business head had been aligned to the device (not the solution) and the meeting was expected to be a cakewalk. Despite the iconic nature of the device, the technical team was wary going into the meeting; not many enterprises had deployed on the scale that was envisaged and in challenging environmental conditions.

The meeting started well with a summary of the proposed solution, similar deployment in developed markets though on a smaller scale and how they can change the way business is done. The technical lead started asking a few questions which they tried to brush aside. He persisted as the support burden would fall upon him and he had to be sure. With amazing clarity of thought he laid down the questions that would determine the fate of the project in the long-term.

The vendor sales head started to justify the value proposition by talking about how the device has gained popularity globally and caught the imagination of the consumer. Their dominant market share is a validation of how well their device works. The number of solutions available on the device outnumbers all other competitors put together. They have been continuously innovating on making a better device. He went on and on, on the merits of the hardware sidestepping the pointed questions.

The discussion was going nowhere so the CIO intervened and sought specific answers to the specific questions. He clarified that the decision was contingent on the ability of the overall solution including the device to work as expected. If there are no workarounds or ready solutions, then they will have to explore alternatives. The long stories cut no ice, come straight to the point and stop going round in circles. After moments of silence, the meeting proceeded to its logical conclusion quickly.

In the post meeting debrief, many in the room almost in unison associated the past hour spent to the vendor making Jalebi. He avoided giving straight answers to most questions instead preferring to remain vague in his responses. Any love for the vendor by association to the device soon evaporated leaving everyone impatient to get over with the charade. Business does not and cannot accept the nebulous and imprecise when working to solve a determinate problem.

With tolerance levels reducing and options increasing to solve real business problems, vendors have their task cut out for them; the business and the IT teams are working collaboratively to arrive at solutions.  The discussion is focused on what matters, the scenario is the same internally too; no more beating around the bush or running around trees. The Jalebi is great to eat not considering the calories it adds; go on a diet, keep it away from the meeting room.

IT Annual Report

Almost a decade back, I met the CIO of Intel, who talked about an Annual Report of the IT organization— similar to the Annual Report published by the company for its shareholders. This report made good reading, which at that time presented metrics around availability of systems, uptime of links, number of problem tickets, budget performance, and a few others. At the turn of the century, a lot of these were indeed deemed relevant, and accepted by everyone. The report’s interesting parts depicted ’Voice of Customer’, discussed projects undertaken with their status, impact to business, and customer quotes. It was a slick report, similar to what a company would create with help from Marketing and Advertising.


Fast forward to 2010, when I was listening to a presentation on “Why should IT create an Annual Report”. The examples quoted were from Computer Associates (CA) and Intel. The audience of about 40 IT leaders listened in rapt attention, made notes, consuming the speaker’s insights, who mesmerized the audience. The KPIs were largely different, reflecting evolution of the IT organization and IT leader. Post the presentation, a debate started off on how many in the room did anything similar in terms of KPIs, reports, transparency, or even the basic weekly or monthly presentation at the management meetings; and if they did, what did they report?

Almost everyone had some kind of report being tabled, though not an Annual Report akin to the one that was presented. These hard copies were typically printed and distributed to the stakeholders, with help from an Advertising agency or Marketing department. A large IT company’s CIO mentioned that he has started working on something similar (with external help). He hopes to emulate the success that we all listened to. The thought that crossed my mind was that are CIOs of IT companies a step ahead of the rest of us in the room who represented other non-computer related industries. It was a disconnect, considering that a fair number of IT companies did not provide a seat on the management table to their IT heads.

Thinking for a long while after that, I kept wondering about why I never took the step (despite having the benefit a decade back) and when it was rekindled from memory again. The thought also wandered around as to why the representative Annual IT reports were only from the IT industry. Where were the examples from the large and successful marquee CIOs as well as IT enterprises (of success stories that everyone talks about)? Don’t they need the Annual Report to publish their success story and present it to their shareholders (CXOs and Board)?

I believe that success does not need an anniversary to present, but is shared within the enterprise on occurrence, during frequent management meetings, and gets acknowledgement. The Annual Report is a vehicle to tell the rest of the world what we do well. But maybe, I am totally off the track.

Business buy-in ? Why do we need that ?

In a panel discussion involving a few vendors and CIOs, someone asked a question to the panel. “My business users do not seem to be interested in the project, even though I know for a fact that the implementation will create big benefit. How do I get business buy-in ?”. This kind of question comes up every so often (words change, context is similar) as if evolution will be denied to a few.

It is amazing to see that IT heads in their enthusiasm to push ahead ignore the signs of discomfort or lack of interest, rarely pause to reflect upon the message coming across quite clearly that “No !”, we are not interested in this wonderful project. In some cases, it could be due to the inability of the CIO to articulate the project clearly enough for everyone to understand and be on the same page. Thus the business case is not compelling enough or the benefit statement is not a true reflection of the real case.

It could also be that there are other priorities that consume the business users and thus they would rather have the CIO focus on them as compared to the latest trend or new fad which the IT vendor may be interested in selling. In a few rare cases, the digital divide between the CIO and the CXO may be the raison-d’être for the disinterest in moving ahead.

The basic principle in all cases is listening first, and then talk. Communication is not about your ability to use your linguistic skills such that the other needs a dictionary to decipher, but to ensure that you understand the frame of reference of the listener. Effective communication always happens when the involved stakeholders share a common interest and are willing to listen to each other.

Finally, if you are still facing the same question, then stop pursuing it. After all you do not want a scenario where the system is developed to specifications that were sketchy and no one uses it. Why are you interested in the project when your customer is not ? Sometimes the answer can be no too.