Employer Values and Employee expectations-continued

In the last increment of the piece on employer values I outlined the importance of valuing a person's ability to communicate effectively and to work well in teams. Recalling that this list is not mine but one that I found from an organization that I have a great deal of respect for here is the rest of the list:

• Is accountable- In this case keeping your word on commitments you make on getting things accomplished is very important. The work of others depend on you. If you are not accountable and people can not trust your word then the organization is weaker for it, as is your value to your company.
• Values diversity- one of the things we have learned over the past few years of watching our government at work is that when you value on the opinions of those you like you tend to get a very clouded view of life. Not everyone is right all the time nor is it likely that your "filter" is the same as mine. I tend to get one really good idea every year but it tends to be a very valuable one, sometimes worth millions in additional business. To think that I am the only one with this capability is insane. We all can contribute regardless of our backgrounds, beliefs, or gender.
• Commits to service- It should be obvious that treating your customers as a valued asset should be number one in people's minds but this is not a universally held view. There are a few managers out there that value customers only for the revenue they bring in. Once the contract is signed they have little use for these customers until it is time for a new contract or a renewal. This is an entitlement mentality, "I am entitled to your business", that few customers appreciate. When your competition treats them better guess where they are going. This same mantra is true if you serve internal customers. We often wonder why there are rogue IT organizations in companies. They have developed competition for the true IT organization, most likely because of poor service.
• Delivers excellence- I like this one because it gets to the type of person you are and your beliefs as a part of a group, which is what a company really is. If you are not always in the mode of delivering an excellent product you will be dealing with problems more than new business. Once you go down this path recovering from it is nearly impossible. Many a great company has suffered from a lack of excellence only to fall victim to competition. We have watched the American steel and auto industries go through this and we all know the results.

Have a great new year every one!

Employer Values and Employee expectations

I recently ran across an organization that insists on having their employees and prospective employees agree to certain behaviors and values. I found the process intriguing and thought I would share what I learned about their expectations and some thoughts on what it means from both the employer and employee perspectives. The list was fairly extensive so I will have to break the list up into parts, in no particular order:

• Effective communications- to include active listening to others; responding to others with "a sense of caring and respect"; keeping others informed; conveying information clearly, concisely and respectfully in speaking and in writing; encouraging and modeling open dialogue; to be positive and supportive in all communications; and displays a willingness to share opinions and or concerns with "positive intent".

This would be tough for some I have worked with in the past as they cherish the opportunity for back stabbing and other modes of back channel communications. Their intent was often not positive in nature.

• Demonstrates Teamwork- This includes working collaboratively with others rather than working separately competitively or adversely. Emphasis is given to working to build collaborative relationships across all functional lines to meet mutually agreed upon goals.

Clearly teamwork can be closely related to the first value of communications. As an employer setting expectations early on in a relationship with your human resources can provide you with an advantage later on should behaviors not aligned with these values crop up.

I have to emphasize that this is not my list but that of a organization I have a great deal of respect for, and one that is highly successful in their given niche.

I will provide the next increment of this list shortly.

What I want for Christmas

It is that time of year once again and I am getting into the mood to make a list of wants and needs for Christmas. Thanksgiving is over and with keyboard in hand here goes:

• A truly modular laptop- recently I had the opportunity to rebuild my 3 year old laptop. It had developed an intermittent problem that was heat related and it took a while to figure out that I needed to replace the motherboard. I would like someone to make a truly modular laptop so that I could purchase the required part and slap it back together. It took me several hours and an eBay purchase to fix my machine. It should not have to be this way.
• An operating system that is universal- I do not believe that computing OS for the end user has benefited from the current competition. We should have one that works, is bug free, and all applications work on it. Windows clearly does not fit this description, MAC might come close but not all the way. Vista is a long way from what I think we need too.
• Smart Network ports- I would like to be able to set up my computer for the services I need from a network, including the destinations I would like to go to, plug it in, and I get the services I need. This ideal set up would be made available to me wherever I go, to any enterprise network regardless of who's equipment it is built on. Think about roaming with your cell phone. Yes I know about 3G and 4G and 2.5G and all the variations but it used to work! I am not thinking that NAC in its current form is what we need.
• My Blackberry to work again- About a month ago my Blackberry stopped working on my BES account. I can receive emails but not send or respond from that account. I can send from other POP accounts but.... It turns out that there is an incompatibility between my software in the device and the BES software. Now if I could only convince the support guy of this I would be in great shape. It worked up until a month ago so one would think that rolling something back to that configuration would do the trick.
• Anti-virus software that does better than blocking 20% of the known infections.
• Real-time vital health statistics monitoring displayed on my wireless device. No wires or anything, just an implant that does all the work and sends the numbers to my screen. Blood pressure, cholesterol, EKG, EEG, blood sugar. I would be able to tell when it was time to eat, not eat, sleep, not sleep, and leave frustrating meetings before bad signs start to appear on the screen. I could keep my doctor fully informed in real time. No office visits, no problems. The perfect gift!

Politics signals IT shortcomings

Like most Americans I have been watching the Presidential election process closely this time around. Given the current state of affairs in this country I figured the better informed I am the better my decisions would be.

We have now elected to the highest office in the country a person who prides himself on being well connected. Barack Obama is an avid Blackberry user, web surfer, email power user, Facebook user, and text messaging guru. This is not normal in Washington, D.C. Most of the elected officials in D.C. are up there in age so they are not used to all the options available to them.

The news recently is that the President Elect might have to give up his Blackberry in order to comply with the Presidential records act and security good practices. What does this really mean? It means that wireless device security and managed services like Blackberry Internet Services are less secure than they should be. It means that the President has just found out that, while he can be the most connected guy in the world when he is in the office or on his plane, he can not carry around his own personal communications device. It means that we in the IT field still have some work to do.

Can you imagine how good it would feel if we could say that it would be safe for the president to carry and use a Blackberry? We may never get there but it is a good target goal to strive for.

We did, We can, and We will

I have to admit to being an on-line news addict. The immediacy of news from all parts of the world is hard to resist for me. Being well informed is a duty we all have, both in our jobs and our communities. The last two years have been especially enlightening with the election of our new President and new leadership in the other branches of government. It also points out some technology insights that are important to enterprise users.

First, examine Barack Obama's use of technology in his run for the Presidency. He used everything we have developed to communicate a message, to organize citizens for his cause, to raise money to fund his campaign and to serve as a cornerstone for his message on the importance of innovation in our society. While some may have criticized his use of text messaging to announce his running mate I thought it was a classy way of doing it. Everyone got a personal note at nearly the same time. President elect Obama used the Web like no other politician has ever done. In doing so he energized a younger electorate (his customers) and they responded by granting him the right to carry some of these innovations to Washington. I have no doubt he will finally be able to get the federal government to successfully automate many of the functions that still need attention, like the processes we use to vote perhaps!

President elect Obama's use of the same technology tools used by many enterprises was not an accident. Collectively the technology community has developed a powerful set of tools that can bring success to any campaign, business or political. How does it feel to know that "we did that". Even more important is the feeling that we now realize that we can apply these solutions to nearly any problem we face. The tools are out there, as is the talent to apply them.

I have no doubt that we will continue or tradition of innovation in this country. New solutions are out there waiting to be discovered or simply applied to different problems in ways that can range from the very simple to the more complex.

We owe President elect Obama a big thank you for successfully demonstrating to us that innovation is not over in this country.

Storage Networking World Conference

Just a note to shamefully publish the fact that I will be speaking at the Storage Networking World conference in Dallas on October 16th. Please stop by and introduce yourself or just say "howdie".

Web 2.0 Does it really Exist?

There have been numerous occasions where we have all heard buzz words used to describe some current trend or a group of individuals. Generation X or Generation Y come to mind first.

Now we are hearing Web 2.0 being thrown about these days to describe updated applications for gaining access to information. Maybe the information is new to the individuals using it or the application is delivered in a novel way, such as as as service rather than shrink wrapped software for your desktop. But does that constitute something radically new so as to justify the 2.0 designation?

I have been hearing this term used more and more these days and quite frankly it has made me a bit upset at the notion that all of a sudden everything that is web based is new. Clearly this is not the case. Likewise, some have equated social networking sites with Web 2.0. Even though I will admit that some of the social networking sites are providing a valuable service not previously conceived of I hardly think that the underlying infrastructure for the services being provided is that unusual. So how is it that we have designated some of these sites as Web 2.0?

To me it seems like a lot of hype. What is important is how these applications are used and can anyone gain a competitive edge using them. Does that justify a trade show devoted to them? All we wind up with are a bunch of providers trying to fit their applications into the Web 2.0 designation for marketing purposes. That is not particularly innovative.

Let your applications and their usefulness stand on its own, without the labels, and let the market decide if they are worthy of support.

Verbal Communication is becoming extinct

Those of you with teenagers know this already, but it would appear that verbal communications among many of us is becoming extinct. It would appear that we have replaced speaking with one another with Instant messaging and texting.

The other day my daughter forgot her lunch for school. This is not usually a big deal but she is a swimmer and works out 5 hours a day on some days. To say that she eats a lot is an understatement. For her to go without her lunch is admitting you would like to be replacing wallboard and desk tops in the school after she is through with them. So to make the situation better she texted me asking me to return to the pool at 6AM and bring her lunch to her. Mind you I was just there to drop her off at 5:45AM. Being a good father I did as requested and she thanked me via another text message at 7:30AM when she got out of the pool to go to class. In the time it took her to send the text message she could have called me and asked me herself verbally.

Insult to injury is when a co-worker emails or IMs you from across the isle. This has happened to me before as well. One guy was less than 20 feet from me and IM'd me to ask a question. Now I do not mind it when someone likes to use technology because it is fun but this is a bit out of hand. He claimed he did not realize I was in the office but I have a direct line of sight to his chair. The point is he did not look, or he would rather not speak to anyone.

I think there should be rules on the use of IM within an office. If you can reach the person within the same amount of walking you use to get to the coffee pot then you should walk over to them and ask in person. If what you want to discuss is not worth walking that far then it must not be that important anyway. If you are using email as a legal tool to document your discussion with someone then you need to seek out legal counsel and work out your issues with that person one on one. I can understand using IM to see if someone is open to a discussion at that point in time but lets use all of the communications skills we have developed, otherwise we will be back to writing on the cave walls.

The InformationWeek 500

No it is not the latest car race but it is the annual listing of the top innovative IT organizations. I have taken more of an interest in this year's list than in the past due mostly to the economic issues we are currently facing. I thought it would be fun to go down the list and see where some of the organizations stand as of today.

• The number one company, National Semiconductor, is one that I have competed against in a former life. We tried but failed to benchmark our IT organization against theirs. My former employer is basically out of business and Nat Semi is going strong. Good for them.
• At number 17 is Constellation Energy, the parent company to my old electric utility. They just announced that they had to be bought out by a unit of Berkshire Hathaway due to liquidity issues driven by their energy trading unit. Bad break I guess.
• FedEx beats out every passenger carrier on the list at number 18. Always an innovator, I guess it pays to get the baggage there on time, without fail, and to offer your customers a way of tracking its progress.
• Foundry Networks, at number 31, just got bought out by Brocade.
• Microsoft does not appear on the list until number 95! You would think that they would be able to do better.
• Washington Mutual, this year's number 100 on the list, is on the auction block and waiting for government bailout money to come its way before selling itself to another firm. Perhaps a bit of risk management automation would have helped?
• Nortel Networks is on the ropes as well, perhaps justifying their position at number 225.
• After all those ads about their web services you would have thought that Geico could have done better than 242 on this year's list.

Clearly the general economy plays a huge role in the health of some of this year's top most innovative organizations from an IT perspective. There are a number of surprises on this list and a number of opportunities for improvement in IT's contribution to the success of a number of organizations.

Focal length-the long and short

The current state of the financial and enterprise markets reminds me of something I learned while teaching rookie pilots to fly planes. It turns out both have something in common. It matters how far you are looking forward.

During my teaching career I have encountered a number of pilots who have trouble developing a knack for smooth landings. I can say the same for some economists but that is another story. One of the most troubling students I have encountered was actually passed off to me by another instructor for whom I have a great deal of respect. It turns out that this student had been practicing for nearly 100 hours and had yet to master landings. This is an unusually high amount of time but I took on the challenge anyway. It turned out that I did not have to experience too many of this students landings to realize that the problem was where the pilot was focusing during the last few seconds of the landing. The student was focused too close in.

One of the age old lessons in aviation is that when approaching a landing at nearly 100 miles an hour it pays to look a bit further out than just over the nose of the airplane. Sometimes it is required that you look beyond the available runway in order to determine if the landing will be a smooth one, taking corrective action when any deviation is noted. If the focus is too close in you can lose all sense of distance and it becomes a guessing game as to how the landing will turn out. It usually turns out bad by the way. By selecting a view that incorporates the horizon even small deviations can be corrected early in the process and almost always the result is a desirable one, and the pilot is rewarded with praise from his or her passengers. Too bad that some enterprise executives suffer from the same focal length problem during high stress times just prior to "landing". Those that are able to be aware of what is going on close in but remain focused on the horizon are usually rewarded with a smooth landing and everyone wins.

Sounds a lot like Wall Street these days don't you think? Too much focus on the close in and not enough on the horizon results in a hard landing and a bad lesson. Enterprise CIOs and other executives should use this as a learning event. Focus a little further down the runway for a better outcome. It works every time.

IT and the general election

Tis the season to be concerned about politics and the election process. Why does this election matter to IT? There are several unresolved issues which may come up in the next administration. Among them:

• Net Neutrality- The current administration has done a poor job of resolving this issue once and for all. It remains unclear whether the government will step in and mandate that the internet remain neutral for all or if restrictions will be allowed to make their way into internet use by enterprises.
• Service provider restrictions-The FCC will have to rule on whether the internet service providers will be allowed to restrict access to the internet through filtering of P2P traffic, bandwidth limitations or any of a number of other restrictions now being contemplated. Picking the FCC commissioners can sway the outcome of these or other ideas being proposed for internet use.
• Data Breaches- Currently we have a lot of separate laws governing the actions required when a data breach occurs. Each state has one and they are less than uniform. Perhaps a national policy on the treatment of individuals rights when their personal information is disclosed through a security laps is in order now.
• Spectrum use- The current auction process for spectrum to be used for future wireless services is less than effective. The payment of large up front fees for future services should be changed to allow for recurring fees when services are established. We will never balance the federal budget with spectrum auctions so why try. Service providers should bid on spectrum and then pay fees on a routine basis as a percentage of revenue for the use of the spectrum. The fees should start early and grow with the services that use the spectrum.

Selecting the leaders of the federal government will set the tone for these and other issues that impact enterprise IT for the next four years. It is unclear which candidate would best represent the interests of the IT community at this point. One thing is clear though, Fall will be interesting.

Innovation question

In the past several days I have run across a number of instances where innovation has been discussed with one central theme. Where has it all gone? I finally ran across the answer this morning.

The first discussion on the topic arose around why a very large IT product company would cut its R&D budget dramatically from one year to the next. My answer? It is cheaper to acquire technology from smaller companies than it is to fund the development in house. Not to say that this is always true but I was speculating on the real answer for this organization. I believe I am right given that the company announced a continuation of its acquisitive nature in the coming fiscal year.

Next up came a discussion around why a fairly large, long standing organization was not an ideal buyout target. The answer? The CEO has turned down a number of approaches from other organizations and is known throughout the tech industry to be difficult to get along with in this regard. It would seem that anyone approaching him about a buyout is rebuffed almost immediately.

Finally, today I saw an article announcing a new book by a former CTO of Cisco, Judy Estrin. In her book she outlines her concern about the lack of innovation in America in general, and specifically within the tech industries. Her conclusion? Short term vision on the part of senior management. The emphasis on short term gains, building companies to be taken over by larger ones after a short time, funding tech start ups to be bought by the likes of Cisco without any consideration for building anything for the long term was cited as a growing concern. It will be interesting to read the book but I agree with the answer. The situation applies in other areas as well, like oil. Using oil profits to pay bonuses and dividends rather than developing alternative energy sources to replace a depleting one.

Cheers to the tech CEO that would rather build his own organization than to sell out.

How much more proof do we all need?

In my last post I made the statement that 80% of the time human error can be accounted for as the cause of major IT outages. This goes for enterprises, carriers and the government.

Today it was published that the cause of a major outage of the FAA NADIN network was due to "human error that "resulted in the wrong configuration data being loaded onto the switch". This is not an uncommon error. Noteworthy in the release of information was that the configuration error took place on an IPX 9000 packet switch. Anyone other than me know what that is?

Secondary to the outage was the fact that the backup provisions for NADIN to process flight plans calls for a system in Utah to pick up any load from the failed system in Atlanta. The problem was that the queue built up caused so many delays and re-inputs from the airlines that the system in Utah could not keep up. As I mentioned earlier it is wise to test backup systems to see what will happen when they are called upon to do their duty. Clearly this was not the case here. Now the FAA is talking about adding a third system to the mix for backup. How much do you want to bet that routing issues will be the next thing that will plague this system and none of the systems will pick up the load when needed?

The FAA's antiquated management and procurement practices make it hard for them to get things right. The good news is that in this outage planes were held up on the ground.

The 80% rule still applies but it can be overcome with smart planning and execution.

The Eighty Percent Rule

In the last 24 hours we have all been told of a major disruption in the air traffic control system in this country. The word is that a "communications failure" in a FAA facility in Atlanta was at fault for numerous flight delays across the country and in particular in the Eastern US. Further information indicates that a network failure between Atlanta and a facility in Utah caused the issue.

This situation reminds me of an old adage in the networking business " 80% of all network failures are caused by changes made by humans". In nearly 30 years of observations I can validate the saying. Interestingly enough one can easily prove the 80% rule by putting an embargo on network changes during a time of low staffing, say the end of the year holiday period. Year after year of doing this resulted in that period of time being the lowest instance of outages for the entire year. With no one around and no one doing any changes in the network things just ran like they were supposed to.

What does all this mean? If there is a period of critical operation then minimize changes to your environment during that period. The last thing you want to do, say if your are a candy maker, is to do a major system change during the period leading up to Halloween (Hershey did an ERP upgrade during this time and did not produce enough candy to meet the Halloween demand and thus had their worst performing quarter in their history).

My guess is that we will find out that the recent FAA outage was a direct result of a network change that went in either untested or poorly tested at best. The other possibility is the lack of testing of redundant links so that you know they work when needed.

Stay tuned on this one. I have an 80% chance of being right again.

Management Challenge-Part time employees

This one should be easy but it turns out it is not.

The situation is this- you have someone who, for any number of reasons, wants to work part time. You like the person and they have proven to be a valuable employee. Perhaps the person is new to you and you like what you have seen thus far but a full time arrangement is out of the question. Do you agree to a part time arrangement?

The challenge is multifaceted. First, you could get a good am out of productivity out of this person even though you do not have them full time. They like what they do, they are energetic but have other responsibilities. Perhaps they are willing to take a pay reduction in order to facilitate the arrangement. If you agree you will make them happy and get a good employee as a result. The bad news is you may build up resentment on the part of other members of your staff. "Why does she/he get to work part time and I don't?" might be something you hear. As a practical matter you can ill afford to run your group or operation with a whole staff of part time employees. The other issue turns out to be an accounting/HR one. A name on an org chart typically counts as a head count whether they are full time or part time. When it comes time to "adjust" headcount you will be faced with the issue of cutting a Full time or Part time person. It will come down to a question of productivity at that point. It is sad to say but there are situations where you might be getting more from a part time staff member than you do one that is full time.

Obviously there is no clear cut answer in this situation but it is an interesting situation and one that will require all of your skills in management and diplomacy to work through when the time comes. With the population aging as it is, creating more need for caregivers, you may be dealing with this sooner than you think.

Internet traffic jam?

I came across an article recently by one of the pioneers of the Internet, Larry Roberts, for whom I worked many years ago. Larry's article was insightful and pointed out that there are some reasons to believe that there should be classes of service for those accessing the Internet. Larry is a visionary in network protocols and has started yet another provider organization, this time to provide Internet traffic carriers with the ability to throttle traffic "flows" based on class of service.

In reading the article it struck me as odd that Larry would advocate using bit rate to determine class of service and therefore the fees associated with Internet access. I have a relatively slow broadband access rate in my home office and pay a modest rate for the service I receive. Power users on the other hand might pay a larger fee for their higher grade of service. My thought was that I would rather pay for the grade of service the information I requested gets from my ISP rather than just the bit rate I am able to get from the carrier. This "Contracted Information Rate" would allow agreement between me and my service provider on what grade of service they would be willing to provide as measured over a set period of time. This would allow me to be assured of receiving a set service level regardless of the bit rate of my access link, realizing that there would be a limit to the service I could receive if I continue to have a relatively slow access path. Measuring this access would be relatively easy over a longer period of time rather than just complaining about not achieving peak bit rates on my link over a very short span of time.

It is very clear that the more bandwidth demanding applications that are developed and delivered over the Internet the more likely we are to have occasional slowdowns. The service providers have every right to charge for the grade of service delivered to end users but at the same time the end users have a right to receive a quality of service that is appropriate to their use and applications. Restricting rate flows is OK as long as it is being done in a way that achieves the agreed to objectives of both parties involved. Also, I do not want to pay for poor performance from a carrier based on bit rates when what I really care about is getting or transmitting the information I am interested in. It is also clear that we can not expect to be able to continue to simply "fill the pipe" with information and expect performance to be at link speeds at all times. Networks do not work that way in the long run. Maximize the utilization of the network asset, yes, but do not expect to fill it 24/7 and achieve any acceptable performance.

This may all seem to be an argument over the same thing but I feel that there is a very fine difference. The technology solution that offers a way for me to send or receive information within a certain time frame "absolutely, positively" will win my business and ultimately allow everyone involved to win as well.

Network Administrator gone bad-Told you so

Back on May 20th I posed the question whether network administrators, or anyone with Admin rights to a resource for that matter, should be licensed. The premise was that if the person is a professional then they should be willing to submit to a background check, and to operate under a code of ethics in their daily work.


As of last week we have now seen the worst case scenario play out. A network admin for the City of San Francisco created a super user for himself for the network resources and locked out the other admins from the network. He then proceeded to hold the network hostage in order to ensure that his employer would not take action on a performance compliant they were building. What information that is being released now makes this story even more unbelievable.

It would appear that the city of San Francisco hired a person previously convicted of aggravated burglary to maintain part of the city's IT infrastructure with the full knowledge of this past criminal history. He is now sitting in jail and the city still does not have it's network back in full operation. Under the concept risk management and good security practices this hire would not have been viewed as a wise move. Under the previously suggested practice of licensing system administrators this person would not have been allowed to have admin rights at all. All that said, who was watching the store on this one? Were there no configuration audits during this person's tenure in this ill advised position? How about automating that audit function? Immediate notification of an unauthorized change to the network environment would have been advised don't you think?

This type of transgression should have never taken place and was very easily prevented. Answer-if a hiring decision seems like a bad idea, it probably is. In this case, I am 100% sure it was a bad idea. No license for this guy.

IT Security Spending- Is it enough?

On average an enterprise organization spends anywhere from 3% to 6% of its IT budget on security infrastructure. This budget amount is divided between operating expeses (nearly 70% of an IT budget which just keeps the wheels on) and capital expenditures intended to improve things and meet new user requirements (making up the other 30%). Is it enough?

I would say that it depends upon the organization and the vaule of the information assets the enterprise is looking to protect. A good example is a financial services firm. This organization is entrusted with information that could litterally change the course of the lives of millions of people should it fall victim to a security breach. In this instance I would hope that such an organization was devoting more than say 5% to keep my money safe. Speaking of which I got a phone call recently from a rather large financial services organization indicating that an account I have with them was subject to an attempted fraudulent act. All was well and I was pleased with the proactive nature of the call. I make it a point to thank the caller every time even though I realize they may be trying to save their company pain and financial loss more than they are trying to save me.

Just another example of how it all depends upon the vaule of the asset and the organization's tolerance for risk,

Making the leap

So you're thinking you are ready to make the leap into IT management. You have held down a technology job for a few years and you are tired of working for someone else. You have more hands on experience than those you have worked for in the past and you are thinking "so what is the big deal? I can handle it." Maybe yes, and maybe no.

I have had the pleasure of mentoring a number of technical people making the move into their first management position in IT. It has always been fun and interesting to see them succeed beyond the level they thought they would achieve. Not to say that there have not been bumps in the road along the way. Having assisted in this transition a fair bit I have come to the conclusion that there are a few qualities that are essential to making the transition a success.

• The person has to really want the job.

Like with most things in life if the desire is genuine then things tend to work out. If you are the slightest bit hesitant about taking on a management "challenge" then perhaps it is not for you. There is a difference between being nervous about your first position and not being fully committed to the task. I look for a genuine commitment before promoting someone to be responsible for the work of others.

• Life and work experience is essential.

If you are going to be supervising the work done by others then you had better done some of the work yourself. This means having served on some project teams doing some of the tasks you will be supervising in your new position. If you have not done this then get yourself assigned to a team that is actively doing a relevant project. Get your hands dirty. Along with that, get some experience interviewing and mentoring others. Be prepared to make a decision or have input on the hiring of others to do work for your organization. You could be making selections on contractors or full time staff, either one is fine for now. It will help in the long run if you have had to gather information about people and make a choice based on your efforts. Living with your choices can be hard.

• Do not think that you can learn management from a book.

Do not make the mistake in thinking that all management techniques can be learned from an MBA course. If it was only that easy we would all have MBAs. Don't get me wrong, book learning is great and I try to do a lot of it myself but in a different way. I read a lot of materials about others successes and failures ( the Harvard MBA program does this same thing). Corporate histories are a great source of information about what do to and what not to do in management situations. Learning from others mistakes is a good thing in most cases.

• Learn from everyone, both good and bad.

Everyone has had good bosses and bad ones. I contend that you can learn a lot from both. Clearly you want the good ones to provide you with lots of guidance on how to manage people and projects. Taking lessons from the bad ones is a bit trickier but essentially involves applying "I would never say or do that to someone" test. Recognizing the bad and filing the experience away for later recall is some of the best lessons available.

• Find a good mentor

Having a good mentor during your early management experience is invaluable. Access to someone who can answer questions, be a sounding board for ideas, and offering gentle corrections when needed can help to ensure success. The trick is how to find a mentor and perhaps this is a good place to start your management career. More on this one next time.

Say goodbye to XP-Maybe

As a longtime troubleshooter and seeker of stability in IT infrastructure I would say that Microsoft's "abandonment" of XP as an operating system effective June 30th 2008 is shameful at best. Realistically they are not really abandoning XP but surely making it harder to implement it on home machines or others bought through retail channels. This impacts individuals and small businesses more than enterprises.

With the advent of Service Pack 2 came one of the more stable OS's we have known. Everyone knew how to use it, most applications ran on it, and drivers were seldom an issue. Now that Vista is being forced on a small segment of the user population we now have the joy of doing downgrades, making application performance and drivers more of an issue. Three cheers for Microsoft indicating they would "support" XP through April 2014. The question is, if you are going to support it that long why not make it easy to get it for those who want it?

A majority of enterprises I speak with are delaying Vista implementation until 2009 or after and now that Windows 7 is slated for delivery in January 2009 who would go with Vista anyway? Perhaps it is because Microsoft has warned all of us that going straight from XP to Windows 7 is not advisable, or that they have never met a delivery schedule for a new OS since..... well ever.

Suggestion for Microsoft- Let XP be widely available until support is no longer available and let the end user or their support staff decide which OS is the most appropriate one to use.

Hello, Nice to see you

Those of us who have been around for a while have heard that one of the major justifications for video conferencing is to cut down on the need for travel. Recent conversations I have been involved in indicate that this may be coming true finally. There are organization out there that are justifying video conferencing enhancements through travel reductions. This is not hard to believe with the price of airfares and such.

What strikes me now is the question of whether face time is really necessary these days. Social networking has advanced to the point that some people are falling in love and practically getting married through the internet and yet we still have vendors inventing ways to have video to our desktops. One recent article quoted a Skype product manger indicating that nearly 25% of their traffic was video based. Is this a toy or a real business tool? In the same article was quote about Tandberg coming out with a $1,500 desktop phone that provided DVD quality images on a 10 inch screen. Is that really what enterprises really need these days or again, is this going to just be a toy?

Video is certainly an important way of communicating but the open question is, how necessary is it for effective discussions, collaboration and productivity? My feeling right now is that it is not really a necessity. To prove that point I would suggest that there is very little video conferencing going on between North America and APAC outsourcers. If it was all that important we would see a growing traffic volume between these two regions of the world. There is not evidence that this is happening, at least no yet.

Until then, I would say that it is great to see you, but not necessary to get the job done.

Out with the Old, and in with the New?

I had a need recently to go out and purchase a new laptop. Not rocket science by any means but it sure seemed to get to that point by the time I was done. All that led to more conclusions. First some background.

For my wedding anniversary this year I wanted to buy my wife her own laptop. She was the only one in the house without one so it made sense. Also, having her have a machine that was portable would allow for her to use a computer without needing to be in the office. This is not convenient at times as I frequently need to be alone in office for meetings and conferences as well as recording web and voice mail broadcasts.

The trouble began when I went looking for a laptop with XP preinstalled on it. I have had no end of issues with machines requiring to be downgraded from Vista to XP. I did not want to have to deal with all the issues of training my wife on Vista, nor dealing with driver issues due to the downgrade. So with that I was off looking for a machine with XP on it. After looking long and hard I only found 1 out of about 50 that I looked at at various places. I wound up with a Lenovo machine from an online retailer. To their credit, I had the machine in 3 days, just in time for my anniversary, and it has worked perfectly thus far.

So what's the point? First, I believe all consumers and enterprises should be afforded the opportunity to choose which OS they want. It would be in Microsoft's best interest to offer both XP and Vista and allow all OEMs to do the same. They would be best served to make Vista be so compelling to change to that requests for XP drop to near zero. At that point only should they discontinue supporting it. Better yet, how about letting another organization support it on into the future. Thus far it is apparent that the only reason for the uptake in Vista is that Microsoft has forced it upon the distribution channel. Owners are truning off so many features of Vista just to make it perform that it is hardy worth having it.

I will do everything I can to stick with XP until it is "time" to switch. In the mean time, the only thing getting old around here is me.

Telecom Expenses

Nearly seven years ago I was introduced to the concept of automated telecom expense management (TEM). Nearly 30 years ago I was introduced to the concept of telecom billing being messed up. The question is "Why the gap in time"?

It has been widely established that any telecom bill, fixed or mobile, of any size is probably in error. The really cool part is that it is very predictable in which direction the errors are, and it is certainly not in the favor of the enterprise. Most billings from the big telecom providers are in error from 1o% to over 30% in favor of the carrier. Some larger enterprises spend north of $50 Million on voice and data transport facilities and other services. The net result is there is $5 Million plus to be had by doing a good job managing these expenses. Imagine those savings falling strait to the bottom line.

The process to achieve this used to be complex but has gotten a lot easier these days. It used to be that you had to hire a very smart person, who was a little suicidal, to look through your bills to find the errors and to argue with the carriers to get the money back. These days you can implement one of a number of software applications or sign up for a service to do the function for you ( for a rather hefty fee). The carriers have become accustom to providing the bills in electronic form, although they are not very willing to do so initially. The key is to know what your "inventory" of telecom assets looks like and then be able to match it against the actual expenses. Only those that match get paid and the rest get disputed until you get a refund. This can take many months but the money usually comes back eventually. Once the initial reconciliation is done, change control becomes very critical. One would assume that change control is part of your everyday processes so we will not dwell on this.

Telecom Expense Management (TEM) is ideal for delivery as a service (SaaS) or as a stand alone application but does need special attention to detail as billing formats vary widely among the carriers, and among each service they provide. Remember that most carrier billing systems are actually a collection of inherited applications from many decades of mergers, with very little integration. That said, it is well worth the effort with the ROI never in doubt.

Disaster Recovery Facilities in the making?

As promised, more on the subject of disaster recovery planning, with a twist.

A recent article in my local news paper, The Morning Call, got me thinking about the whole issue of disaster recovery facilities as an economic development project. The article chronicles the trials and tribulations of a group attempting to create an environment attractive enough to convince disaster planners from Wall Street's largest investment firms to locate their disaster facilities to the Pocono Mountain region. The group has amassed $15 Million in funding to be used to convince the firms that it would be a good idea to house such facilities outside of a "blast zone" that is Manhattan, and one that is on a separate power grid zone. I give a lot of credit to the local power authority for isolating my region from the last large power outage that affected most of the North East US. This alone does not make the Pocono mountain area an ideal place to put disaster backup facilities.

There are only two main routes that run to the west out of Manhattan, Interstate 80 which runs to the Pocono's and Interstate 78, which runs through New Jersey and eastern Pennsylvania. Both routes would likely be affected by any wide scale disaster in the area, making it harder to get people to these newly established facilities. Both regions discussed in the article, the Pocono's and the Lehigh Valley are about 2 hours away from Manhattan on a good day. As a result of this and other factors, most Wall Street firms have located their backup facilities in northern New Jersey. The bandwidth required to support synchronous data replication is already in place between Manhattan and say Jersey City. The same can not be said for the Pocono's or Lehigh Valley areas. Most disaster recovery plans call for generating your own power for a good amount of time, so being on a separate power grid just relieves you from getting fuel to your generators over a long term.

So what is the point? I am somewhat embarrassed to say that the leaders of the region in which I live would spend $15 Million on training and education and not have a single tangible thing to show for the investment. No enhancements to network bandwidth, facilities, or agreement with service firms to provide the essential support functions that would make the region a viable option for disaster recovery services. If they really wanted to gain the respect needed to be in the running for consideration as a viable disaster recovery location, then at least get the bandwidth in place. Until large firms sign up to use it, at least the local citizens could enjoy having great Internet service.

The opposite of "if you build it, they will come" seems to be "if you promise it, they might consider it" and in this case not one firm has taken the bait. This makes for a pretty expensive fishing trip.

Disaster recovery planning-The need

Having been around the network awhile I have to admit that I have been a party to some disaster recovery efforts. Thankfully most of them have been pretty minor. Some have been averted due to some prior planning and some have been recoverable with some ingenious use of technology, such as it was at the time. It was also not like we could not see it coming.

In some of my past positions I have done some strange things to get the information we needed in order to plan for a disaster scenario. The good news was we had forward thinking management at the time who saw the need to plan ahead. The most odd thing I ever did was buy the power company lineman coffee if he would allow me to see his site planning books with enough time to copy the relevant pages. It took a while but we got what we needed not only to prove we were single threaded at our major data center but that there was an alternate feed available for us to split our power feeds with little effort on the part of the utility. The comment on the part of the field engineering manager was "Boy you guys sure know a lot about our physical plant"! That "knowledge" cost me a cheap cup of coffee and came in handy on the day that a 150KV line went up in smoke without explanation, and no outage.

The other scenario was the recognition that we were single threaded in our main telecom feeds going along a well travelled road up north to the first "PoP" to a national network. I do not take credit for the discovery, but when the ultimate disaster scenario came true one day we were all standing in the data center looking at each other wondering what we could do about it. We were told that we were hours or longer away from having service restored to one of our primary service systems. Insult to injury was our "dial backup" service followed the same path as it turned out. I will take credit for using my calling card from an alternate provider to establish 14 alternate paths out of our data center and up to a backup site a thousand miles away. It turns out we were down on our primary service for over 13 hours.

If the message has not gotten through already, everyone and every organization needs to think about what they would do in the event of a disaster of some kind. More on this topic to follow based on current events.

Should Administrators be licensed?

We live in a world where there are licenses and certifications required to do just about anything. I carry around 5 or 6 every day, but none of them for IT.

While we have professional certifications in the IT business we have few requirements for having and using Admin rights on servers and end user workstations. With data leakage becoming more of an issue every day it would seem appropriate that Admin rights come with a requirement to be licensed to use them. While nine out of every 10 people you ask will tell you that data leakage is centered around non-malicious activities, it is the one in 10, the malicious one, that is the most damaging and costly. It is usually pulled off with help from inside the enterprise and it is usually someone that has admin access rights. Doesn't it make sense that we know who we are giving these rights to, and then require them to be bonded to do their job?

I am not into burdening people unnecessarily but we have gotten to the point in IT where it would make some sense to stand up and say to everyone who entrusts personal data to us "You can trust me to do the right thing." Don't want to be required to have your background checked and live up to a professional code of ethics? Give up your admin rights then.

Enterprises are being required to spend millions of dollars on software and appliance based security tools to prevent data leakage and other malicious activities. Those costs are being passed on to all of us as consumers with little being provided in return. Perhaps we can offer some additional value to the equation.

Social Networking

Some of the latest news from the security world about enterprises blocking social networking sites strikes me as disturbing. I have found that some of the social networking sites provide a valuable way for people to stay in touch with former colleges, perhaps for fun, and perhaps to use these resources to solve current problems. To think that enterprises are now blocking these sites with web filters boggles my mind.

The justifications for blocking access run the gamott from resource utilization to lost productivity to security concerns. For those sites with known security threats I can see why blocking them would be useful in protecting the enterprise network. As for productivity enhancements, there are any number of distractions that can rob staff productivity during the work day. I used to think that employees going to the "smoking lounge" was a big productivity loss. I suspect it still is but I have given up on that point. Networking resources is another issue alltogether. If streaming video is a big issue coming from social networking sites then assign it the lowest quality of service and let users download it to their smartphones instead.

Social networking has been going on for centuries and will likely continue for many more to come. Some of the new internet based applications make any excuses to not keep up with people virtually disappear. Enterprises should embrace the capability to network among people in as efficient a manner as possible.

IT in health care- First hand experience

My family had the good fortune (and bad) to experience the services of one of the best health care providers in the country recently. Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP) has been one of the top hospitals for kids for many years and has made significant strides using technology solutions as an enabler.

This latest visit afforded me another opportunity to see how far they have come with their technology implementation. The customer care there has always been great but our visit this time impressed me even more. We saw paperless EEG testing, collaboration of results with a wide range of medical professionals, constant contact among staff members, and even wireless access for patients and visitors. Our next visit will allow us to see more advanced medical monitoring and communications, including portable monitors and recording equipment, and software that analyzes results and assists in the development of patient care plans.

Anyone that really wants to know how to use IT solutions to serve their customers better needs to find a model organization to point to as a good example of how to get it done. CHOP is one of many such leaders.

Projects and why they fail

It has been a while since I was solely responsible for the outcome of a project. That is probably a good thing. I have led teams of people on a number of projects across a wide range of technologies and services. Common to most of these efforts has been a team of devoted engineers, programmers, and project leaders committed to getting the job done. In spite of those efforts sometimes projects to fail. The big question is, why?

It has been my experience that projects that drag on have a higher likelihood of "failure" than those that can be brought to a conclusion more quickly. On the surface it would seem that efforts that extend beyond 18 months are often doomed to failure. The key to preventing this type of thing from happening is to bundle tasks into projects that are more manageable and can be achieved in under 18 months. We used to have a saying of "build a little and test a lot". When implemented it might mean the ultimate end goal is still 2 years away but measurable progress can be made by closing out a "project" and opening a new one to allow for more progress to be made. This often means you can bring in a new team of people for the follow-on effort and possibly prevent burning out your team. At the same time you can also facilitate more junior folks to gain valuable experience and see measurable progress faster.

The above is true for development projects, infrastructure upgrades, and even maintenance efforts.

Information Assets

I am back from the RSA show in San Francisco I can now outline my impressions of the show and some of the things I learned while I was there.

First, out of approximately 425 vendors represented there were a grand total of 6 that included the term "NAC" in their business descriptions. This compared to a "bazillion" that featured this technology term last year. What to take from this? NAC is a solution that may get built into network infrastructures and other desktop agents in the future but it is not the "magic bullet" that everyone was dreaming about a year ago.

The major theme for this year was clearly data protection. There is a huge market out there for data that an enterprise has and that market is getting more sophisticated by the hour. Anyone with a bit of cash can turn it into gold by mining for data that is easily taken from many organizations and sold in the electronic marketplace. You no longer have to be a hacker to get to it. You can rent time on a botnet now, rent or own your own malware, and gain access to personal account information which you can then sell on a ready made marketplace for a tidy profit. Until enterprises get to the point that they realize they have created a virtual storefront for "information assets" they will continue to be robbed without knowing it.

The smart organizations are now understanding that there is no perimeter anymore that needs to be protected. The wolves are at the door and they are taking what they want. If you want to keep any of these assets, start treating them like to have them stored away in a vault or safe deposit box. You would not give away the location and the key to these vaults to allow someone to steal from you, would you?

The key here is to get your CFO on board with the idea that information is really an asset that needs proper management and control. Once you do, the funding to do the management job the right way will be made available and there will be no discussion of ROI for the investment.

Balance and too much of a good thing

In the IT world we run into this question a lot; "When is too much of something a bad thing?"
In my world of networking too much bandwidth makes your CFO angry but typically your users are very happy to not have limits placed on their use of the network. The angry CFO will then ask you to justify every "circuit" or network expense in an effort to see that you have just enough to get by and that is all he/she will be willing to pay for.

I recently encountered a situation that reminded me that balance is also needed for those of us who strive to have a career in IT. Balance applies to numerous situations including decisions like how much to outsource, how hard to push a project team to get something done, and how hard to push yourself to achieve whatever goals you have in mind.

The situation was one of having too much of a good thing but having it out of balance. As most of you know I fly airplanes for fun and I enjoy the process of teaching others how to fly as well. Recently I encountered a situation in a plane I had not flown before where there was too much fuel on one side of the plane and too little on the other. This is not an unusual situation for the most part but in this case it was exaggerated a bit. Taking off for the first time the plane wanted to turn to the side with the most fuel. Logical enough, but when I could not stop the turn from continuing the situation got a bit more intense. I had a mountain in front of me and no real place to go if things turned really ugly. Fortunately with a bit of experimentation I was able to get the situation "righted" for the moment until I could figure out what was truly going on. Turned out that the cause of the imbalance was a fuel miss-feed issue from a previous flight.

When things get really hairy in the IT world you have to wonder whether we are keeping everything in balance or not. Too much pressure on one side can cause things to go out of control in the direction the pressure is being applied to. The question remains if there is enough control authority to get things level again. In my case I had plenty of tools in the bag to make that happen but not every situation in the IT world allows for that. Turns are good and serve as the only way to change direction when needed. The trick is to do them under control and in balance with other things. Making your IT staff aware of the situation, the need for a change in direction and that the control authority exists to stop the turn when you have reached the desired course are all good things to know and communicate.

The fact that a mountain stands in the way of your current path helps as well as long as everyone can see it coming.

Flying off to RSA

This is a big weekend. It is the last one before the annual IT security fun-fest at RSA. I recall last year there were predictions that this year there would only be three vendors in the Exhibit Hall due to consolidation. I hate to say it by I know from my meeting calendar that this is clearly not the case this year.

We have seen some interesting things happen since last year's event. Several NAC vendors have either gone on to other things or have dropped off the radar screen altogether. This was predictable given the lack of uptake for NAC that has been evident since the summer of 2006 time frame. Enterprise IT security folks are still watching the developments in this area but it would appear to be an "NFL" kind of game, requiring big bucks to make it work as advertised.

With several well publicised data breaches since the last RSA conference it will be interesting to see what everyone is talking about this year. I was amazed to see that someone actually walked out of an enterprise with $600 Million in intellectual property going to China and no one but the airport inspector knew it had happened.

And to think that there are still some corporate managers still trying to justify IT infrastructure improvements.

Where technology has failed the business

For nearly 19 years of my IT career I had the opportunity to support all of the major airlines of the world in their quest for servicing their customers. Along the way I had a chance to work with wireless technologies to serve the airline customer along with other technologies to automate airline services directly and indirectly. Public access wireless LANs were first tried in airports and I was there to solve coverage issues and make the service work. I was also there to help justify the use of RFID for baggage tracking. It is still not in use for that purpose.

I am very disappointed in where we are right now with airline service. Getting people on and off aircraft at gates seems like a hugely difficult task but your favorate restaurant does a better job of filling your favorate seat with low tech solutions. You have little to no chance of knowing whether your bag is going to make it to your destination even though you can be notified of 1000 things in your life straight to your cell phone, including where your teenager is and how fast they are driving. You stand in line and have to remove your shoes in order to prove you are one of the millions of flyers every day that use airlines without posing a threat to yourself, the crews, or your fellow passengers. All of these things were solvable by technology 20 years ago. I know, as I was involved with demonstrations of most of them. Recent revelations of congested airspace in the New York city area were also predictable back then.

There has never been a better example of how technology could have been better deployed had the business been more willing to be forward thinking. I recall offering one airline executive to cut his cost of lost luggage in half ( a seven figure number by the way) if he would allow me to implement my ideas for automating his operation. He refused. In my latest version of the solution I could eliminate that figure completely, sending all the savings to the bottom line.

Technology professionals should be watchful of opportunities to demonstrate the ability to contribute to the bottom line of organizations. At the same time it is wise to be aware that at times your potential contribution can fall on deaf ears in spite of your best efforts. Sometimes that is what "skunk-works" are for.

Going Green

There has been a great deal written lately about organizations going "green" or at least trying to. It has finally become financially worth looking at conserving energy in any way you can. Most organizations are looking to the data center as the first likely target for savings. But there might be a better place to look.

The federal government has long had a program underway to promote telecommuting among its employees. Recent releases indicate that a majority of federal workers do not know that they are eligible to work from home much less having done so. Other recently released statistics indicate that enterprises (95% of them anyway) have gone to great lengths to make mobile applications available to their employees in addition to traditional remote access methods. Having grown up in the Washington, D.C. area I can attest to the need to reduce the traffic there as much as possible. With gas prices as high as they are and going higher why are more workers not pressing to work remotely, at least part time?

The answer is management. It turns out that most of today's managers have not become proficient in trusting the people they hire enough to empower them to get things done without being visible in an office somewhere. The best example of this is AT&T both pre and post the merger or buyout with SBC. AT&T used to be a big advocate of having employees work remotely, but as of the end of last year that was all but over. Now it seems that the management of SBC ( now named AT&T) thinks that everyone should work in an office somewhere. This causes more gasoline consumption, more emissions to deal with, and higher costs and growing dissatisfaction on the part of their employees. There is no indication that it was being done for any other reason other than "we do not trust you enough to have you work remote". This is clearly a management failure and not a technology one.

With rising cost, concern about the environment, and employee retention it would seem that this one would be an easy situation to solve. Not every job requires working out of an office, nor do they require constant contact with other coworkers who would most likely email you from their desk 30 feet from you when you are in the office anyway. Telecommuting is an easy strategy to get underway. Most enterprises have the infrastructure to accommodate it, and most workers have access to the tools necessary to make such a policy work for employers.

No new hardware or complicated implementation programs, just good common sense.

The 2.0 mentality

We have heard the term "2.0" applied to lots of things these days, including Web 2.0, Enterprise 2.0 and the like. Web 2.0 is a state of mind that speaks to the maturation of the Web as an information delivery medium. The term Web 2.0 is akin to a parent admitting one day that their child is no longer a toddler but is now a teenager and is growing up and ready to take on more responsibility. Hosting of data and applications traditionally done at the desktop through the Web are two good examples of this maturity.

Enterprise 2.0 is a recognition that we have moved beyond communications technology merely replacing paper business processes with paperless ones. When you can facilitate new business processes that are additive to business generation activities you can admit that you have moved into the Enterprise 2.0 mindset.

Unified communications is another example of a "2.0" evolution. At its core, UC is a recognition that communications can happen in many forms. UC means that an infrastructure should not be the limiting factor in crossover applications such as delivery of images to mobile devices rather than fixed ones, and that voice and data can be one in the same in certain instances.

Web 2.0, as a state of mind, can be utilized as part of a UC strategy or "toolkit" and can become part of Enterprise 2.0 if applied correctly.

In many ways the "2.0" mentality is intended to provide you with permission to think differently than you have before.

Trends as viewed by Gartner

A friend of mine, Mike Doyle, is a former CIO and long time IT professional. In a recent post on his blog he included a list of predictions made by the analysts at Gartner for the upcoming years. Included among the predictions was one that struck me as being particularly important to note. The prediction states that "By 2010, end-user preferences will decide as much as half of all software, hardware and services acquisitions made by IT." My thought is, why is this not true today? We in IT have always had customers, either internal in the case of a captive IT organization, or external, in the case of an IT service provider. Why would your end user preferences not enter into your sourcing decisions? You will note in previous posts that I am a big believer in gaining your customer input on new IT projects, the earlier in the process the better.

This prediction seems rather easy to make and hard to argue against in light of the fact that as IT professionals we have an obligation to please our customers. Giving them what they want and making it work is part of the job. We will discuss later the task of making sure that your customers are making a well informed decision on what their preferences are.

Unified Communications-The next big thing?

Ok, so you have heard this new buzz phrase shortened to "UC" and you have decided to develop a strategy to integrate UC apps into your infrastructure. What are some steps you might take to develop a good plan for now and your organization us up for future additions?

The main goal of a unified communications strategy should be to facilitate an innovative business process regardless of the communications medium. Given this as an assumption the first step in formulating such a strategy is to fully understand your current business process and to incorporate the input of your business partners into that strategy. Answers to questions like "what portion of our business human resources is mobile?" or "what are the current barriers to communications?" would be important to know and understand early on.

Those who are responsible for the formation of your UC strategy might consider becoming "embedded" with your business partners for a while in order to understand what their pain points are and how your UC strategic planning might assist them in the performance of their duties. Doing a good job of investigation early on and rooting out the "needs" of the business will save you time and disappointment later on. You may also find that your priorities insofar as picking anchor applications and infrastructure elements might be different than the ones you envisioned once you understand better what business problems you are trying to solve.

The next step would be to outline a product or service road map that would let the business know what you are working on and in what order. Starting out small with your roll outs tends to go better than "revolutionary" changes throughout and entire business infrastructure. Plan on communicating your successes throughout the entire business so you can ease into some of the changes that might be disruptive later on. "Build a little-Test a little" strategies are often appreciated by the business partners as it affords them an opportunity to participate in small programs and provide valuable feedback.


Picking infrastructure elements that will not preclude the addition of "best of breed" providers later on has proven time and again to be a winning strategy. There is little need to narrow your options too early in a process only to be disappointed later on that certain functions can not be added due to infrastructure limitations. The more standards based elements you can utilize the better things will be later on.


Gaining credibility with your business partners on small projects that are deemed helpful to them in the performance of their job functions is also a proven methodology. Say you can eliminate the use of Fax for taking orders from customers where no one can remember why they are doing by fax in the first place. They will thank you profusely and give you half a dozen other functions to automate for them. Your strategy is now working!

Winging IT

For those who know me well this post will be a review. Those not familiar with me or my career will come to realize that the title of this blog is not intended to imply that anything dealing with IT should be left up to chance. Having been a pilot and a flight instructor for nearly three decades I can tell you that every flight, regardless of the destination, needs to be conducted with the utmost professionalism and purpose. I have approached the business of IT in much the same way.

I have enjoyed a career in IT that spans quite a period of innovation, from the first PC and a network to go with it (NorthNet) to Ethernet to ATM on up. I have had the good fortune to work with some of the first adopters of Wireless LANs for commercial, public access at airports around the United States among many other innovations. Along the way I have been responsible for developing business cases for technology adoption, something I have discovered does not come easy for most organizations. Winging IT is clearly not the right way to win over senior management of an enterprise, regardless of its size. A good solid business case goes a long way to achieving the "buy in" of senior leadership as well as securing the funding necessary to procure, install and service new infrastructure, applications and tools. What is good for the business is most likely good for IT as well.

I will be using this forum to generate discussion and ideas on how to raise the bar for the IT community in dealing with some of the more difficult IT management tasks and issues we face today. I look forward to your comments and questions as we explore and demystify technologies and management issues IT professionals are faced with today.