As I currently reside in Denver, I spent a lot of my free time hiking in the oxygen-thin air of Colorado’s mountains. Often I will reach a level spot where I have to stop and ask myself if this is a resting place where I can catch a quick breath to continue on or have I reached a plateau where I need to consider if I can go any higher.
Many people are asking that same question about careers in IT - have they reached a plateau or is the current market situation just a short resting place in preparation for the next climb?
The signals from the market are mixed. Almost weekly there is an article or commentary about the projected talent gap in IT due to the impending retirement of baby boomers. The number of college students enrolled in technology programs has decreased and employers fear the demand for IT talent will exceed the available supply.
Yet at the same time we are hearing about more and more companies cutting IT staff, outsourcing development to reduce costs and putting technology projects on hold. Due to the current economic crisis, I personally know very few baby boomers who are actively considering retirement. Most of my baby boomer associates are looking at ways to leverage their experience to keep their careers going.
Is IT still a viable career? When I’m asked that question, I relate the story of my friend Bob. Bob was a history buff. During grade school and high school he constantly read books about historical events. In college, he majored in History and studied it with a passion, eventually obtaining a Ph.D. Even though jobs for history majors are few, Bob devoted himself to the subject. And it paid off.
He worked hard and ultimately became one of the top experts in world history. He is a tenured college professor and has published several books on historical topics. He also conducts executive-level seminars on how to use the lessons of history to create effective business strategies and become more successful. The combination of teaching salary plus book royalties plus speaker's fees provides Bob a comfortable living. In a field with little apparent opportunity, Bob realized that there are always opportunities for those who strive to be the best.
And so it is with IT. The job outlook is debatable and the amount of future job opportunities is open to conjecture. But the same can be said for any number of career paths from marketing to sales to journalism to management. However, there will always be opportunities for those with a passion for technology and who strive to be the best. Granted, they may never become rich, but they will be doing what they love and providing for their families. And in the end, isn't that what a career is all about?
Thursday
Tuesday
ITIL Version 3 - Enhancing The Value of IT
If you’re an IT manager with a focus on service improvement, ITIL – especially ITIL Version 3 – needs to be part of your process framework.
In the previous versions of ITIL, the focus was on enhancing IT performance through best practices in specific processes such as configuration management, change management, incident management, problem management and others. While enhancing IT operational performance is still a fundamental component of Version 3, the focus of the framework has shifted to how IT services the business.
An example of this difference can be shown with remote access - a service provided by IT that consists of a variety of hardware and software components, some of which can occasionally be “operationally available” but not providing the needed service. Monthly IT operational reports could show that all the components were 100% available while in fact the remote access service was down for 72 hours due to a corrupted routing table in a switch.
There's nothing that degrades the business value of IT more than reporting 100% operational uptime to a group of senior leaders who were unable to access the company intranet remotely. You can be sure one of them will say: “the IT group just doesn’t get it.” ITIL Version 3 attempts to resolve this situation by putting more focus on the actual service aspects of IT.
ITIL Version 3 also facilitates its adoption rate by providing more implementation guidance. Since it is a framework that was created to be modified, molded and shaped as needed to meet business requirements, ITIL does not provide specific steps on how to do a process. However, this has been a downside to its adoption as many IT departments want – or need – more concrete guidance on implementation.
ITIL Version 3 bridges the gap between a pure framework and an operations manual by providing more guidelines on how to implement the core components. For example, in ITIL Version 2, a service catalog was recommended for service-level management; however few guidelines were given on what should be in the catalog.
Having been previously tasked with creating a service catalog, I searched the Internet for information and found everything from a one-page summary sheet to a detailed spreadsheet. In ITIL Version 3, more guidance is provided on what a service catalog is, how it should be developed and what it should include.
ITIL is not a panacea and will not solve all service issues. What ITIL Version 3 brings to the table is the ability to implement a service and support framework that shifts the focus of IT from operational metrics to delivery of IT services, which will ultimately enhance the overall business value of IT.
In the previous versions of ITIL, the focus was on enhancing IT performance through best practices in specific processes such as configuration management, change management, incident management, problem management and others. While enhancing IT operational performance is still a fundamental component of Version 3, the focus of the framework has shifted to how IT services the business.
An example of this difference can be shown with remote access - a service provided by IT that consists of a variety of hardware and software components, some of which can occasionally be “operationally available” but not providing the needed service. Monthly IT operational reports could show that all the components were 100% available while in fact the remote access service was down for 72 hours due to a corrupted routing table in a switch.
There's nothing that degrades the business value of IT more than reporting 100% operational uptime to a group of senior leaders who were unable to access the company intranet remotely. You can be sure one of them will say: “the IT group just doesn’t get it.” ITIL Version 3 attempts to resolve this situation by putting more focus on the actual service aspects of IT.
ITIL Version 3 also facilitates its adoption rate by providing more implementation guidance. Since it is a framework that was created to be modified, molded and shaped as needed to meet business requirements, ITIL does not provide specific steps on how to do a process. However, this has been a downside to its adoption as many IT departments want – or need – more concrete guidance on implementation.
ITIL Version 3 bridges the gap between a pure framework and an operations manual by providing more guidelines on how to implement the core components. For example, in ITIL Version 2, a service catalog was recommended for service-level management; however few guidelines were given on what should be in the catalog.
Having been previously tasked with creating a service catalog, I searched the Internet for information and found everything from a one-page summary sheet to a detailed spreadsheet. In ITIL Version 3, more guidance is provided on what a service catalog is, how it should be developed and what it should include.
ITIL is not a panacea and will not solve all service issues. What ITIL Version 3 brings to the table is the ability to implement a service and support framework that shifts the focus of IT from operational metrics to delivery of IT services, which will ultimately enhance the overall business value of IT.
Monday
The Zen of IT Planning
One of the main tenets of Buddhism is mindfulness – the ability to be totally aware of the moment. Adherents of all branches of Buddhism meditate daily to train their minds to have "clear comprehension" and see things objectively and impartially.
After 20 years of involvement in IT, I can safely say that mindfulness has not been an inherent trait of most IT organizations. Sadly, from many perspectives, it can be said that "mindlessness" has been a better description of IT.
Many costly strategic decisions have been made based totally on technology prejudices, zealous preferences or knee-jerk reactions, without analyzing the true business impact. Many companies have wasted a good deal of time, resources and money on the latest IT “project of the day”. Data warehouses sit idle with data that hasn't been updated in years. Expensive Asynchronous Transfer Mode campus networks have been implemented, only to be ripped out before they are fully depreciated and replaced with Gigabit Ethernet. Budget-breaking CRM systems have been implemented that are rarely used because of their complexity and high support costs.
Unfortunately, we haven't learned from these mistakes. Companies still make knee-jerk IT decisions without analyzing the overall finances, risks and business impact. With the current need for companies to focus on their returns on investment, it's even more crucial that IT decisions be made objectively and impartially.
Take virtual private networks (VPN) as an example. VPNs can generate substantial savings in many situations – especially in the areas of remote access, corporate office connectivity, Intranets and connectivity to lower-revenue generating locations; however they are not an across the board panacea for lower network costs. Being Internet-based, VPNs can't offer the same availability, redundancy and quality of service that dedicated connections provide. So while VPNs might be acceptable for small branch offices, they probably aren't the best choice for situations requiring mission-critical connectivity – yet many companies are doing wholesale replacement of their dedicated WAN links with lower-cost VPNs. Instead of being mindful of the business impact in terms of extended mean time to repair, degradation of network performance, lower user productivity and potential lost revenue, they are blinded by the lower cost and make a knee-jerk decision.
Along with avoiding knee-jerk cost-cutting decisions, IT personnel need to also guard against making zealous technology-based decisions. It's easy to be blinded by a technology's technical elegance. An open-source PC-based IP virtual call center solution with skills-based multi-location routing is very elegant. However its business value can be questionable if the skills needed to design, implement, support and manage the platform are not available. It may be easier, faster and more cost effective to utilize a third-party call center service – especially one that has proven skills in customer service.
LAMP-based Web architectures (Linux, Apache, My SQL, and PHP) are very elegant but may bring limited value if your developers are Microsoft-centric with experience in .NET, C+/C# , SQL Server and IIS.
IT departments need to be impartial in their analysis to understand where a technology will fit and where it won't. A technology's only value is in the need it will meet. If the need isn't there, the technology -- no matter how elegant -- has no value.
And to complicate matters, technology is rarely a question of “either/or”. More often than not, the most appropriate strategy is a hybrid mix of new technology and legacy infrastructure which requires even more objective and impartial analysis to insure optimal value.
IT managers need to be mindful of the all the benefits, risks, costs and business impacts of their decisions. IT planning needs to be objective and impartial to ensure the technology architecture is not the product of the latest vendor-driven fads, but rather is a cohesive, business-focused strategy that focuses on the overall goals of the business. Now excuse me as I go meditate.
After 20 years of involvement in IT, I can safely say that mindfulness has not been an inherent trait of most IT organizations. Sadly, from many perspectives, it can be said that "mindlessness" has been a better description of IT.
Many costly strategic decisions have been made based totally on technology prejudices, zealous preferences or knee-jerk reactions, without analyzing the true business impact. Many companies have wasted a good deal of time, resources and money on the latest IT “project of the day”. Data warehouses sit idle with data that hasn't been updated in years. Expensive Asynchronous Transfer Mode campus networks have been implemented, only to be ripped out before they are fully depreciated and replaced with Gigabit Ethernet. Budget-breaking CRM systems have been implemented that are rarely used because of their complexity and high support costs.
Unfortunately, we haven't learned from these mistakes. Companies still make knee-jerk IT decisions without analyzing the overall finances, risks and business impact. With the current need for companies to focus on their returns on investment, it's even more crucial that IT decisions be made objectively and impartially.
Take virtual private networks (VPN) as an example. VPNs can generate substantial savings in many situations – especially in the areas of remote access, corporate office connectivity, Intranets and connectivity to lower-revenue generating locations; however they are not an across the board panacea for lower network costs. Being Internet-based, VPNs can't offer the same availability, redundancy and quality of service that dedicated connections provide. So while VPNs might be acceptable for small branch offices, they probably aren't the best choice for situations requiring mission-critical connectivity – yet many companies are doing wholesale replacement of their dedicated WAN links with lower-cost VPNs. Instead of being mindful of the business impact in terms of extended mean time to repair, degradation of network performance, lower user productivity and potential lost revenue, they are blinded by the lower cost and make a knee-jerk decision.
Along with avoiding knee-jerk cost-cutting decisions, IT personnel need to also guard against making zealous technology-based decisions. It's easy to be blinded by a technology's technical elegance. An open-source PC-based IP virtual call center solution with skills-based multi-location routing is very elegant. However its business value can be questionable if the skills needed to design, implement, support and manage the platform are not available. It may be easier, faster and more cost effective to utilize a third-party call center service – especially one that has proven skills in customer service.
LAMP-based Web architectures (Linux, Apache, My SQL, and PHP) are very elegant but may bring limited value if your developers are Microsoft-centric with experience in .NET, C+/C# , SQL Server and IIS.
IT departments need to be impartial in their analysis to understand where a technology will fit and where it won't. A technology's only value is in the need it will meet. If the need isn't there, the technology -- no matter how elegant -- has no value.
And to complicate matters, technology is rarely a question of “either/or”. More often than not, the most appropriate strategy is a hybrid mix of new technology and legacy infrastructure which requires even more objective and impartial analysis to insure optimal value.
IT managers need to be mindful of the all the benefits, risks, costs and business impacts of their decisions. IT planning needs to be objective and impartial to ensure the technology architecture is not the product of the latest vendor-driven fads, but rather is a cohesive, business-focused strategy that focuses on the overall goals of the business. Now excuse me as I go meditate.
Tuesday
There's No I In Team...But There Is A "ME"
An experienced team leader knows that motivation is a primary factor in whether goals are missed, met or exceeded. It’s motivation that determines if a person can't wait for their feet to hit the floor in the morning to get to work or hits the snooze button and spends another five minutes dreaming of a better life. And it is motivation that decides whether a team is high-performing or barely meeting goals.
We’ve all heard the phrase “there’s no ‘I’ in team”; however there is a ‘me’ in the word team and if you’re going to build a motivated team that delivers results, you often need to focus on the “me”.
Anyone who has taken a basic management course has heard of Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs. According to Maslow, people are motivated by five needs, which range from biological needs - such as eating - to higher self-actualization needs such as being creative. Each of these needs is focused on the self – the “me”.
People in general are not motivated by ideas such as increasing shareholder value or building a world-class organization. They are motivated to meet their basic needs such as paying their bills, putting food on the table and providing for their families.
Often, the key to motivating a team is to translate business goals into personal value. A motivating leader understands this and makes sure the team knows what's “in it for them” if they meet the goals.
You may find this "it's about me" view very selfish, but in reality, nothing could be further from the truth. Consider the following example:
I have been assigned a project to implement a new system that will increase productivity and save the company $2.5 million. That's a good corporate goal, but it means increased workload, longer hours and extended leaves from my family. So what's in it for me?
If the project is successful, I will get a bonus, my merit raise will increase, my career path and job security will be enhanced, and I could get a promotion. Now I'm getting motivated.
To motivate my team, I need to apply the same strategy and help them understand what's in it for them: they will be exposed to new technologies, there will be opportunities for training, they will get a bonus and potential salary increase if the project is successful, and they will be able to move into more senior positions. Now they are getting motivated.
My "me" is motivated, their "me" is motivated and we are a motivated team ready to do whatever is needed to make the project successful - which will ultimately satisfy senior management’s "me," as business goals will be met.
So while there is no "I" in team, there is a "me" - a bunch of them, to be precise. A motivated and successful team is made up of individuals who understand what's in it for them.
We’ve all heard the phrase “there’s no ‘I’ in team”; however there is a ‘me’ in the word team and if you’re going to build a motivated team that delivers results, you often need to focus on the “me”.
Anyone who has taken a basic management course has heard of Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs. According to Maslow, people are motivated by five needs, which range from biological needs - such as eating - to higher self-actualization needs such as being creative. Each of these needs is focused on the self – the “me”.
People in general are not motivated by ideas such as increasing shareholder value or building a world-class organization. They are motivated to meet their basic needs such as paying their bills, putting food on the table and providing for their families.
Often, the key to motivating a team is to translate business goals into personal value. A motivating leader understands this and makes sure the team knows what's “in it for them” if they meet the goals.
You may find this "it's about me" view very selfish, but in reality, nothing could be further from the truth. Consider the following example:
I have been assigned a project to implement a new system that will increase productivity and save the company $2.5 million. That's a good corporate goal, but it means increased workload, longer hours and extended leaves from my family. So what's in it for me?
If the project is successful, I will get a bonus, my merit raise will increase, my career path and job security will be enhanced, and I could get a promotion. Now I'm getting motivated.
To motivate my team, I need to apply the same strategy and help them understand what's in it for them: they will be exposed to new technologies, there will be opportunities for training, they will get a bonus and potential salary increase if the project is successful, and they will be able to move into more senior positions. Now they are getting motivated.
My "me" is motivated, their "me" is motivated and we are a motivated team ready to do whatever is needed to make the project successful - which will ultimately satisfy senior management’s "me," as business goals will be met.
So while there is no "I" in team, there is a "me" - a bunch of them, to be precise. A motivated and successful team is made up of individuals who understand what's in it for them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)