It is often the CEO who makes the difference between success and failure of a software driven transformation.
In my long career as head of IT and implementing software projects within companies, I have come across a variety of CEOs – some of them who were excellent change managers and others who were not. So, I classify all CEOs into 2 major categories – those who understand computerisation (not computers) and those who don't. Understanding computerization for a CEO means understanding the psychology of change brought about by automation. How well he understands this determines the success or failure of software projects.
Whenever I speak of the role of CEOs or top managers, I always remember this COO who was the best CXO I have worked with in my career – the best at least from computerization point of view. His name was Mr S C Jolly and he was the head of Sarawati Sugar Mill in Yamuna Nagar, (a group company of the Saraswati group consisting of Sugar mill, heavy engineering unit, etc. where I worked as their Group IT Head). It was my first job as a IT Head with only 4.5 years of prior work experience, and I set up the entire IT department and was higly successful in developing and implementing complex applications (see success stories published in Computers Today and Times of India at http://pukamble.co.cc/ct1 and http://pukamble.co.cc/toi). Mr Jolly is the best IT enabler I have come across in 28 years of my IT career and 24 years as head of IT/Software). I hope Mr Jolly reads this. Anyone who knows him may please convey my feelings of appreciation for him. The last time I was in touch with him he was living a retired life in Delhi.
And what was it that he did best to enable successful automation? You will be surprised to know - the best thing that he did was that HE DID NOT REACT. He was so balanced that he did not react to complaints as they came in. I was just 29 – 30 years young manager but I used to chat with him in his office and he oftern shared with me some of his wisdom. He said that he received several complaints about computerization. Some of the users were fed up and frustrated. What was different about him (which I have rarely seen in many CXO's I have worked with later) is that he did not immediately start blaming the computer department. He said that their frustration and complaints were not a result of any problem with technology or the tech department – they were a result of their reaction to change.
Let me paint the following scenario of an incident to illustrate what I said.
I had completed the automation of a very complex application very successfully (as the users were very cooperative and mature). I then started the automation of the most common and relatively simple application - payroll. But I was having great difficulty in implementing the system. The HR/Admin manager was simply not able to go live with the application. As is my style, I first tried hard to convince him and persuade him. But when I failed, I set up a meeting with the COO, Mr Jolly. The HR manager had several complaints on the system and lot of master data preparation was pending. And following is the scene at the meeting.
There I am sitting in front of the COO's desk - a clean big table with just one Economic Times lying in one corner. By my side is the HR Manager – both of us facing the COO. And the Manager beside me starts off by cursing the system, fretting and fuming and blaming the system in no uncertain terms. "Our neighboring company has been using Payroll for years and they do not face any such problems. We just don't know how to do it…"
The COO quitely listens to all that is being said. There is no reaction whatsoever and no expression on his face. He patiently waits for the manager to finish blurting out what he has to. When the manager is finished with his story, the COO – completely unmoved by all that was said and with no emotions on his face – asks what were the next steps. He reviews the steps to be taken, sets targets for master data correction (which was the primary reason for all problems) and closes the meeting.
And believe me, it worked wonders.
Later one day he gave me his words of wisdom, "The HR Manager was reacting as he did not because there is anything wrong with the system, but he is uneasy under the impact of change. The frustration, anger, complaints have nothing to do with the causes that the managers state. They themselves do not know that it is their reaction to change and has no relation with the issues that they complain about. But I give them a patient hearing just to allow them to let off steam."
I have not heard wiser words than these from any CXO in over 20 years of my career after this incident. I have suffered from some of the worst CXO's too – there were some who would believe the first guy who went and complained about computerization. And hell would fall on IT.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Need for IT Awareness amongst CEOs and Senior Professionals
In the long industrial history of mankind, functions like Finance, HR, production and Marketing always existed. IT function is new which has come into existence not in the industrial age but the information age. No wonder, IT is an area where there is maximum ignorance amongst the top management. Man will evolve to understand this new function as the dust of the information revolution settles.
My readers may think I am being arrogant - posing as if IT folks know everything and others don't know anything. That is not my intention. Yes I do not know the finer points about other functions like Finance, HR, Production, Marketing. CEOs and senior managers too may be equally ignorant of all other functions - you may argue. So why am I complaining about IT alone?
There is a difference. The senior management may not know about finance, HR, Production, marketing, etc. But the good thing is that they know that they do not know about these fields. They also know what they do not know about them. Further, they know that there are other experts who know more than what they themselves do and are therefore willing to use the expertise of the experts.
In case of IT, particularly with respect to Software, the senior management does not know what they do not know and need to know. They certainly know that they do not know software and programming, but there is much more to Software Management (particularly in managing software within corporates) which they can and should know as it is not technology. What is worse is that they do not know that they do not know something which they can know.
My readers may think I am being arrogant - posing as if IT folks know everything and others don't know anything. That is not my intention. Yes I do not know the finer points about other functions like Finance, HR, Production, Marketing. CEOs and senior managers too may be equally ignorant of all other functions - you may argue. So why am I complaining about IT alone?
There is a difference. The senior management may not know about finance, HR, Production, marketing, etc. But the good thing is that they know that they do not know about these fields. They also know what they do not know about them. Further, they know that there are other experts who know more than what they themselves do and are therefore willing to use the expertise of the experts.
In case of IT, particularly with respect to Software, the senior management does not know what they do not know and need to know. They certainly know that they do not know software and programming, but there is much more to Software Management (particularly in managing software within corporates) which they can and should know as it is not technology. What is worse is that they do not know that they do not know something which they can know.
 Fig. 1 |
 Fig. 2 |
Let me explain what CEOs and non IT Managers do not know and which they can easily know.Most managers think IT management is all technology. What they do not know is that software head not only has technology skills (Fig. 1), but also has people/change management and process skills. So whereas the CEOs will readily consult the IT guy for technological advise, they may not know that they can also use their change management and process management skills.
On the other hand, most managers are quick to admit that they do not know technology ("I am not a technology guy, you see"). With this they may also absolve themselves of all their responsibility of automation. Technology is just 5% of what they need to know if they are part of an automation project (Fig. 2). What they need to know and can easily know is the management of change and the psychology of change brought about by automation. User Managers should know the process of software development and the limitations thereof. If they can learn this and be fully involved in the automation process, there is no reason why a software project should fail.
There are several change management issues, people dynamics and process issues related to Software management that senior management can easily know. But unfortunately, in the field of software, ignorance is rampant because it is thought of as only a technical field - whereas there is a lot more to it than technology. What is worse is that several CEOs do not even know that such expertise is available to use. They are not aware of even the need to use this expertise, because for them, automation is a technology exercise.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)