I like to simplify these issues whenever possible; I agree with Leonardo da Vinci's statement that Simplicity is the Ultimate Sophistication, too often we try to make things difficult. As usual, Ms. Orlov provides excellent insights & advice. I find the two most common mistakes that we CIOs make before taking a new job is:

1. we don't look at the culture to see if there is a good fit
2. wed don't clearly determine the degree to which IT offers a value proposition that is in line with our interests & philosophies,
3. we don't determine early in the process the degree to which we can clearly show how IT would increase shareholder value - and be able to demonstrate that early on - business issues, not technical ones.

More to it than that of course, but a few thoughts about what trips up many of us in the CIO role.

I have a good idea what IT organization Mrs. Orlov is referring to. I disagree with a few points. The comment "Staffers provided no status as to where their time was spent" is factually incorrect, weekly updates as well as as regular prioritization meetings were ongoing. Also the comment "shadow IT (sprinkled throughout the firm) became the prime source of enterprise analysis and decision-making." is not actuate as a tremendous amount of IT resources went into supporting these individuals as should be the case.

The "Assessment" involved spending 1 hour each with a range of IT and business members. The outcome was a set of conclusions that I would question the accuracy and completeness of.

I would argue that in the case of this company, there is quite a bit more than appears to the eye. The business was highly engaged with IT until the steering committee was dissolved by a newly participating business executive. The history of the oversight of the projects is a bit muddy as well. The business in question has a history of charging into projects without going through the process of gathering requirements or allocating enough time to plan adequately. There was also a tremendous amount of push back on any attempt to not over allocating projects to IT, the business constantly tried to put 10 lbs of (you know what) into a 5 lbs bag. This is the reason a few IT processes spilled over to impact the business.

In any case, most likely due to the findings in this quick assessment, a few senior members of IT are out of a job. I would suggest that more time be spend on an "IT Assessment" before providing a set of findings that do not tell the whole story and cost individuals their livelihood.

It's all a question of semantics, but I think IT-centricity shouldn't have its epicentre in the IT function, ie IT-centricity is a organisation-wide issue.

I believe IT-cetricity must stem from the boardroom. Treating all IT related problems including substandard CIOs as IT problems is more often than not a mistake. The problem lies somewhere in the recruitment, development and management spaces.

Somebody somewhere outside the IT function got one or more of these wrong.

It's all a question of semantics, but I think IT-centricity shouldn't have its epicentre in the IT function, ie IT-centricity is a organisation-wide issue.

I believe IT-centricity must stem from the boardroom. Treating all IT related problems including substandard CIOs as IT problems is more often than not a mistake. The problem lies somewhere in the recruitment, development and management spaces.

Somebody somewhere outside the IT function got one or more of these wrong.