Do Consultants Have What It Takes to Be CIO?
Companies are increasingly hiring consultants into CIO positions. The Hartford Financial Services Group hired a 25-year veteran of Accenture as its CIO last October. Paper and packaging distributor Unisource Worldwide also hired an Accenture consultant as its CIO in August 2007. Other companies that hired consultants as their CIOs in the past year include:
This is a dramatic change from a decade ago. In 1998, when I first started working for CIO magazine, companies were reluctant to hire career consultants into the CIO role for a variety of reasons—the main one being that public companies didn't think consultants possessed the political finesse to effect change inside organizations.
At the time, companies were racing to deploy ERP systems both to automate business processes related to finance, manufacturing and HR and to help with Y2K compliance. As we all know, those implementations were no picnic, fraught as they were with change management challenges. Since rallying support for ERP among key business executives and getting end-users acclimated to the new software and process changes were key to successful deployments, companies wanted to hire CIOs who had hands-on experience implementing ERP systems. Even though companies hired legions of consultants to help with ERP implementations, they believed there was a fundamental difference between deploying these systems and effecting change as a consultant and outsider vs. effecting change from the inside. They thought consultants had it easier because they didn't have to worry about burning bridges and because they were contracted for a short period of time, not the long haul duration of the implementation. Consequently, employers didn't think consultants had the hands-on, real-world, insider experience of building internal political alliances and rallying end-user support that was critical for success.
I wonder why companies have changed their attitude toward consultants. Some, such as The Hartford, Michael Baker and Mace, hired consultants who had been working for the company, so these consultants weren't coming in off the street, so to speak. They had the opportunity to prove themselves on projects. I understand companies using consulting engagements to "test" job candidates. It makes sense to me, and presumably makes hiring a lot easier for them.
But still, if effecting change as an external consultant is truly different from effecting change as an internal CIO, why would companies be confident that these consultants they're hiring can do the CIO job? I don't think the answer is 'because those consultants have proven themselves' because I'm not convinced these consultants have proven themselves as CIO. (Of course, the companies that hired them might think otherwise.)
Don't get me wrong: I'm not trying to pass judgment on consultants, and in particular on the consultants who've been hired into the CIO positions I've mentioned above. I'm not saying I think they're bad, incompetent or incapable of being CIO. I'm simply trying to point out a change in attitude that has affected competition for CIO jobs, and I'm trying to understand what prompted that change.
Why are so many more companies open to hiring consultants into the CIO role? Has the nature of IT projects changed such that the skills and experiences that were required for CIOs in 1998 are no longer in demand? Is it a need to pick a CIO from a broader pool of applicants? Do consultants, especially career consultants, have what it takes to be CIO? Let me know what you think.
Print
This is a dramatic change from a decade ago. In 1998, when I first started working for CIO magazine, companies were reluctant to hire career consultants into the CIO role for a variety of reasons—the main one being that public companies didn't think consultants possessed the political finesse to effect change inside organizations.
At the time, companies were racing to deploy ERP systems both to automate business processes related to finance, manufacturing and HR and to help with Y2K compliance. As we all know, those implementations were no picnic, fraught as they were with change management challenges. Since rallying support for ERP among key business executives and getting end-users acclimated to the new software and process changes were key to successful deployments, companies wanted to hire CIOs who had hands-on experience implementing ERP systems. Even though companies hired legions of consultants to help with ERP implementations, they believed there was a fundamental difference between deploying these systems and effecting change as a consultant and outsider vs. effecting change from the inside. They thought consultants had it easier because they didn't have to worry about burning bridges and because they were contracted for a short period of time, not the long haul duration of the implementation. Consequently, employers didn't think consultants had the hands-on, real-world, insider experience of building internal political alliances and rallying end-user support that was critical for success.
I wonder why companies have changed their attitude toward consultants. Some, such as The Hartford, Michael Baker and Mace, hired consultants who had been working for the company, so these consultants weren't coming in off the street, so to speak. They had the opportunity to prove themselves on projects. I understand companies using consulting engagements to "test" job candidates. It makes sense to me, and presumably makes hiring a lot easier for them.
But still, if effecting change as an external consultant is truly different from effecting change as an internal CIO, why would companies be confident that these consultants they're hiring can do the CIO job? I don't think the answer is 'because those consultants have proven themselves' because I'm not convinced these consultants have proven themselves as CIO. (Of course, the companies that hired them might think otherwise.)
Don't get me wrong: I'm not trying to pass judgment on consultants, and in particular on the consultants who've been hired into the CIO positions I've mentioned above. I'm not saying I think they're bad, incompetent or incapable of being CIO. I'm simply trying to point out a change in attitude that has affected competition for CIO jobs, and I'm trying to understand what prompted that change.
Why are so many more companies open to hiring consultants into the CIO role? Has the nature of IT projects changed such that the skills and experiences that were required for CIOs in 1998 are no longer in demand? Is it a need to pick a CIO from a broader pool of applicants? Do consultants, especially career consultants, have what it takes to be CIO? Let me know what you think.
Previous Post: JetBlue's CIO Gets a New BossNext Post: CIOs Increasingly Seek New Jobs with Small Companies
Most Discussed Posts
Cloud computing has emerged as one of the most significant game changers to hit the technology landscape in the past 20 years. With this massive expansion of the cloud, the perception of the IT organization is shifting from a utility player to a change agent. This eBook breaks down five ways progressive organizations are using cloud-based IT Management solutions to help drive innovation and become more strategic, including: adding visibility and analytics, speeding up time-to-value, lowering costs, improving prioritization, and providing a blueprint for future cloud deployments.
Read the white paper to see how IBM helped Citigroup deliver new services and enhancements to their 200 million customers faster.
There are 3 ways to modernize legacy applications: rewrite completely, acquire packaged solutions or migrate existing code. This paper explains why it's best to migrate and how IBM® Rational® software can help.
Accommodating specific lines of business can result in a hybrid ecosystem of applications and servers. The resulting complexity of this architecture makes for an environment that is costly to maintain and difficult to change when addressing new challenges.
This whitepaper will help you to define a mobile device passcode policy. Security managers must attempt to reconcile two opposing goals. They must: 1) create a passcode policy that is strong enough to protect the device if it is lost or stolen, while: 2) not annoying users with needless length or complexity.
This whitepaper, authored by The Radicati Group, looks at the key reasons organizations should consider moving to a cloud-based archiving solution. Email archiving solutions enable organizations to store, monitor, and collect electronic data exchanged by their users to comply with internal policies and regulations.
ATERNITY will showcase a 30-minute demo on how Fortune 500 companies are leveraging its award-winning FPI Platform to deliver a user-centric approach to Proactive IT Management.
For businesses to move forward and tap into the ever-expanding universe of Internet users and network-enabled devices, it's critical to learn how to make the transition to IPv6. Learn the critical steps your organization must take to make a seamless transition-and keep your business world connected.
Learn how IT teams can protect against spear phishing tactics. Harry Sverdlove, chief technology officer of Bit9 offers a frank discussion about spear phishing - the most common technique used in today's advanced attacks.
Learn how to build a solid business case for your migration to Red Hat Enterprise Linux so you can run leaner, innovate faster, be more flexible and own the New Now.
Social media isn't about you; it's about everything around you. As you consider how your customers want to communicate with you, social media is something that can't be ignored. But what should your strategy be? Is social media "just another channel?" What kind of a plan makes sense for your contact center and for your customers? Join our experts as they share their insight and research results.
Hardware tokens were a popular method of strong authentication in past years but the cumbersome provisioning and distribution tasks, high support requirements and replacement costs have limited their growth. The additional log-in steps that hardware tokens require and the resulting user frustrations have limited adoption and make them impractical for larger scale partner and customer applications.
Sponsored Links
