There, First Sergeant Carwood Lipton worries about heading into combat under the company's incompetent commander, Lieutenant Norman Dike. "It wasn't that Lieutenant Dike made bad decisions," Lipton observes. "It's that he made no decisions."
Sound like anyone you know?
Unfortunately, technology organizations are infested with Lieutenant Dikes. The economic malaise and high-tech backlash have raised IT indecision-making to a new art form. Executives, middle managers and staffers alike avoid making recommendations that could be perceived as risky, backing only those initiatives whose returns are black and white and selecting only those technologies they've used before. How many of your company's strategic IT projects are in limbo because no one in authority is willing to make a difficult or unpopular decision?
Even IT managers with the most impressive track records and credentials are second-guessed at every turn. One CEO of an otherwise aggressive and forward-thinking midsize company recalls "screaming and yelling and spitting" at his CIO--someone he says he has worked with and trusted for close to 20 years--about a $25 million customer relationship management project the CEO came to view as overkill. At least this CEO has the presence to see he was wrong. "Now I look back and think, 'Oh, God, he was the genius who thought this thing through and I wasn't,' " the CEO admits. "But frankly, if I'd been told years ago that this thing was going to cost us what it's cost us, we probably would have kiboshed it."
Most business technology leaders are far less humble and reflective. On the vendor side, Hewlett-Packard heir and influential shareholder Walter Hewlett opposed (and continues to rant about) HP's $19 billion takeover of Compaq Computer. Why? It's risky: The acquisition will dilute HP's printer-centric profits, stretch the company's finances and distract its employees. In other words, the merger will be costly and difficult to pull off, with no guarantee of success.
No kidding. These kinds of concerns could be raised about any big business decision, whether it's a multibillion-dollar corporate acquisition or a multimillion-dollar software implementation. Granted, the HP-Compaq deal isn't the most creative deal either company could have entered into. But at least management charted a vision and acted on it rather than settling for the status quo in an industry that devours the faint of heart. Last month's swift HP reorganization--under which product lines, brands, sales teams and other functions were consolidated--shows management to be clear and decisive now that the merger is official. Hewlett's counterplan, in contrast, lacked impact as well as imagination.
In both the user and the vendor examples above, give the protagonists credit for having the courage and conviction to stand up to entrenched opposition--shareholders, executives, board members, employees, venture capitalists, analysts. In both cases, the protagonists' staunch commitment to their visions could have ended their careers. Some scoff at HP chief Carly Fiorina for craving power and seeking the limelight, but other celebrity CEOs have gotten far more acclaim and riches for risking far less.
You may disagree with the decisions leaders make, but respect those leaders who at least stick out their necks.
In Band of Brothers, Lieutenant Dike doesn't make it; he becomes a casualty of his own indecision. As an IT decision-maker, don't fall into the same trap or shirk your responsibility to challenge other absentee leaders.
-- Rob Preston, rpreston@cmp.com
RSS
