CIOs Must Have the Ear of the CEO

The Chief Information Officer is not a second-rate executive position as some would claim. Also, CIO, does not, as the saying goes, stand for “Career Is Over”. And the CIO position is certainly not “dead”, contrary to rumors to the contrary. As Mark Twain once said, “rumors of my death are premature”.

There is this notion that CIOs deserve a “seat at the table”. The “table” in this sense is the CEO staff, as a peer exectuive with the CFO, COO, and assorted VPs of Operations, Sales, etc. Much is written in blogs (included my own), magazine articles and discussed in forums about the justification for this belief.  The main idea is that CIOs have to be more ‘strategic’. Supposedly, the mechanism for becoming more strategic is most often termed “alignment”.

Let me so bold as to suggest that things like ‘contribution’ and ‘value’ go right along with ‘strategic’. There are plenty of tactical issues with managing a business. Things are dynamic, a flow, requiring a dexterity of seamlessly migrating through issues of business performance: sales, product quality, customer satisfaction, supply chain, etc.  Information Technology is clearly threaded through these and other areas of the business. However, the trick is to demystify and ‘dis-abstract’ this stuff so that you are not spending half of the monthly strategy meeting talking about who should be allowed to get a Blackberry or an iPhone.

So, the big picture has something to do with not being the “moron in the room”.  True executive ”peers” suffer fools badly. The thought that there is somehow a special microscope for CIOs is nonsense — unless it takes one to see the value that the CIO is delivering. It is more about culture and being in the “club”. The one thing about clubs full of highly-ambitous people is that they are territorial and very picky about letting others inside.

Prior to being hired for a CIO position a few years ago, the HR executive told me that the company was thinking about slimming down the number of direct reports to the CEO. Thus, they were considering having me report to the CFO. My response: a non-starter. If they were trying to reduce the number of CEO reports, I had just the solution: have the CFO report to me.

After an awkward chuckle or two, the HR executive was back to his senses. I wasn’t asking for a seat at the table. I expected one. It is all about grabbing a chair and acting like you belong there.

Bottom line

quit whining. If you do not have the business-savvy to earn the respect of fellow business executives, then you deserve to be seated in the gallery.

For more on this topic: Business Solutions: Death of the CIO?, by Nadia Cameron; The Death of the CIO–Again, by Brian Watson; Is the CIO a “pinnacle” position?, by George Tomko; and
What Do CEOs Want from CIOs?, by Maryfran Johnson.

Image: Arvind Balaraman / FreeDigitalPhotos.net

©2010 George M. Tomko All Rights Reserved

Night Blue Sky and Tree of Light

We may be skiing, on vacation, digging into another batch of cookies, reading, making resolutions or putting the stacks of papers into some kind of order. But, In general, we aren’t working; or, in wall-to-wall meetings; or planning a weekend cut-over to a new system.

The brief respite that we have been given will end with a vengeance on Monday, January 4, 2010. So we better be ready.

Clear memory, reboot, recharge – whatever you do, take this gift of time and backflush all of the crud and waxy buildup that has accumulated on your brain in what was a brutal 2009.

Quite a number of challenges await your return. 2010 will be a pivotal year. The rate of disruptive technology changes, and the new social contract that will emerge from economic recovery, will drastically test the “elasticity” of the organization to deal with things.

Whatever happens in 2010, it is going to take more guile and determination, intensity, creativity, resourcefulness and tenacity from leaders.

So, enjoy the time off. IT Leaders will be called upon to actually lead in 2010. Figuring things out will take a clear head and the ability to find some think time and plan the moves. We used to call it “blue sky” or thinking outside the box but, first and foremost it requires thinking.

Simple, maybe. But such a simple thing is often sabotaged by knee-jerks and bad reactions.

Bottom-line: Come out of this holiday season thinking right.

Image: Francesco Marino / FreeDigitalPhotos.net

©2009 George M. Tomko All Rights Reserved

As a long-time CIO and, now, consultant for CIOs, I am seeing that there is a role shift that is happening, ever so subtly, but it is going to be transformational for the role of CIO in most organizations. Perhaps it will not be manifested in a “big bang”, but all CIOs will be affected.

Some have referred to this as “CIO 2.0” as if to suggest that it is a planned and that there is some sort of documented manifesto that has popped out of some lab, university or think-tank. No, this is entirely circumstantial. It is also inevitable, unstoppable, irreversible, unavoidable, and, well, a good thing. A 2007 article by Deloitte and Touche, aimed mostly at government IT leaders, identified the changing roles and imperatives for public sector CIOs and was highly suggestive of the changes brewing for private sector CIOs.

The bottom line is this: a CIO is a broker of business solutions that involve cross functional process stewardship and a provider of a technology and infrastructure framework. Beyond this, there is an opportunity for the business-savvy CIO to contribute to joint enterprise strategy development with senior leadership. As described in an April 2008 blog post CIO 2.0: The Chief Impact Officer:

In other words, the ideal of CIOs becoming key players in the business arena is taking shape. Call it CIO 2.0 — the evolution of the IT czar into the role of “chief impact officer.” Call it the SCIO — the strategic CIO. But whatever you call it, the transformation is inevitable.

Those that are able to transcend the perception that they are zookeepers of the geeks and propeller-heads (as very talented technologists are unflatteringly labeled) will find themselves as thought leaders and key players in making things happen at the speed of business. Any attempt to be controlling, withholding, short-sighted or locked-in will simply generate powerful incentives for the organization to go it alone, underground, in any number of ways.

CIOs that fail to migrate from IT czar style CIO to chief impact officer style CIO will find themselves moved out, passed over or working for a more powerful executive (read CFO), rather than the CEO.

Nothing represents a game of ‘chance’ more than a pair of dice. Even with “loaded” dice, the outcomes are far from certain. Very often there is money on the line, significant money. So, I couldn’t think of a better subject –gambling on the roll of the dice– to compare with the use of consultants for high stakes decisions, intitiatives, etc.

Very often, consultants come to the same conclusions as the company’s own internal analysts. There is a perception that a prestigious consulting firm can 1) validate and therefore ‘certify’ the solution as the correct approach; 2) provide risk-averse executives with a scapegoat if things go bad; 3) increase commitment of the organization’s leaders to justify the large consulting bill.

But, at the end of the day, does any of this lower the possibility of rolling “snake eyes” with respect to the issue or opportunity that is being addressed? Does the lovely PowerPoint presentation leave you ready to “let it all ride” on the next roll?

As the truly great consultant would say, “it depends”. Perhaps, surprisingly, that consultant would actually be correct.

If so, then what does it depend on? While each situation is different, my take is that the biggest factor is matching the consultant to the mission. If you need ideation and strategies, hire a consulting firm that has demonstrated success in such engagements. Be wary, however, when the partner tries to sell you the implementation work. The firm may be great at analytics but does it have impeccable execution and delivery credentials?

In a very recent blog post, Chip Camden comments on the reasons why a client should hire a given consultant:

Prestige comes at a price that fewer companies are willing to pay for these days. In this economy, it comes down to the bottom line: What is your net effect on profitability (short- and long-term), and how does that compare to their other options?

So, basically, it ultimately depends on who can step in and “deliver the goods”. And it is this point that, to me, is the most important. Has the consulting firm or individual ever delivered a complete and successful solution? Have they ever had to live with the outcomes of delivered projects? Maybe, but usually, the consultants are long gone a month or two after the project is ‘complete’.

The world is now full of people who are mid to late stage career professionals that have early retired or have been let go in staff reductions due to the troubled economy. Some will come back to work at their former employers, albeit at lower cost to the company because the worker will be responsible for overheads like health benefits.

Others will become entrepreneurs and start their oun consulting practices, either as individuals or banded together as small “boutique” firms.

In any case, their “brand” will be etched on their faces, come through in their resumes, be evident in their wisdom and show in their been-there, done-that attitude. Their accomplishments and decades of experience will be a compelling option for managers looking to increase the odds of winning in this business version of the game of craps.

Image: FreeDigitalPhotos.net

I put out a set of exploratory questions to see how people see this.

Through a number of direct conversations, comments to this and other blogs and the use of other forums, some very good ideas came forth. To be sure, I am going to be hunting for more. Surprisingly, there does not seem to be much in the public domain on this subject.

Consider Google search results for May 6, 2009 where all of the words appear :

• 95 million for web pages that have the word: consultants
• 57 million for web pages that have the words: do consultants
• 23 million for web pages that have the words: do consultants deliver
• 10 million for web pages that have the words: do consultants deliver value

Now, Consider Google search results for May 6, 2009 where the exact phrase appears:

• 95 million for web pages that have the word: consultants
• 14 thousand for web pages that have the words: “do consultants”
• 88 (eigthy-eight) for web pages that have the words: “do consultants deliver”
• 62 (sixty-two) for web pages that have the words: “do consultants deliver value”

Interestingly, 53 of the 62 referred back to this blog.

So, suffice it to say that whether this is a top-of-mind question or not, it isn’t asked (and answered) very much.

There are certainly other questions that offer insights, such as “What do consultants really do, anyway?” or “Why did I hire the consultant anyway?”.

You can gleen from many of these that either people were satisfied customers or they weren’t satisfied. A generalization can be made that consultants give consultants a “bad name”. That is, all consultants get painted with the same brush. There have been enough overpriced, arrogant, know-it-all, blow-hards that the truly good ones can be overshadowed, at least initially, by the collective angst of organizations who feel betrayed when senior management brings in experts to tell them what the internal staff has already told them.

But, things are changing. One is that the economy has driven more people from retirement back into the workforce. While it is a tough job market, the best and most experienced are recognizing that putting up a shingle of their own and contracting out their knowledge and experience as a consultant, temporary worker, project resource or other paid contributor.

I will be conducting further research on this trend and what consulting firms and their customers have to say about it. In the meantime, please read the comments that were generously contributed by John Moore, Tracy Austin, Virginia Steinberg, and Chris Bunnett.

Ultimately, there is a fundamental question to be answered: “Do Consultants Deliver Value?”

I certainly can’t answer this question alone. And, such a broad question invariably leads to more questions:

1. Do you use consultants?
2. If so, why do you use consultants – because of the lack of internal expertise; because of the lack of internal ‘bandwidth’; because a strategy, project, etc. needs a boost of credibility?
3. If not, why not?
4. What do you look for in a consultant?
5. How do you determine ROI for a consulting engagement?
6. How do you hold consultants accountable after they are gone?
7. Is it all about the size of the engagement or the perception that it is less risky to engage a name brand?

Please take a moment to post your answers and comments. What further questions would you ask to clarify and provide the data points to answer the larger question? My aim is to consolidate the responses into a formal post that not only represents my opinions on the matter but those of my colleagues and contemporaries. All contributions will be carefully cited.

Also, feel free to take a look at some of the following references to help frame your thinking:

Companies urged to keep control of consultants [Andy McCue Published: 21 Jun 2007]

Simplifying the ‘Social Media Expert’ Discussion [Amber Naslund Published: 13 Jan 2009]

A Consultant is Not a Leader [Laurent Duperval Published: 24 Feb 2009]

Management Consultants in Higher Education [Keith Hampson Published: 29 Mar 2009]

Women In Consulting: Differentiators [Deborah Plumley Published: 27 Feb 2009]

Making a Value Choice [Omar Khan Published: 02 Feb 2009]

Social media consultants: snake oil or value add? [Jennifer Leggio Published: 20 Oct 2008]

How Economic or Business Consultants Add Value [Bill Conerly Published: 10 Jun 2008]

Value Method: Another Strategy for Bill Rate Calculation [Liz Greene Published: 27 Mar 2009]

Consulting Is My Sixth Revenue Stream [Jason Alba Published: 30 Jan 2009]