Link: https://www.adaptivechangedesign.com/post/still-building-shanty-towns
From adaptivechangedesign
Dear Reader:
It saddens me that I feel it necessary to repeat the lesson’s taught by forward-thinking organisations over 30 years ago. Back then, companies like DHL and FedEx, led the way in the express parcels business, in many ways, they blazed the trail for global logistics that underpins the operating models of Amazon and Alibaba.
What these brands have in common is an innate understanding of the strategic value of information systems and technology. They treat long-range investments I.T. and systems infrastructure the same as investments in aircraft fleet and transportation & logistics facilities. These investments were all made with a strong understanding of strategic value – the sort of value that might not see a return before five years, but when its impact is felt, it delivers growth multipliers, of the order of x2, x3 or more.
Sadly, it seems that many firms can’t see this strategic view when investing in I.T.; they continue to see the I.T. function as a second class citizen, a whipping-boy whose only function is to serve “the business” masters rather than an equal business partner along with Operations, Sales and Finance. The tell-tale signs are the piece-meal of I.T. solutions that are entirely driven by parochial requirements of business teams some way down the hierarchy of the enterprise. This behaviour leads to sprawling information systems ‘Shanty Towns‘ that impede strategic development and the technical debt created by duplication and repeatedly rework required just to keep the business afloat. The organisations don’t see the need for a joined-up business & systems architecture and often ignore or remove such capabilities from their business operating model.
I accept that I.T. departments have, in part, themselves to blame; too focused on technology, and in the case of ‘Enterprise Architecture’, too focused on arcane and unwieldy frameworks like the 800 odd pages of The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF). I.T. leaders should sit down and learn from their business colleagues on how to ‘sell’ strategic value, you can bet your boots, the justification and the blueprint for a long-range investment of the air fleet, didn’t require an architectural framework.
It’s simply not good enough to say that I.T. must only serve the operational whims of. “The Business”, no excuses, I.T. cannot be treated as a “Dark Art” to be kept in a box. Not unless you’re in the “Shanty Town” construction business (I’m not sure what that business model is, maybe trading in recycled corrugated iron).
I.T. can be treated as having strategic value. It’s surprisingly easy, with the right attitude (as I learnt from my 11 years at DHL). It starts with the CEO and her leadership team. When she looks at the longer-term future, as she views the whole business, including I.T., she might be surprised to find strategic information systems near the top of the pile. Just like DHL, FedEx, Amazon, and Alibaba.
Yours Truly,
A Battle-Scarred Business Systems Architect.
