Discussion on:

The dangers of unintended consequences

Sadly this is the case, even if they don't see it that way. I work in Marketing. Part of my job, as determined by our Board, is for me to use social media to engage with current members, recruit staff, support community events, etc. It is a part of my daily list of activities I go through on a regular basis, not because I want to hang out and play FarmVille, but because I have a job to do. However, despite an endorsement from the Board and from our CEO, our IS team continues to attempt to get access banned.

Other problem areas have also come up. They didn't like our old website vendor, so they hired a new one. I'm in charge of updating the website with new messages and products. Our CMS is best used with Firefox or Chrome, and it took six weeks to get those programs. Because it wasn't IE on WinXP SP3, which is the only approved internet browser.

Third fun thing. We're supposed to move video in house. We ordered Adobe's video editing software, and a video camera through IS to get started. We shot some video and were told that if we wanted to load the video from the camera IS provided, onto the computer IS maintained, using software IS purchased, we'd need to do it from an IS controlled laptop to make sure there were no viruses. We ordered a bunch of DVDs from IS... which they now won't let us use as they won't allow foreign objects in the computers.

These kind of annoyances do nothing to encourage me to want to work with IS. Further, in all the time Marketing has been using FB, we have yet to do anything that exposed our system to attack. I know this because IS told me so!

The situation I've describe has not been isolated in my experience, and I think that is why IS/IT departments are seen as obstructionist and a necessary evil!

As a long time IT admin and support person, I've found so many IT pros say "It's too dangerous" or "It exposes the network" to anything from allowing social media access to RSS feed to implementing tablet/smartphone access.

Instead IT should recognize their is a risk, but determine ways to minimize the risk yet allow the required tools for sales/accounting/HR or whatever other partners in the business are needed to keep the business running.

IT people need to remember we're one cog in the wheel and not the hub.

I am retired from Ford. I am a master electrician. Many problems arose because our engineers would *not* get up off his arse, & actually look at the prob. The engineering was OK, but did not fit with the production work flow. One of our electricians actually went & got an EE degree to fix the prob. He did the *best* prints & directions I ever saw. He merely went out on the floor & observed, then delivered the best all-around solution.
I write some programs. I *always* interact with the users to see how they can be improved. Many times the users would suggest something I had not thought of, to make improvements.

Know your audience, know your stakeholders - key to every project, as all the examples used in this article could be.

Though I agree that inflexible rules are no way to run an IT shop, I do have sympathy for shops that are run that way. Having worked in IT for over 20 years now, I can't count the times that "marketing" or "sales" or any other department for that matter has begged, pleaded, and threatened to get software, hardware, or policy changes. Then, as soon as something goes wrong, someone in IT gets fired or demoted. Also, I wonder whose budget the salary for the additional support staff comes from for all these things?

I'm not advocating draconian IT policies. I think social media and modern technology are great and add a lot to many business models. However, I'd just caution those that are ready to crucify IT departments, who also are working under mandates from the board and the CEO, perhaps a couple minutes in the shoes of a tech who is held responsible for things he/she cannot control would be in order. Maybe, if other departments where willing to take some responsibility when incidents do happen, IT would not feel the need to block and control everything.

IT finds itself in a very similar role to QA in manufacturing. Everyone hates QA. They point out all the mistakes and get people in trouble. But, if a mistake ever leaves the factory, its QA that gets in trouble first.

Just my thoughts. ymmv

I once heard of a project manager who insisted all project work be suspended, and all project documentation updated, reprinted and re-distributed for even the slightest request for a change. Probably would have been best to allow the changes to be made concurrently to the docs being updated. Of course this was prior to PMS (Project Management Software) but the consequence was that projects took far longer to complete than originally anticipated.

I've been working in data warehousing and business intelligence for many years, and have often been called in to build systems that capture and evaluate productivity.

Years ago, I worked within a call center. The business determined they needed more productivity from the call center personnel, as measured by the number of calls per hour answered by the CSRs. It was "determined" that the optimal call length was 90 seconds. The concerns was that if the call were any shorter, the customers would not get answers and any longer, the call center wasn't "efficient".

When the CSRs were told this, they did what should have been forecast at the beginning: if at 80 seconds into the call, the issue wasn't "resolved", the call was transferred to someone else or "accidentally" disconnected.

While the numbers showed an "efficient" call center, customer retention numbers showed something was drastically wrong.

Who got blamed? IT... for implementing the performance tracking and analysis system.

IT very often does what it's told. It's when priorities come into conflict (security vs. BYOD; maintaining bandwidth utilization and availability vs. allowing YouTube; efficient and stringent management of corporate PCs and laptops vs. allowing "unapproved" devices and software) that troubles being.

Ever watch/read Arthur C. Clarke's 2001?