Companies today face technology challenges from all angles.
Internally they are all looking for ways to increase efficiency by automating task, while
at the same time reducing the overhead associated with supporting the technology that runs
their business. Externally they are not only faced with the challenge of keeping up with
the competition, but also with their customers who are becoming more technically savvy,
and therefore expect more.
This poses a particular challenge to companies who rely on
the same groups that support their internal infrastructure to provide products and
services to the customer.
Not long ago (and maybe currently,) investment houses began
the task of improving the reports they send to customers detailing the performance of a
clients portfolio, the type of holdings as well as a breakdown of individual investments.
At one time this would be considered added value if information is customized to meet the
consumer's needs.
Today, customers expect as much. After all, today's
consumers are better educated, and have access to some pretty powerful technology
themselves that for one hundred dollars or so allows them to track their own investments
quickly and easily. In fact many on-line operations allow non-customers to use these sorts
of services for free, just to keep them coming back. Competitors who act quickly can win
customers. Likewise, customers can be lost be not acting quickly enough.
One of my clients related to me how frustrated they
were with their company's inability to react swiftly to market demands. They had
information that was considered extremely valuable by their customers who had been
receiving it on CD ROM. More recently they received many requests to post this information
on a web site, and the business unit agreed that this was a good idea.
What should have been a simple task of copying
information from the CD ROM to a web site became a huge political battle. Information on
the disk CD ROM was typically accessed using a third party search engine that was not part
of the corporate standard for web services. The proposed solution would require a six
month evaluation and trial period before the corporate I.S. group would allow the product
to be used. There was a high chance that the product would be disallowed and the
information would have to be reorganized around a corporate application, and that solution
would also take months. The proposed cost of either solution was in the tens of thousands
of dollars.
The actual solution that my client decided on took
three days, and cost $25.00 per month. They completely bypassed their internal people and
hired an Internet Service Provider to host their site for them, got outstanding service,
saved a great deal of money, and answered their clients request in less than a week .
I believe every organization should have a technology
special forces unit whose mandate is to act swiftly to deploy the appropriate technologies
to get the job done. While this team should be well aware of corporate standards, they
should not have to go in front of committees of technical experts whose mandate is to
maintain a stable internal environment for the least cost possible. They should be able to
justify a business case and then act quickly to deploy a services as quickly as possible.
They should use standard tools where possible. They should not have to justify
their choices of technology, but rather demonstrate the outcome that their choices
provide.
There are two ways to go about creating such a team.
One way is to facilitate a culture change within your existing I.S. department. The other
is to create a separate group altogether. Each approach presents a challenge, but I
believe a separate group can bring immediate results and act more swiftly. A gradual
merger of the two groups may be the best way to affect a culture change within the
existing group if you can avoid the change going the wrong way.
Everyone should be encouraged to learn more about the
business aspect of your business. They should understand not only what the consumer wants
but also why it is important to them. For instance, is it simply a nice to have feature or
do your competitors already have the capability to produce information in a way that is
more meaningful to their clients. Are the I.S. people responsive to your needs, are they
giving you what you need to satisfy your customers?
If you are providing a service to the public:
Do your customers have better capabilities using their
own home computers than you offer them? For example, if you are an investment house, are
your standard reports poor compared to what consumers get with their own financial package
such as Quicken
If you are a television broadcaster or producer, are your
special effects mundane when seen from the point of view of the Nintendo generation?
If you give lectures and presentations, are overhead
viewgraphs dead? would multi-media enhance or take away from your presentations?
If you are part of Corporate Services:
Are you receptive to your clients requests? How long does
it take to see the results? Do you know what those results are?
Are you flexible in your results? Who decides what the
end result will look like, will the decision be assumed by you or will YOUR customer have
final say?
Traditionally I.S. people had the upper hand when sharing
technology with end users and making decisions about what could and could not be done.
Today new graduates your organization hires grew up on computers. Will they be satisfied
with you telling them it can't be done when they know better?
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world;
the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
|