
|
|
Time to Foment a Revolution - Part 1
by Vaughan Merlyn on 2007-12-05 05:18 AM read 4189 times Source: http://itorganization2017.wordpress.com/2007/12/05/time-t... |
|
In the interests of being controversial and stimulating some potentially enlightening debate, I was thinking today about “shadow IT” and their role in the world of IT organizations circa 2017.
To be clear, I’ve spent much of my consulting career helping IT organizational leaders eliminate (or at least, reduce) the scourge of the dreaded “shadow IT.” These were both a barrier to successful IT maturation (they would not get on the standard platforms, did not really know what they were doing, hijacked available IT spend/business demand that otherwise should have flowed to the “real” IT organization) and a reminder that, in some way, IT had failed, and shadow IT had surfaced as a response to our failure.
Now, as we move towards 2017, and towards Level 3 business-IT maturity, I’m re-thinking the role and nature of shadow IT. I stand by my prior positions on shadow IT - if you are trying to get through Level 1 maturity, you have to reign in shadow IT. It’s all about “getting control” so you can standardize, consolidate and rationalize. However, to get to Level 3, I think you need a reversal of position - shadow IT is good - to be encouraged and steered, rather than discouraged and eliminated. First, this is pragmatic. But more importantly, it’s about Level 3 IT having a solid Level 1 and 2 capability (basic platform for Level 1, and transactional platform for Level 2), on top of which the business can innovate - requiring business-embedded IT capability - i.e., shadow IT. At this stage, shadow IT is not an admission of IT’s failure - it is a recognition of IT’s success in enabling higher value IT activities, which, by definition, are close to/embedded in business capability.
Viva la shadow IT!
It’s possible also that this trend will be impacted by the nature of infrastructure technology itself, as we travel this same timeline. I’m thinking of the ways in which the layers of the traditional OSI Stack are becoming commoditized and compressed (indeed we seldom even speak of some of these layers any longer), and the trend (though not yet mature) toward “business aware” infrastructures. Another perspective on this is the trend we hear about the necessity for IT staff to become more “business process aware.” In either case, the technical infrastructure moves closer to the hands of those engineering the business processes, which could create an environment less reliant on IT’s ability to execute on a portfolio of projects.
So,… ‘perhaps there are some organic forces at work lending support for the revolution.
Having just come from a corporate environment that had lots of shadow IT, I have spent considerable time thinking about why this occurs and whether or not it's a good thing. For a Level 1 IT organization, shadow IT most often occurs because the IT organization doesn't "have its act together." Once the IT organization matures, the business gains trust,and a partnership develops (yes, this is possible - I've experienced it), the need for shadow IT diminishes.
The reasons Shadow IT continues to pop up is the need for agility - the IT organization is constrained by required methodologies and regulatory audit requirements. Shadow IT can develop prototypes quickly and cheaply. An inexperienced high school or college graduate can pick up .Net skills easily and put together and deply desktop applications with ease. I have generally encouraged this type of development as it helps the business to solidify their requirements. Of course, this begs the question of why isn't the IT organization positioned to provide quick and easy development? Some part of the organization should be structured to provide this service.
What the Level 2 or Level 3 IT organization can do is develop guidelines or a checklist for the businesses that clarify what's appropriate to develop in the business area and what is not. For instance, if the application is to reside on a network to support multiple users, or if it uploads data to IT supported applications, it should not be developed by the business.
Assuming the partnership between the business and IT is good, they should jointly review each business area on an annual basis, evaluating all applications (both business and IT developed) in relation to the business processes and determining together which ones need to be transitioned to IT. This type of dialog can serve as a strategic applications planning session and evaluate technologies used, fit with architecture, etc. and feed into the application portfolio plan.
Thanks, Dorianne - I think your perspective is right on! In fact, we held our team brainstorming session today at DFW for our recently kicked-off "Reaching Level 3" Re.sults project, and this was among the topics discussed. It's interesting, there's a "converge, diverge, converge" pattern that takes place as a company matures from Level 1 to Level 3 business-IT maturity. At level 1, as you note, shadow IT is a bad thing - a symptom of an IT organizaiton that is not satisfying demand. At level 3, a shadow IT organization is a good thing - perhaps the ultimate "converged business-IT" focused on innovation at the edges, and collaborating according to a "reference architecture" as so eloquently described by Steve Douty at another DFW meeting this week.
Stay tuned for more on this topic as the RLT research (we love our 3-letter acronyms!) unfolds.
[…] was reminded of this framework the other day by a response to my post on Shadow IT. Here’s Jacob’s […]
[…] was reminded of this framework the other day by a response to my post on Shadow IT. Here’s Jacob’s […]
Thanks, Bob - an excellent pint, at many levels (no surprise, considering it comes from a ‘master IT architect’ who has an amazing ability to think in terms of multiple levels!) This idea of the OSI stack as one layer in an evolving larger stack is important. Also, the idea that as you move up the stack, the lower levels tend to beocme commoditized and compressed is key to advancing business-IT maturity.
I will pick up the point about the larger stack in an upcoming post.