They are made either any of the following- - Tech job, - Business job, - Nut job, or - Enterprise job. What's yours? Can you do it better from your existing drive? Whatever you do, your output should facilitate not just your organization's goal but a little more than what you originally planned. Leaders usually kept them in the mind, so subtle only them knows it, but with some useful and delicate strategies employed people really are doing a good job, and working to improve them, too. That's the beginning why corporate social responsibility, or even the consequential environmental, social and governance initiatives can be a potent move to do something, if pertinent or weighty is even the right word. That doesn't need an ostentatious resources but the effect is meaningful for stakeholders, everyone we meant.
There have always been varying opinions whether or not IT is to be placed under organization's departments or business units. If IT is not on its own, some find it logical to put under—
- finance, because IT is more helpful in their activities;
- risk management, especially financial institutions, because it is their business not to lose money and IT must be built without question reinforcing security of systems and financial data processing;
- executive, because IT is seen to have capabilities to lift the entire organization's businesses into a better and smarter workplace and experience, determine priorities how resources must be allocated and balance the effect of IT for all stakeholders;
- technology, because IT is their business which is led most of the time by a business manager;
- advertising, makes IT the best graphic artist and webmaster.
Other departments not included, and whatever their reasons for placing IT under their roof.
When an effort seems to be successful we would think that we had decided correctly. However, if our research, measurements and expected outcome would say so otherwise then it's probably just a good luck which is not sustainable when you are running IT operations or purposely is expecting IT to facilitate support necessary for business efficiency including but not limited to achievement of its goal.
As an IT practitioner we necessarily don't need to object where we must be reporting to. Whether to the finance or compliance department this has really no bearing to our output. We still can deliver on expectations and the outcome must be benefitting clients or organizations.
The key in our work is that IT and business must be going along well. From start senior management, most especially, already know how business systems and IT will be like when acquisition and implementation are finished. And stakeholders somehow understood each other’s importance in the job including what to expect in any task, project or goals.
The IT people can execute their part effectively and efficiently based on the need of the business with IT. That’s what we can a decision-making with IT. However, if they are alone, and without the necessary information and plans to implement business systems and IT, the maximum potential to facilitate required performance may be dubious. Without the other there will not be much to expect but problems.
Problems, if not based on investment, may be seen in any or combination of the following
- Decision making within organization’s one sided;
- Timeline not realistic, the reason why business systems and IT not being executed properly;
- Organizational resistance or just unnecessary and gratuitous politicking;
- Business and IT people have problems i.e. responsibilities, not enough enterprising in either side, leader full of unsound criticisms, et al.
- Policies and procedures are for IT alone, nonsynchronous to the realities of business and regulation.
- Nobody is a leader, the worst in an organization when even basic IT is not tried to be tackled.
- Experience with IT staff and service providers were very rough, now organization will only see IT as expenses.
Comments