My original intention was not to write a book on the decline and fall of so many projects, but rather to pen a short essay, a sort of hard-hitting criticism of the litany of IT failures. Of course this is rarely enough, it wasn’t enough because it identified the issues without provoking debate, and it highlighted common issues without providing guideline suggestions, which meant that it appeared upon reflection to come across as too much like a hi-tech hit and run exercise, beating up on IT failures without actually offering tangible solutions.
Therefore, the motivation in providing this material is in an honest attempt to correct a serious problem and not specifically to apportion blame or to identify scapegoats, this is never helpful in learning from the lessons of the past. Most of us know that it’s relatively easy to criticize failure but much harder to explain how those failures can be avoided and how success can be achieved.
Subsequently my thoughts turned to explaining to executives in business how to understand the issues in order to radically improve the contribution of IT in the shortest possible time, this I knew could be done – based on past experience and knowledge of IT and Business.
But what about all the people currently working in IT, obviously any hard criticism and radical suggestions for change would not be too welcome, and here I was, first bashing people in IT for failure, telling executives in their organization that their IT probably sucks and then showing them how to purposefully change the situation for the better.
This was really the real dilemma that had to be overcome in writing this book. This is a question of:
§ Identifying the problems
§ Identifying the reason for the problems
§ Identifying how those problems effect business
§ Gauging the expediency of minimizing or eradicating the identifiable problems
§ Identifying needed changes
§ Identifying processes and structures needed to bring about change
§ Identifying roles and responsibilities in the process of change
§ Providing a commercial and moral foundation for that change
§ Articulating a cohesive and coherent rationale for change
I really felt as though I had something to say, something to write about, a positive contribution with unavoidable negative aspects. This created a dilemma for me – which lead to the dialectic, which would define the purpose, the content and the structure of the book.
Many thanks for reading.
File under: Good Strat, Good Strategy, Martyn Richard Jones, Martyn Jones, Cambriano Energy, Iniciativa Consulting, Iniciativa para Data Warehouse, Tiki Taka Pro