A Conversation with Paul

[anonymous]

Watching the CIO. IT leadership talking about new operating model. Outside Paul's team, no IT executives, directors, managers are involved. They don't own the IT strategy. It's being done to them. Paul espouses ownership and autonomy, but his team is micro-managing everything - on paper! (Centrally managing a quarter of a billion dollar budget down to the thousands. Really? REALLY?) It's really disenfranchising. No feels accountable because they're being told what to do and not do. Meeting was clarifying, but not inspiring. A real downer.

 

[anonymous]

Watching the CIO. IT leadership talking about new operating model. Outside Paul's team, no IT executives, directors, managers are involved. They don't own the IT strategy. It's being done to them. Paul espouses ownership and autonomy, but his team is micro-managing everything - on paper! (Centrally managing a quarter of a billion dollar budget down to the thousands. Really? REALLY?) It's really disenfranchising. No feels accountable because they're being told what to do and not do. Meeting was clarifying, but not inspiring. A real downer.

There are actually a lot of IT Executives, Directors, and Managers involved. If you're not and have interest in it, then speak up at work. The entire company strategy is being driven top-down and very rapidly (by traditional corporate standards) so it's going to feel imposed in some ways. Making decisions about a reorganization is not something that can or should be "inclusive", so yes, that was "micromanaged", but now that's done and people are being engaged. As for the budget management, I don't think that's what Paul meant. He was responding to questions about how the process is actually going to work, and his response was that it will take time to figure out, because of the complexity of there being investments of all sizes... tens of millions down to thousands... and getting alignment on where to draw that line is something they have to figure out.

 

[anonymous]

Lots of executives, directors and managers involved in the IT redesign and roll out? News to me. Got exactly the opposite information from my ITLT member. I talk to lots of IT executives, IT directors and IT managers. Other than ITLT members, who is being included in the planning? I haven't bumped into anyone. Not saying your wrong, but I've got no evidence and I'm curious what you mean by "lots." Most people I work with in IT are feeling disconnected and done-to, not part of or owner of. I was in PPK this past week and one of the ITLT members said cynically, "It's not build and run, it's build then run." Shouted it down the hallway. This from an ITLT member!

 

[anonymous]

There are actually a lot of IT Executives, Directors, and Managers involved. If you're not and have interest in it, then speak up at work. The entire company strategy is being driven top-down and very rapidly (by traditional corporate standards) so it's going to feel imposed in some ways. Making decisions about a reorganization is not something that can or should be "inclusive", so yes, that was "micromanaged", but now that's done and people are being engaged. As for the budget management, I don't think that's what Paul meant. He was responding to questions about how the process is actually going to work, and his response was that it will take time to figure out, because of the complexity of there being investments of all sizes... tens of millions down to thousands... and getting alignment on where to draw that line is something they have to figure out.

Your statement about needing time to figure out how the process is going to work because of the complexity is nonsense. Big and small companies do this everyday! There is nothing to figure out! This is not new or novel or unusual. If what you said is true, then IT is being lead by incompetents who know nothing about portfolio management. And sadly, it is true.

 

[anonymous]

Amen. If you don't know how to manage a budget, perhaps you shouldn't be a C level officer of the company. Do the math - 100k is less than 1/2000th of the budget. 5k is 1/45000th of the budget. Expecting to predict and manage spend to 45000th or even the 2000th is beyond incompetent, it's insane.

 

[anonymous]

Watching the CIO. IT leadership talking about new operating model. Outside Paul's team, no IT executives, directors, managers are involved. They don't own the IT strategy. It's being done to them. Paul espouses ownership and autonomy, but his team is micro-managing everything - on paper! (Centrally managing a quarter of a billion dollar budget down to the thousands. Really? REALLY?) It's really disenfranchising. No feels accountable because they're being told what to do and not do. Meeting was clarifying, but not inspiring. A real downer.

And confusing. What the heck is the User Experience group and what do they do? I listened and left more confused than had I not. It was a jumbled mess of things they're not doing, not clear talk of what they will be doing. Do that women know what her job is?

 

[anonymous]

Why so angry? You seem to want to work in a place where leaders dictate every aspect of your job. Personally--I don't. If you have great ideas then go to your boss and share them. And how many times do they have to say "we're still figuring it out" for you to believe that? If you can't handle managing through ambiguity then maybe this is not the place for you anymore. But if you dig in and help figure it out-- we will have a better chance of succeeding.

 

[anonymous]

Why so angry? You seem to want to work in a place where leaders dictate every aspect of your job. Personally--I don't. If you have great ideas then go to your boss and share them. And how many times do they have to say "we're still figuring it out" for you to believe that? If you can't handle managing through ambiguity then maybe this is not the place for you anymore. But if you dig in and help figure it out-- we will have a better chance of succeeding.

Why assume I'm angry and I haven't dug in? I've been doing exactly that for over year. It's exhausting, not energizing. I don't need or want it all figured out. I want engaging, inspiring and intelligent leadership that allows those closest to the problems to solve them. The stuff that "needs to be worked out" is stuff that's been worked out, over and over. Why are we reinventing this, and doing it poorly? Because of the insular leadership team and their dated ideas. Lastly, I'm not angry, I'm passionate about doing IT right, being more than a service provider. We moved away from Global Shared Service and Enterprise Services because they both failed. 3rd time's the charm. Keep the faith.

 

[anonymous]

You do sound a little angry. Chill out. Collect your pay.