I was coming back from the supermarket at lunchtime and overhead the following conversation between a young dad and his grizzling toddler daughter: "What's wrong? We're supposed to be having fun, man, what are you crying for? Why can't we just have fun?" The joys of having uncommunicative off-spring with unfathomable agendas. I knew exactly how he felt in more ways than one. I have young boys myself and I've always been amazed at how fragile their mood is, but it started me thinking about team morale and his exasperated questions sounded very familiar in the work sense too. Team morale is as fragile as a three-year-old's, but unlike my sons, team morale cannot be fixed through the application of a strawberry ice-cream.
"Why can't we just enjoy what we're doing?" will be a phrase often thought, if not expressed out loud by many a leader struggling to understand why morale is low. Unfortunately it's not usually one thing or another that is afflicting the whole team, but a whole spectrum of little issues associated with individuals that manifests themselves across the whole team killing off morale.
Individual morale issues can be addressed, but one sure-fire way to kill off morale across the team is to keep people in the dark about change. In today's environment where change is the norm and job security is at an all time low people really want to know what's going to happen and yet it may be impossible to provide the detail that satisfies the craving for knowledge. Unfortunately whilst it is understandable that leaders want to only convey finalised decisions the rumour mill will mean that those kept in the dark will have already made 2 and 2 equal 5 and their conclusions will be spreading like wild-fire through the organisation. This is not good. So, why not treat people like adults and tell people about on-going decision-making?
Giving people the opportunity to know about incomplete decisions sounds risky, but surely it must be a positive thing in the long run. Most people like to know what's going to happen or may happen and will grab any passing snippet of information they can in an attempt to rationalise their future. By involving them in the change process, rumour and conjecture will be removed and whether the messages are positive or negative at least people know where they stand.
Recently I witnessed this working when a new senior manager bluntly told a team what they already knew, but hadn't been officially told. Everyone was releaved, everyone felt better, even though the message was not very positive at least they now knew. They could then get on with their work knowing their future even though in 12 months time the system they were working on would be no more the communication gave them an opportunity to make sound decisions for themselves on their own future. On this occasion it worked. On another occasion it didn't - promises were made about a new office which never came to fruitition, but it only didn't work because no-one was brave enough to stand up and give an adequate explanation of why the promises never came to fruititon - leadership were scared to get up in front of people and say "we screwed up".
If leaders communicate on-going change, then the teams need to get on board too. There needs to be acknowledgement that communicating decisions or strategy prior to being finalised means they are at risk of changing. The leaders need to be prepared to stand up and explain reasons for change and the teams themselves need to be prepared to hear these changes in direction and cope, to do anything else will ensure morale will be as bad as ever.
At a senior leadership level, ambiguity and uncertainty are ever present and it's a world we're all familiar with and yet at the grass roots level, there is a preference for a black and white world with no ambiguity. It's the leaders job to ensure that the amibiguity s/he lives with every day is translated in to something that the teams themselves can cope with and understand. Treating people like mushrooms is not an option so somehow we need to communicate these ambiguities in ways that people will feel comfortable with. As yet, I don't think I have a complete answer, it's a work in progress, but I have found that more communication is better than less and listening carefully to what the teams have to say is also important.
Oh, and one last thing: Never, ever view the budget line-item that provides pizza to the team once a month as optional, maybe the morale re-boot with food does still work as well on adults as with children!
Tuesday, 9 June 2009
Thursday, 28 May 2009
ByteNight 2009
ByteNight 2009 will launch on Tuesday 30th June. This year it will take place overnight on Friday 2nd October, nearly 400 IT professionals will be sleeping out under the stars in central London raising funds for Action for Children. I took part for the first time last year in a team pulled together by silicon.com (The Silicon Comrades) and between us we managed to raise around £7,000 with the whole event raising in excess of £450k. This year, I was asked to join the ByteNight board and I've also managed to persuade some of my work colleagues to join me in a team. We've just kicked off our fundraising efforts for this year, with the team aim of raising at least £5,000, but the overall aim is to exceed the last year's total.
Thursday, 21 May 2009
Green Shoots? Cost Cutting...
A recent CIO Jury article asked whether there were signs of green shoots appearing in industry. The jury voted "No". I was part of the "No" vote and like many IT leaders, I am still looking at my costs and continuing to trim even though now the bone is starting to show through. Unfortunately I don't see the pressure to reduce costs easing at any point in the near future.
So, in these times of continuous cost reduction, what can be done to preserve appropriate service levels? IT is still seen by many as the a high-cost, low-value area where savings can easily be made, particularly if it's not understood or trusted by the board. Immediately cutting costs at the request of the board shows weakness and that homework was not done. Instead being transparent over costs, how they are incurred and providing a variety of options for reducing costs along with the impact of cost reduction in terms of productivity, business risk and revenue generation will help show value as well as provide options for the board to agree where costs should be cut further.
It is also a time when the partnerships that have been grown and carefully nurtured with other departments in the business can be exploited - having a director of another department stand up for technology and the services it provides demonstrating how their department is enabled through technology to do the work that directly increases revenue is invaluable in putting forward a case to manage further cost reductions.
Additionally, ensuring that all parts of the organisation know exactly what they're getting for the IT budget is important. Acknowledgement that the service level is appropriate and that further reductions would impact their ability to deliver will help strengthen any case to keep services at existing levels. However service levels appropriate a year ago may be way out of line now and they should be flexed accordingly.
When reviewing and adjusting service levels, senior management also need to understand any changes to the level of risk the business is being exposed to and what additional risk might be present were further cost savings to be made. Not having out of hours cover for the email system may be one thing, but not supporting the on-line portal 24/7 may well be seen as too much risk to revenue streams.
So, publicise those service levels, ensure they are appropriate and demonstrate business acumen by managing business risk appropriately. Provide intelligent, thought through options for further cost cutting, but make sure the board understands the consequences of such cost cutting. Then the exercise becomes a well thought through, inclusive process rather than a series of random cuts in services with not a lot of thought for the consequences.
So, in these times of continuous cost reduction, what can be done to preserve appropriate service levels? IT is still seen by many as the a high-cost, low-value area where savings can easily be made, particularly if it's not understood or trusted by the board. Immediately cutting costs at the request of the board shows weakness and that homework was not done. Instead being transparent over costs, how they are incurred and providing a variety of options for reducing costs along with the impact of cost reduction in terms of productivity, business risk and revenue generation will help show value as well as provide options for the board to agree where costs should be cut further.
It is also a time when the partnerships that have been grown and carefully nurtured with other departments in the business can be exploited - having a director of another department stand up for technology and the services it provides demonstrating how their department is enabled through technology to do the work that directly increases revenue is invaluable in putting forward a case to manage further cost reductions.
Additionally, ensuring that all parts of the organisation know exactly what they're getting for the IT budget is important. Acknowledgement that the service level is appropriate and that further reductions would impact their ability to deliver will help strengthen any case to keep services at existing levels. However service levels appropriate a year ago may be way out of line now and they should be flexed accordingly.
When reviewing and adjusting service levels, senior management also need to understand any changes to the level of risk the business is being exposed to and what additional risk might be present were further cost savings to be made. Not having out of hours cover for the email system may be one thing, but not supporting the on-line portal 24/7 may well be seen as too much risk to revenue streams.
So, publicise those service levels, ensure they are appropriate and demonstrate business acumen by managing business risk appropriately. Provide intelligent, thought through options for further cost cutting, but make sure the board understands the consequences of such cost cutting. Then the exercise becomes a well thought through, inclusive process rather than a series of random cuts in services with not a lot of thought for the consequences.
Tuesday, 28 April 2009
Where Technology Fails
Last night, I wanted to play my wife a single track from a Lily Allen album. It was pertinent to what we had been watching on TV. I could have found the CD, fired up the CD Player and Receiver and played it, but I thought I'd save time and use technology. So, I fired up my Linksys DMA2200, it's a solid-state Windows Media Extender that sits in the living room linked up to the TV and went on to completely fail to play the track I wanted. This is exactly why technology so often fails in the home and why people will continue to be content to use a radio or their old CD player rather then modern equivalents that offer so much more.
So, I powered up the DMA2200, but then realised my PC upstairs was off. The DMA2200 needed to communicate with my PC to access the files so I had to go and boot it up (5mins wait). Then the DMA2200 connected and the main interface showed up (another 2-3mins wait). I navigated to the music part (sluggishly, but this is normal). It told me I had no playlists, and then refused to navigate to the albums themselves (10mins fiddling trying to sort it out). It's not done this before. I checked the connection, I navigated (sluggishly again) to the videos section, they played just fine (10mins watching some home videos). Back to the music, nothing, nada, no luck. Rebooted, tried again, nothing. More than half an hour after starting, I gave up.
It's played music just fine before, now it seems to be refusing to do so. I have no idea why and I'm relatively technical. I bought a solid state device to save electricity not use more. It can't play ripped DVDs like Windows Media Centre on my PC can, instead you have to wrap the actual film file in a proprietory format to make it play (I found that out via an internet search). It responds sluggishly and takes a reasonable expert to set up. What I find really annoying is that it's not even the first generation of this kind of equipment, I had a Kiss 1500 for a few years and got used to the eccentricities of that one (it only played files of less than 1Gb, but at least it would play files from a server) so I expected the next generation to be able to deliver what the customer wanted, but no, not a bit of it.
This is symptomatic of home-based technology and it's time the suppliers sorted things out. How many wireless routers have a way of enabling people to set up a secure wireless LAN without having previous knowledge of how to do it? How many devices actually support all the formats that we really need? How many interface with each other seamlessly and effortlessly? Probably none. Interestingly, the digital TV set-top-box systems from Sky or Virgin Media are probably the only modern-day computerised device that actually work properly in the home that can be used by non-technophiles. If only more systems emulated the digital TV set-top-box system perhaps more devices would get mass market penetration, but they need an interface that just works and provids all that the customer needed at a touch of a button first.
In the meantime, perhaps I'll go back to the CD-player, it's just so much quicker...
So, I powered up the DMA2200, but then realised my PC upstairs was off. The DMA2200 needed to communicate with my PC to access the files so I had to go and boot it up (5mins wait). Then the DMA2200 connected and the main interface showed up (another 2-3mins wait). I navigated to the music part (sluggishly, but this is normal). It told me I had no playlists, and then refused to navigate to the albums themselves (10mins fiddling trying to sort it out). It's not done this before. I checked the connection, I navigated (sluggishly again) to the videos section, they played just fine (10mins watching some home videos). Back to the music, nothing, nada, no luck. Rebooted, tried again, nothing. More than half an hour after starting, I gave up.
It's played music just fine before, now it seems to be refusing to do so. I have no idea why and I'm relatively technical. I bought a solid state device to save electricity not use more. It can't play ripped DVDs like Windows Media Centre on my PC can, instead you have to wrap the actual film file in a proprietory format to make it play (I found that out via an internet search). It responds sluggishly and takes a reasonable expert to set up. What I find really annoying is that it's not even the first generation of this kind of equipment, I had a Kiss 1500 for a few years and got used to the eccentricities of that one (it only played files of less than 1Gb, but at least it would play files from a server) so I expected the next generation to be able to deliver what the customer wanted, but no, not a bit of it.
This is symptomatic of home-based technology and it's time the suppliers sorted things out. How many wireless routers have a way of enabling people to set up a secure wireless LAN without having previous knowledge of how to do it? How many devices actually support all the formats that we really need? How many interface with each other seamlessly and effortlessly? Probably none. Interestingly, the digital TV set-top-box systems from Sky or Virgin Media are probably the only modern-day computerised device that actually work properly in the home that can be used by non-technophiles. If only more systems emulated the digital TV set-top-box system perhaps more devices would get mass market penetration, but they need an interface that just works and provids all that the customer needed at a touch of a button first.
In the meantime, perhaps I'll go back to the CD-player, it's just so much quicker...
Monday, 27 April 2009
Change is not scary
How robust is your change control process? How many incidents are as a result of change? When a significant change goes in to live do you worry about what's going to happen? A robust change process is often seen as a business blocker, but when implemented correctly, it will provide a return on investment.
Since my team implemented a robust change process and actually got buy-in from all affected parties, the volume of incidents associated with releases and significant system changes has all but gone to zero. The ITIL based process is the underlying reason why we've seen this step-change, but just as important is that it's a process that meets the business need and is seen by all to enhance the chances of success so adoption became a no-brainer. Recently, we even managed to get a 3rd party to use the process and they had one of their most successful version upgrades ever.
Often change processes stumble around the need for a change advisory board (CAB) which typically runs once a week or some set time period. This is never timely and most people find incredibly dull and therefore don't attend. A non-working CAB will always kill any attempt to maintain a successful change process so there is no CAB, instead all changes are signed off electronically with the Change Manager maintaining a forward schedule of change and making intelligent scheduling decisions. All the required documentation and information is associated with the change ticket and is therefore available for review by the relevant stakeholders. Workflow and the Change Manager ensures the ticket is only available for sign-off once it's ready and only those who are interested in the change are notified making review and sign-off as fast as possible.
By removing the CAB obstacle, stakeholders outside IT are willing participants knowing that they will only be involved when it is pertinent and their opinion really means something; "No" really does mean "No". Negotiation is obviously possible, but the only way the workflow will allow a change to go ahead is when all checks and sign-offs are completed.
Two to three incidents per release used to be the norm, but in the last 6 months, the norm has shrunk to no incidents per release, having an incident post release is quite odd now and it's reduced our incident workload considerably meaning we can put further time in to the quality of releases.
I thoroughly recommend a change process, but to make it work, make sure you have a strong change manager who is a great communicator and who lives and breaths successful change.
Since my team implemented a robust change process and actually got buy-in from all affected parties, the volume of incidents associated with releases and significant system changes has all but gone to zero. The ITIL based process is the underlying reason why we've seen this step-change, but just as important is that it's a process that meets the business need and is seen by all to enhance the chances of success so adoption became a no-brainer. Recently, we even managed to get a 3rd party to use the process and they had one of their most successful version upgrades ever.
Often change processes stumble around the need for a change advisory board (CAB) which typically runs once a week or some set time period. This is never timely and most people find incredibly dull and therefore don't attend. A non-working CAB will always kill any attempt to maintain a successful change process so there is no CAB, instead all changes are signed off electronically with the Change Manager maintaining a forward schedule of change and making intelligent scheduling decisions. All the required documentation and information is associated with the change ticket and is therefore available for review by the relevant stakeholders. Workflow and the Change Manager ensures the ticket is only available for sign-off once it's ready and only those who are interested in the change are notified making review and sign-off as fast as possible.
By removing the CAB obstacle, stakeholders outside IT are willing participants knowing that they will only be involved when it is pertinent and their opinion really means something; "No" really does mean "No". Negotiation is obviously possible, but the only way the workflow will allow a change to go ahead is when all checks and sign-offs are completed.
Two to three incidents per release used to be the norm, but in the last 6 months, the norm has shrunk to no incidents per release, having an incident post release is quite odd now and it's reduced our incident workload considerably meaning we can put further time in to the quality of releases.
I thoroughly recommend a change process, but to make it work, make sure you have a strong change manager who is a great communicator and who lives and breaths successful change.
Monday, 23 March 2009
The .tel TLD secret
Whilst, I admit, I'm sure that my readership is small, what I am fairly certain of is that probably none of you will have heard of the .tel domain name, what it does and how it is apprarently going to become the next "must-have" top level domain name.
Anyone? Anyone? Nope, I didn't think so. Sadly, this interesting new development is a very well kept secret. I only found out about it after stumbling over it on the nominet website. A bit of research later and I realised that it was a good idea and I bought myself steveclarke.tel. Click on the link and it'll take you to a page that shows my public contact details. Essentially, my business card now just needs the simple tag line: steveclarke.tel and that's it. It'll never go out of date, it'll never cease to be relevant because I can update the information on steveclarke.tel easily and simply. It's not even stored in a webpage or in html, it's all stored in the DNS information which should make it harder to hack (here's hoping).
My name is unfortunately very common, googling my name reveals lots of "Steve Clarke"s, famous and otherwise: A Chelsea football coach, a Times writer, a Scottish International Footballer, a Photographer, a Devonian car-dealer, a Norwich based French Polisher, an Author, a DJ... I could go on. These all come up before a single search result shows one that refers to me. So I thought I'd better get in quick and this was when I realised it was a well kept secret because much to my surprise I managed to purchase steveclarke.tel in the landrush prior to general availability. I thought it would have been well gone. I also found that clarke.tel was also available as were many famous names and after trying a number of different name combinations, the lack of current take-up was obvious.
Is it going to take off, this .tel thing? Yes, I think it will. I for one am fed up with continuously having to update details of people when they move or change jobs. I suppose people might be anxious about having this kind of detail in the public domain, but equally the system allows for people to control who can access their information via a simple control panel. Once a few people have their new-fangled business card out and about, people will start to take a real interest and the domains will be snapped up. It plugs in to Outlook, it works on the mobile, managing the data is simple and quick.
Already, I'm using it on my linkedin headline and when I need some new business cards, I'm hoping that I can pursuade Facilities to just put steveclarke.tel on it. We'll see, that might be a step too far for facilities!
General Availability kicks in tomorrow, so if you want to land-grab your.tel and are worried someone else might get it, you need to move quickly!
Anyone? Anyone? Nope, I didn't think so. Sadly, this interesting new development is a very well kept secret. I only found out about it after stumbling over it on the nominet website. A bit of research later and I realised that it was a good idea and I bought myself steveclarke.tel. Click on the link and it'll take you to a page that shows my public contact details. Essentially, my business card now just needs the simple tag line: steveclarke.tel and that's it. It'll never go out of date, it'll never cease to be relevant because I can update the information on steveclarke.tel easily and simply. It's not even stored in a webpage or in html, it's all stored in the DNS information which should make it harder to hack (here's hoping).
My name is unfortunately very common, googling my name reveals lots of "Steve Clarke"s, famous and otherwise: A Chelsea football coach, a Times writer, a Scottish International Footballer, a Photographer, a Devonian car-dealer, a Norwich based French Polisher, an Author, a DJ... I could go on. These all come up before a single search result shows one that refers to me. So I thought I'd better get in quick and this was when I realised it was a well kept secret because much to my surprise I managed to purchase steveclarke.tel in the landrush prior to general availability. I thought it would have been well gone. I also found that clarke.tel was also available as were many famous names and after trying a number of different name combinations, the lack of current take-up was obvious.
Is it going to take off, this .tel thing? Yes, I think it will. I for one am fed up with continuously having to update details of people when they move or change jobs. I suppose people might be anxious about having this kind of detail in the public domain, but equally the system allows for people to control who can access their information via a simple control panel. Once a few people have their new-fangled business card out and about, people will start to take a real interest and the domains will be snapped up. It plugs in to Outlook, it works on the mobile, managing the data is simple and quick.
Already, I'm using it on my linkedin headline and when I need some new business cards, I'm hoping that I can pursuade Facilities to just put steveclarke.tel on it. We'll see, that might be a step too far for facilities!
General Availability kicks in tomorrow, so if you want to land-grab your
Sunday, 8 March 2009
Desktop Security and Flexibility
A friend recently complained to me that he had been unable to work effectively because the tool he wanted to use wouldn't work. It wouldn't work because his technology function had set his rights to his own laptop too low for the software to operate. His IT function was unmoved even in the face of escalation. If it didn't work within the standard configuration, it wasn't going to be used. Security and stability were used to justify their stance.
The irony is that my friend eventually exposed his company to a greater security issue by bringing in his own laptop, installed the tool on it, connected to the work LAN and used it to get the job done.
This is an IT department acting as policeman and divorced from the rest of the business. Their users can't be trusted, they must be controlled and only allowed to operate within a specific walled garden for their own safety. In my opinion this uncompromising and ineffective approach is outdated and gives the IT function a bad name that will once more have CEOs looking to outsource, potentially jumping out of the frying pan and in to the fire - outsourced desktop contracts will always be constrictive!
IT departments must treat users like adults and allow them the flexibility to get the job done and it's a good start in partnering with the business. Security and stability can still be achieved within these environments, it just takes a little bit more thinking about, innovation and collaboration with the customer. What a scary thought!!
The irony is that my friend eventually exposed his company to a greater security issue by bringing in his own laptop, installed the tool on it, connected to the work LAN and used it to get the job done.
This is an IT department acting as policeman and divorced from the rest of the business. Their users can't be trusted, they must be controlled and only allowed to operate within a specific walled garden for their own safety. In my opinion this uncompromising and ineffective approach is outdated and gives the IT function a bad name that will once more have CEOs looking to outsource, potentially jumping out of the frying pan and in to the fire - outsourced desktop contracts will always be constrictive!
IT departments must treat users like adults and allow them the flexibility to get the job done and it's a good start in partnering with the business. Security and stability can still be achieved within these environments, it just takes a little bit more thinking about, innovation and collaboration with the customer. What a scary thought!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)