CIO: Career or Profession? Connecticut

provided by: 
Originally published at Internet.com

I have loved every one of my years in the IT business, which, to give you an idea of how long that's been, was called EDP, or electronic data processing, when I started in 1966. But lately I have come to realize that I had a career, not a profession. By definition, a profession implies such things as certification, global standards, and formal education. And, for those CFOs and CMOs who are successful enough, an automatic invitation into the ranks of upper management. What about you? How automatic was your acceptance into the executive ranks as an equal? Thought so. Those of us who have made the leap to upper management are, in all humility, self-made successes in that we had no formal training in how to succeed as a senior executive within large corporations. For me, that formal training didn't exist 40 years ago. And, shamefully, it still doesn't exist today. To illustrate the point, let's compare finance and IT. Finance is a profession in the strictest sense of the word. Finance professionals have been educated and trained in the fundamentals of how to do finance "stuff" properly and are certified as having achieved by a global standard of accomplishment. Finance is finance. CFOs around the world don't make it up as they go along. Whatever type of finance you choose to specialize in, your fundamentals remain the same. And how about physicians? How would you like to be on the operating room table and have the doctor say that he had dreamed up a new way of operating on a patient, and oh, by the way, that patient is you? No way, you say. Medicine is medicine. Once again, fundamental practices rule. How, then, can we seriously refer to IT people as professionals when the management science of business technology has been missing all this time? We have had to essentially practice it with the best of intentions, but by no means have we had access to accepted fundamentals, as are in present in the recognized professions. We have at best been artists then, and in a great many cases we have been doing a phenomenal job. But, in its currentt state, it is a stretch to call what we do truly a profession. As I reflect on those currently maneuvering their way through this journey, I realize they will have perhaps a more complete set of skills and perspectives than I have had. I'm convinced that technology leaders of the future will also be pragmatic and do the following to succeed: * See technology as a matter of business management. They will intuitively grasp that business technology is strategic. They will know that copying what the competition is doing with technology will only strengthen the competition. Rather, the appropriate level and mix of investment in technology will be a function of what their own firms are trying to achieve strategically; these, they will know, have to be determined in partnership with their business colleagues.
* Appreciate the critical importance of technology management. The next generation of leaders will understand they must invest in the management of technology as well as in the technology itself. If there is any remaining doubt today, there will not be in the future: technology per se is an equalizer. The firms that are best in managing it, win.
* See the strategic nature of technology. Unless they appreciate that business technology plays a critical role in establishing or maintaining a strategic position, future leaders may well spend inappropriately. More often than not in the first half century of business technology it was thought about only tactically.

* Seek convergence in the management of business and technology. The moments of dissension, the pointing of fingers for technology failures, will fade away as executives come to see that business technology failure is often linked to failure to deploy it together with the business strategy. It will become apparent to all that the design and management of business cannot be done apart from the design and management of technology.
* Rethink titles and organizations. I predict the blending of corporate roles will be commonplace in the future. With the norm for so many years being a separation between technology and the business-resulting in lackluster performance. This is going to be a challenging but exhilarating liberation. I truly believe the challenges ahead reside not in the technology itself, but in its management. We're starting to get it right, but we have a way to go. I am convinced that it's no longer enough to talk about aligning technology with the business. We must create environments in which technology helps shape strategic choices. This means we must synchronize business and technology decision making. And if we are to be best-in-class, our technology will converge with the business as completely as say, sound financial management. Thus, the path of progress will move from alignment to synchronization to true convergence. And, as the best practices inherent in this transformation are institutionalized and widely adopted, the business technology executive will find what had been a career becoming a profession. Tom Trainer is a well-recognized and awarded leader in the business technology field. He currently serves as Executive Chairman of BTM Global 2000, a subsidiary of BTM Corporation. Throughout the course of his 40-year career, which includes holding the title of CIO at PepsiCo, Citigroup, Eli Lilly, Reebok International, and Joseph E. Seagram and Sons, Tom has earned a long list of credits including receipt of InformationWeek's CIO of the Year and CIO magazine's "Quintessenttial CIO" for his vision and leadership. He is a frequent speaker, and contributing author on The Alignment Effect and a co-author of Winning The 3-Legged Race.