The Undercover IT Correspondent

Natural selection seems to apply to users too – only the fittest survive outsourcing!  

Now who decided to call them users? It rhymes with losers – which probably explains why the only other category of people to be graced with this term are drug users. Then there’s the anatomical variation called end-users – probably justified given how often they have to take it up the tailpipe. No, there is absolutely no doubt about it: the term user is so negative that it could only have been coined under negative circumstances. 

An apocryphal story holds that the term originated during the first wave of computing in the fifties, which targeted the massive replacement of administrative staff by computers. These were the original clerks (in their Clarks Originals), personified by a timid Jack Lemmon in the 1960 academy award-winning movie ‘The Apartment’, co-starring Shirley McLaine. The opening scene sees him sitting with a hundred other grey-flannelled insurance clerks in orderly rows of desks, toiling over slips and vouchers with pencil, paper and an adding machine. Once these people figured out that all those IBM salesmen in the corridors couldn’t all be coming to buy insurance, they knew their jobs were on the block. So the more cynical amongst them started to refer to themselves as the losers of the upcoming computer revolution. 

Then, as inevitably happens when common sense takes a back seat to lofty objectives and unproven technology, it soon became apparent that so-called unskilled office work wasn’t that unskilled after all. A lot of human intervention was required for handling exceptions, something which no computer could hope to do. So the clerks weren’t going to be phased out after all, at least not in numbers anywhere near those dreamt up by the techno-visionaries. So rather than be replaced by computers, our supposed losers were actually going to start using computers (or strictly speaking the output of those computers) to work more effectively. So the term loser gradually evolved to user, and the term has stayed with us to this day.  (Of course, if you can believe such a story, then you probably are a loser!).

There are two categories of losers – sorry, users – in the organization: 

• Back-office users, who stand at the back of the line and have little say in the type of systems inflicted upon them. They are the enterprise equivalent of workers in the engine room – they keep the ship moving, but you want to keep them out of the sight of customers.  Back-office users come from the traditionally automated functions like order entry, accounting and billing, and are associated with systems like ERP (Enterprise Rectal Pain). 
• Front-office users, who stand at the front of the line, and whom IT has to bend over backwards to please. They are in direct contact with customers and bring in the money, and as such need to be kept as sweet as possible, lest their dissatisfaction starts to impact revenue, or spills over to the outside world. Front-office users come from recently-automated functions like sales, marketing and customer service, and are associated with systems like SFA (Sales Force Aggravation) and CRM (Can’t Really Matter). 

The differences between these two categories are manifest in their relationships with IT. Back-office users, for example, have no option but to use whatever system is being proposed – or rather imposed. At the level of Joe or Jane User in these functional areas, you don’t usually propose anything; you install it and then train people for the new procedures, which are not open for discussion. Whether they like it or not is hardly the question. They have to use it, because their previous system has been unplugged, and without a system, they cannot do their jobs. 

Front-office users, however, are relatively new to automation, especially the largest group amongst them, the sales force, who historically have always worked without a system. Their job is to sell and make their numbers; how they do it is secondary. So if for whatever reason they’re unable or unwilling to use a new system, all they have to say is that they won’t make their numbers if forced to use it, or that it’s negatively impacting customer relations. And since there is theoretically nothing to stop them from making their numbers the way they’ve always been doing before the project came along, any new front-office system is ultimately ‘discretionary’. After all, sales commission plans don’t include big bonuses for ‘achieved 100% compliance with the CRM software process manual’.  

So IT can be, and often is, extremely heavy-handed in its relationship with back-office users. It makes little distinction between them, and mistreats them equally badly.  However, it steps lightly and wears kid-gloves when it comes to the front-office.  And even within this privileged group, there is a clear pecking order: 

• At the top there’s the sales force, because of their size and the fact that they bring in the money that pays everyone else’s salary. IT doesn’t want to mess with this group. A failed SFA or CRM project is one of the quickest exit routes for the CIO. 
• Next comes marketing, which is the enterprise equivalent of your mother-in-law: their view of the world is not always grounded in reality, and they’re always interfering, but you can’t have a marriage without one. For example, the marketing department of one long-distance telco created a campaign that targeted prisons because of the high volume of outgoing calls from the captive – no pun intended – client base.  But this was a non-starter because, not surprisingly, prisoners prefer to use cell phones. So while an angry VP of marketing can still give the CIO a hard time, he or she will probably survive a system that doesn’t deliver. 
• Customer service is the most junior member of the front-office club because it’s a cost-centre staffed with call-centre agents on minimum wage. So not only were CIOs never in jeopardy of losing their jobs with this bunch of losers/users, they actually had the upper hand and shipped their jobs off to India. 

The moral of the story is that users are not all created equal; there are users and losers. It would seem that Darwin’s natural selection applies here too: only the fittest (in terms of costs and organizational influence) survive outsourcing – just ask any call centre agent. MG

Even gardeners and foresters can make a living writing legalese!

Last week, as I was killing time in yet another airport lounge after yet another flight delay, I thought I’d catch up on my backlog of unread analyst reports. After five minutes of wading through the usual tortuous biz-tech prose however, my will-power began to waver, and I hesitated between my professional obligations and some lighter reading (possibly accompanied by a legally authorized, amber colored beverage).

As I ploughed doggedly through one, it made me wonder why some research analyst groups write about IT in an often incomprehensible mix of computerese and legalese that makes you wonder where research and analysis end and the legal profession begins. Are the people who work here failed lawyers or – God forbid – future lawyers in boot camp, learning to confuse the hell out of ordinary people?

The writing style is clearly biased against plain English. It is characterized by the use (sorry, the utilization) of long words, suitably spiced up with acronyms, which are then squeezed into the longest sentences possible. The postman might only ring twice, but the average reader of research analyst reports has to read at least three times before figuring out just what the author is trying to say.

Here is some sample prose that I hand-crafted myself, which is very similar to the stuff which we are often asked to read:

• SPA (Strategically Painful Assumption): “Through 2009, global organizations will concentrate CRM efforts on optimizing existing initiatives and driving consistency across direct and indirect sales channels, creating synergies for sales, marketing and customer service and tapping into new efficiencies for enterprise-wide processes which emphasize customer retention, cross-selling and up-selling”. (0.1 probability – of being able to translate any of this gobbledygook into something actionable).
• Megatrend: “Global IT departments will allocate resources to projects and technologies based on vehicles which will include extranets, portals and web services so that the introduction of new products and services will galvanize better business results, while simultaneously mitigating the risks and uncertainties which impact business global governance orientations and IT process and role patterns”. (Huh?)

No folks, not only is this not understandable, it’s not even impressive. If someone speaks a foreign language however, say, French, now that’s impressive – especially when your own vocabulary is limited to ‘bonjour’, ‘au revoir’ and ‘are you sure that’s the correct change?’  

And where are good old-fashioned market mechanisms when you need them? Under normal circumstances, complex writing would hardly sell, let alone make it to the bookshelves. Yet we continue to spend enormous amounts on sometimes impenetrable material that confuses as much as enlightens.  Some countries have passed official legislation mandating the use of plain language in legal contracts pertaining to banking and insurance . If legal contracts can be transformed into plain language, then research analyst reports should be a piece of cake.

So, gardeners and foresters, it’s time to clear out the weeds and thickets from your writing. Here’s some friendly advice: 

• Use simpler words. (Don’t utilize, use. Stop depicting, show. And stop using words like preclude and obviate when you can use synonyms like prevent or avert respectively.)
• Use shorter sentences. (The use of the period in the English language is free! Reduce the commas and you’ll reduce the comas we often fall into!)
• Use more descriptive headlines to break up your stream-of-consciousness text into logical chunks we can wrap our minds around.
• Make the book ‘Read This – business writing that works!’ mandatory for all your staff. It is full of interesting before/after examples, has been translated into two other European languages, is in use at a number of Big X consulting firms, and – this is the clincher – was written by my brother, who could use the royalties! (I plug his books and he plugs mine – it’s called relationship marketing).

And if you’re a research analyst who prefers to stick to the old ways, then maybe we should meet up in a quadrant somewhere – you know, the one with ropes all around – and then you’ll get a chance to see my strategic reach and ability to execute. MG.

IT projects live or die by their monikers. Nix the boring acronyms. How about Sapphire or Prometheus?

When Juliet said to Romeo in the balcony scene, ‘What’s in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet,’ she certainly wasn’t referring to IT projects. Names can make or break IT projects.

What you actually name a project, especially a biggie, will go a long way towards determining how much initial funding it’s going to get, how much corporate visibility will be associated with it, and especially, when the going gets tough, how much bailout money the company will feel compelled to sink into it in order to preserve credibility. So if your intended breakthrough CRM or 24-hour customer service project is code-named CRM or CS24, don’t complain if it doesn’t get the funding, visibility and support it deserves. However, with names like Symphony, Omega or – drum roll – Prometheus, which inspire security, confidence and vision, you can count on getting a much better hearing and ensure that the CEO shells out for as long as it takes!

Projects have to be marketed internally, and an impressive name will help contribute to brand awareness. It’s also more massaging to the ego and scores more points with one’s peers to be associated with, for example, project Sapphire than project R2-D2. Most important, an inspirational and visionary name will also help to recruit your key executive sponsor, who will be instrumental in promoting your project in the board room. Yep, if you want to launch with fanfare, adequate funding and all the right people, get the name right!

Okay, so about nine months down the line, with the euphoria stage long gone, the practical problems have been identified (cranky users with no idea of what they really want, legacy systems with data in worse shape than originally thought, consultants costing an arm and a leg….). The initial deadline is no longer realistic and more money is needed. So what else is new? Well, no problem here. While some dumb-sounding R2-D2 project requiring more funding would really be scrutinized – maybe even canned – the visibility and commitment associated with your high flier will ensure you get bailed out the first time with hardly a murmur of protest. The second time around might elicit a rap on the knuckles. Of course, if things continue going downhill, the CEO will eventually pull the plug, but not before your project has become a corporate runaway. You might fail, but it certainly won’t be for lack of funds!

So now that you’re convinced that good name branding is an essential part of Project Marketing 101, you’ll want to be careful how you go about choosing one. Remember, be practical. If your big project makes it to the press, a journalist should be able to string together a cute headline (‘The Midas touch!’). But be careful; if your project goes awry, you can count on the same journalist to hang you (‘Midas – or fool’s gold?’). The following are some naming conventions to consider and some to avoid:

• Sure-fire winners are names from Greek mythology, such as Zeus, although you’ll want to stay away from some of the overused gods like Atlas and Apollo.
• Relatively safe are the classical composers (Bach, Schubert), but shy away from Mozart (or Amadeus) and Vivaldi, which are so common that using them actually shows a lack of culture.
• Risky but still manageable choices are jewels, such as Emerald, Ruby, Diamond and Gold.
• Avoid like the plague the names of planets (Saturn, Mars) and cutesy industrial acronyms such as FAST, CORE and FORCE, whose mileage went out with the ’60s.  

Finally, you’ll also want to be sure the name can travel. It’s so easy to end up embarrassed, especially in Europe. You won’t endear yourself to your executive sponsor if he becomes the butt of endless boardroom jokes about the time he brought the Spanish management team to howls of laughter when unveiling the new customer service project code-named NOVA. In Spanish, it means ‘no go’. 

MG

Copyright 1994 by Computerworld Inc., One Speen Street, Framingham, Mass. 01701.  Reprinted by permission of Computerworld.  All rights reserved.

The IT profession was characterized by alphabet soup right from the word GO!

Last week my daughter asked me why my profession is called IT, instead of something in plain English. She did have a point – though I refrained from commenting on the DVDs and CDs lying on the floor of her room, or the time she spends on MSN while listening to her MP3. 

All professions have their jargon. Doctors favor marathon words longer than German nouns. Lawyers use long-winded English, with some Latin thrown in for good measure. The computer industry of course favors acronyms. There are two types of acronyms : the ubiquitous 3-letter ones like ERP (Enterprise Rectal Pain), and gobbledygook like PCMCIA (People Can’t Memorize Computer Industry Acronyms). The first computers were called ENIAC, RAMAC and PDP, ran languages like FORTRAN, COBOL and JCL, and were built by companies like IBM, DEC and the BUNCH (Burroughs, Univac, NCR, Control Data and Honeywell). The profession was therefore characterized by alphabet soup right from the word GO. Even the alphabet was not enough – the colons of a new era went overboard in their use of colons and other special characters. The whole #&*%@:$! industry was awash in it ! 

So to no one’s surprise, the newest member of the organizational chart in the fifties branded itself with an acronym : EDP (Erroneous Data Processing ), followed later by MIS (Mostly Inadequate Service) and finally IT (I Try). In contrast, other company departments get by with plain English names, like Finance, Accounting or Purchasing. Even the legal profession, that bastion of conservatism and intellectual superiority, is content to go by the simple name of Legal – which is just as well, otherwise we’d have even more lawyer jokes doing the rounds. HR, incidentally, was the only other department to go down the acronym route, but they’ve always been an insecure lot anyway (plus any re-branding away from the word ‘personnel’ could only be a step in the right direction). 

Acronyms may be irritating after a while, but there’s no denying their staying power. Examples : IBM and NCR are the only member of the original BUNCH still in existence today; in the HP-Compaq merger, guess who’s running the show? There’s also no denying the marketing power of acronyms, and their ability to get people to buy in to the latest buzzword, as long as it’s known by a clever acronym, eg CRM (Can’t Really Matter). 

And when we ran out of acronyms, we simply tagged on numbers. The first mainframes and minicomputers had names like CDC-7600, PDP-11, VAX or the IBM 390 – not to be confused with the IBM 3090. This numbers game continued with the first micro-computers, like the MITS Altair 8800, Radio Shack TSR 80 and the Levi Strauss 501. 

This great tradition was diluted, however, as numbers and letters gradually gave way to names. The person who kicked off this trend was Apple’s Steve Jobs, who started by naming his company after a fruit. He then brought out a computer named after a girl, the Lisa, which was based on technology he picked up during a stroll in the PARC (Palo Alto Research Center) at Xerox. Since then we’ve seen computers called the ProLinea, Performa, Presario, Aptiva, Jornada, Inspiron, Vaio and Lenovo.  Geez, where do all these cutesy names come from ? Who let these marketing people through the door ?  

I think it was a plot by the folks from Detroit who were laid off during the slump in the American auto industry in the 80s. Determined to wreak revenge on the thriving computer industry for transforming them into second-class corporate citizens, they successfully took over all of marketing in Silicon Valley. This explains why most computers today have meaningless, feel-good names which end in an ‘a’ and sound like a run-down of the models and concept cars from last year’s auto show. 

I say the profession has forgotten its roots. Whatever happened to the original world of acronyms, numbers and letters that knit together a whole community ? It makes you hark back to the good old days when computers were named after the street number of the founder’s house!

MG