Advice is cheap. Unfortunately, many IT leaders pay a high price for following advice that turns out to be misleading, self-serving, or plain incorrect.
The majority of bad IT advice is given in good faith. That’s because, like a lie, a deceptive suggestion can become accepted fact if it’s repeated enough times by enough people.
If CIOs are tired of hearing advice that turns out to be erroneous, irrational, or simply wrong when applied to real-life situations, then they can keep an eye out for the following four common examples of “useful” IT advice that they should never take.
The fact that this advice emphasizes expense vs. gain makes it potentially harmful. CIOs should consider how to become a center of benefit rather than a cost center.
Focusing on helping teams work smarter and quicker is a better approach to application development cost versus value. Then, if all issues have been evaluated and offshoring still appears to be a viable choice, they should proceed with caution and test the method in stages. CIOs can use a hybrid model, in which experts are based locally but tactical talent is based remotely or overseas.
Also Read: To prioritize Artificial Intelligence projects_FINAL
Adopting a new system before fully understanding its commercial worth or business impact might be risky. A new technology may promise to boost productivity or set a company apart from its competition, but the risks should be understood first.
CIOs need to avoid the urge to jump right into a promising new technology. Part of what drives technical leaders and their engineering teams to be passionate about IT is the desire to test out new technologies. The CIO should be involved in all aspects of IT, from concept generation through value-driven strategic implementations.
It’s quite simple for a project to fall apart without a clear business case articulating the project’s final goals, development timetable, and understanding what success will look like in the end.
While an integrated suite, which consists of a collection of tools or services combined under a single brand, may sound logical, convenient, and reasonably priced, it may not deliver on its promises. When it comes to meeting or exceeding their digital transformation goals, the IT team will only have to deal with one provider instead of many. But what if this suite of tools falls short of expectations or performs only mediocrely?
When a company locks itself into a suite, it leaves little room to examine potentially better options. The all-in-one model prevents businesses from implementing new or better solutions as they become available. Businesses should anticipate that their digital needs will grow, and that flexibility and agility will be key to achieving goals.
Businesses should search for a platform that can accommodate a variety of “best of breed” services. This allows them to customize their selection of applications or services to their individual requirements. Opting for the micro services approach also implies they can plug in and, if it doesn’t work out, they can easily change the service.
Also Read: Three Digital Transformation Priorities for CIOs to Focus on
CIOs are routinely told, often by vendors, that adopting the most cutting-edge enterprise technology will ensure significant benefits. However, any meaningful innovation can only succeed if the IT leader collaborates closely with business counterparts to align enterprise and IT goals and needs.
Any project born in a vacuum is certain to fail. CIOs should consider how the new technology’s stated business benefits will integrate with existing process optimization and re-engineering efforts. The desired benefits and effective implementation will come from a holistic business strategy to technology system implementation.
Check Out The New Enterprisetalk Podcast. For more such updates follow us on Google News Enterprisetalk News.
Prangya Pandab is an Associate Editor with OnDot Media. She is a seasoned journalist with almost seven years of experience in the business news sector. Before joining ODM, she was a journalist with CNBC-TV18 for four years. She also had a brief stint with an infrastructure finance company working for their communications and branding vertical.
