Is the global economic slowdown affecting online economics – will we see the internet meltdown again?To answer this question, it is first worth understanding what is happening at a global scale on the web today,and to forecast what is likely to be the next stage of development / battleground for the Web in the next3-4 years. I am calling it Web 3.0, so original, I know, but clearly another step change is happening…

Click here to join the discussion and have your say

Some people have muttered that with the credit crunch now upon us, investors will be cautious about moving into clean technology.

If only the move to green business were a choice.

With oil now at $130 a barrel and perhaps starting to dwindle in supply, there has never been a more pressing need to find alternative energies and cut down the use of carbon-intensive ones.

That is if the human race wishes to maintain a certain standard of living.

Even if you are someone who disagrees that climate change is occurring, other drivers for alternative energy technologies include better national energy security, increasing demand from India and China, and of course the falling supply of fossil fuels.

Clean-tech and the green industry are unlike the internet boom, where entrepreneurs built online services to see what kind of audiences and money they could attract.

There is already a strong demand for the product of clean technology. Good green business doesn’t provide new products, services or utilities. They meet the same demands for clean water, air, heat and food but in a less-damaging way to the planet.

Water, food, heat and shelter are basic demands. And the basic laws of economics state there must be demand and supply for a market to exist.

The trouble we face now is that global demand for energy is increasing. There is a lot of gloomy speculation as to whether supply can keep up, or if it will start falling.

With that in mind, investors are coming to a market where demand is already built. They just need to find a way to supply people in a cleaner fashion.

So there has never been such a need for investment or promotion of new technologies. But they have to be the right ones (not carbon intensive) - and that has to happen before the oil runs out. The credit crunch is nothing compared to that.

This was an article forwarded by Greenbang

Click here to join the discussion and have your say

Are you old enough to remember the mainframe days of IT, when humans had to climb onto machines to service them? Or the days of early programming languages such as Pascal or COBOL that had no correlation to any language spoken on planet earth?

Certainly advances through the years have brought about major improvements, and like most of the major IT progression these have come in large cycles. The opportunities presented by such advances are always put to good use, but despite the potential in the world of enterprise IT, the internal IT organisation has suffered as a corporate services department. It has never really been able to offer the efficiency and effectiveness so desired by its business partners. With the lines of business moving up to three times faster than the average IT function, it is not unusual to assume that over time, business demand will be difficult to manage, efficiency difficult to contain and the customer experience will erode over time. Inevitably, when service slows down and complexity increases the business will question value. Moreover, the business is now demanding that IT do more with less - less what? Less money…Because of the lack of perceived value in IT by its business partners, the lines of business focus even more on cost transparency and on measuring this rigorously. All this combines to offer a tricky situation: there is a dramatic rise in IT complexity, presenting a large problem for the CIO.

So why is complexity on the rise? Firstly, the emergence of the electronic age, faster technology and processing power has enabled the lines of business to move even faster in their execution of day-to-day operations. Secondly, and importantly, the internal IT organisation has continued to ‘layer’ solutions both from a data centre (hardware), network (infrastructure), software and people perspective. In order to get to the efficiency trapped inside the layers of complexity, today’s CIOs have to look to re-engineering or restructuring in large IT organisations. In addition, the word ‘management’ in enterprise IT terms is still an early term - processes have evolved considerably, but they are finally moving to a maturity where effective solutions can sustain themselves in IT. Finally, the CIO’s tenure is reducing all the time, and this is primarily due to not managing the basic problems in IT - i.e. deliver services on time, managing business capacity, providing a good customer experience, optimising costs and financial planning. This seems overwhelming until we realise the truth: that IT’s problems have always remained the same! It is the complexity that has increased.

The IT organisation and its prevailing market players such as vendors and suppliers are getting smarter with this evolution of managing problems in IT. Whereas managing IT demand in large IT organisations remained elusive until now, we are seeing siloed management approaches become integrated to form the next set of solutions for the management of the IT function. For example, an IT organisation can now collect and understand its inventory (such as hardware and software assets), bring all the IT ‘parts’ - what is called a ‘bill of materials’ - and create bundled IT Services. These Services are pragmatic and easily understood by the line of business (the consumer). This enables a service level and price to be attached to the IT Service so that now IT and the line of business can partner to plan and track demand. Yesterday, this was not only difficult, it took the combination of three management disciplines to achieve. Today, we stand on the edge of a maturing evolution: ‘IT Management’.

The next big IT wave - the re-emergence of IT Management

So what, you’ve read 1,000 words, and you’re saying, “Wait - hasn’t IT Management been around before?” The short answer is “Yes.” The long answer is that IT Management is not a new market, but a consolidating market driven by the vendor corporations such as CA, HP, and IBM, companies that started a wave of mergers and acquisitions already amounting to over $9Bn in consolidation purchases. What makes this new market special is that we are now seeing some fundamental drivers converge - namely, the need for smarter processes to solve underlying old or existing IT problems, innovative IT software integrated to deliver support to the solutions of these problems, and an era of great expectation on the CIO - who must run IT more like ‘the business.’ The CIO is now tasked with not just managing through-put, but delivering innovation, greater efficiencies, services on time and much more in the execution of managing the business of IT.

As we near the endgame for the IT enterprise, we are seeing everyone from analysts, vendors and consultants think about how they can capitalise on this consolidating market. We also now have ITIL (IT Infrastructure Library - a set of best practices initiated by the UK government; or more importantly, serving as a simple language that explains the IT Enterprise). Managing IT is a big market, and the customer will see even more innovation in an attempt to make this easier over the next decade.

ERP for IT - it will affect the next 5 years of IT enterprise spend

Most corporate functions have in some way benefited from the ERP era, and still do today in a commoditised market. So why does IT not have an ERP system? The answer is simple; it hasn’t evolved enough yet. But now, in its effort to escape from commoditisation, and in contrast to gain differentiation, the enterprise vendor community continues to consolidate small enterprise IT vendors who focus on the management of IT. Technology vendors such as CA, HP, IBM and others, are gaining ground on positioning an optimal customer value picture, yet have some way to go in grappling with the underlying problems CIO’s are trying to solve. Vendors do understand the potential value of one data model, greater integration and cheaper, yet more effective technology - and this will have a dramatic affect on Enterprise IT. The market will soon have fewer ‘Gorillas’ and irrelevant ‘Chimps’ as the large enterprise software market players consolidate to deliver the ERP for IT - and this will usher in the modern IT Management market. Customers can expect cheaper technologies, more complete solutions and fewer vendors to deal with - never again will Enterprise IT be the same.

Just as we did during the first ERP wave, we can expect to see skill-sets evolve, standardise and align with the integrated ERP for IT systems - suppliers and vendors will have to work closely together to ensure the complete solution evolves and delivers on the full potential promised by integration, price standardisation and technical delivery. The impact of this change will make managing IT a lot easier moving forward. But some key challenges remain that CIOs must face to stay ahead of the IT Management curve:

1.Portfolio management will become even more key as organisations recognise the benefits of solid project/programme transparency, better resource planning, making the best investment choices, and effectively modelling change across the business.

2.As the business accelerates, managing business demand continues to impact IT organisations’ ability to stay agile. Grappling with this effectively will be a key to maintaining a consistent flow of successful projects through the arteries of IT.

3.Financial management must be tackled to provide a more transparent IT organisation -one that is accountable for recovery of IT costs yet is still pragmatic and equitable in its allocation to the business units.

4.Application-relevant information continues to be a meaningful way to view IT performance by the business, and it will be imperative to stay on top of these capabilities. Technology exists to discover, map, track and measure application performance.

5.Reaching beyond the perimeter of IT Security is now a core consideration as security threats are likely to come from within the organisation. Threats inside the perimeter include personal theft, IP, brand loss and much more - this is now a huge consideration for CIOs.

Conclusion

IT in the Enterprise has for some time experienced continuous erosion as the business reconciles perceived and real value. But IT is on the comeback trail. With evolving new management processes enabled by greater integration across IT management technologies, the business will start to see a new IT function - an IT function that will be able to execute with greater agility, more transparency and in better partnership with the business. Once again, the enterprise will see IT as a key business differentiator.

Click here to join the discussion and have your say

Every day the subject of leadership is discussed, we often hear about the examination of leadership traits, and have plenty of examples in the market place to draw from.  Yet mostly it is about how ‘not to do things’, and every so often we here about wisdom that should be followed, that unlocks a few demonstrable exceptions to the rule.

Recently, there has been some interesting discussion about this topic, both from an observational leader perspective, and from the scholastic perspective too. For once, the educators have clear alignment with leaders in the market place. The Harvard Business Review recently published an article (also published under this link by CIO Magazine) entitled ‘In Praise of The Incomplete Leader’ which focuses simply on how great leaders know what ‘they are good at’ and focus on honing these skills, and at the same time know what ‘they are bad at’ - but recognise these gaps or deficiencies, and seek out people to collaborate with in order to achieve success. In fact, the authors go further to suggest that great leaders don’t try to do it all, but naturally find alignment with other leaders that together makes them complete.

Martin Warner recently spoke with Carly Fiorina (Former Chairman and CEO of HP, and author of best selling book ‘Tough Choices’) [speaker profile] about Leadership. Carly pointed out that you need to be an
exceptional collaborator, supporting the HBR article’s view point, but went further to suggest that having the right ‘fabric’ in the leader is important. By that, Carly believed that having a strong character that could seek out different perspectives, always ready to continue the learning process (even if you are a CEO) and be courageous enough to follow unconventional wisdom - these attributes were at the centre of her decision to merge HP with Compaq - the controversial merger that made HP a leader in technology.

Carly Fiorina Interview>>

Dare to be different?

In a recent article entitled ‘The trouble with Steve Jobs’ that featured in Fortune, they focused again on similar positive attributes that have been at the core of why scholars, leaders and media believe Steve Jobs is the most successful leader in today’s world.  What was interesting is again, this common thread that great leaders do not necessarily follow conventional wisdom. In fact, they break rules, define their own, and then
convince the masses to follow.  Steve Jobs has certainly done that in the way he transformed Apple into the most desired consumer company on the planet. Also, it is clear that Jobs has shown how to orchestrate powerful partnerships that are behind a whole string of product opportunities that Apple are engaged in.  His ability to collaborate well through partnerships is clearly at the heart of Apple’s success and nine year renaissance!

A leader has to possess…
So how do we sum up a simple set of modern leadership principles that everyone can agree on?  There is some important correlation that exists between these articles and other literature in the market today.  These principles can be summarised as follows:

• Outstanding Character
• Innovative Collaboration
• Consistent Values

Outstanding Character
The very few exceptional leaders have a few things in common, they have unique characters that focus on strong visions, unconventional wisdom, calculated risk-taking and charisma that translates in communicating to their teams why they should take that ‘high road’.  In Carly Fiorina’s great example, Carly at times was out there alone with the decision to do the Compaq merger, clearly today, it was the best thing for HP, and has given them their dominant position they hold today in technology.  Clearly, Steve Job’s has made several bets that at first seemed unconventional and indeed unproven, but just like Pixar where he bet computer animation could be developed into feature length films, and the iPhone could be the next killer platform - again, he proves that rare character we all seek out if wanting to join the elite of leaders.

Innovative Collaboration
All three short stories above demonstrate that the best leader knows their own weaknesses, and focuses on their strengths, while successfully seeking out creative partnerships with people and corporations that can bring together the complete skills and experiences necessary to achieve a successful leadership position.  Yet, the ideal CEO and chief collaborator does more than just that.  The CEO orchestrates all the resources and ensures they work effectively from the internal workforce, to outsourcers and importantly with partner companies in their supply-side eco-system.  The innovative collaborator validates their vision through this important orchestration of resources to deliver on their vision.

Consistent Values
A more subtle message in all leadership stories today is the foundation in which each leader builds from.  Great leaders orchestrate and communicate with their organisation in an efficient and consistent manner.  Never being second guessed, always providing sound reason for their direction setting statements.  It requires the leader to have great values that day-in, day-out stay consistent and are easy to read.  More and more leaders, at some point, change their beliefs to suit situations, yet the greatest leaders remain steadfast to their values.  It is proven that people engage more effectively if they can trust and understand a leaders beliefs - if these are under-pinned by values that everyone can align to, the leader is going to reach his audience every time.

What’s your view?

Relevant links:

- To find out more about Technology of Tomorrow 08 where Leadership will be in the spotlight, please click here>>

- Carly Fiorina sums up leadership in a recent series of video podcast interviews - please click here to view>>

- In praise of the Incomplete Leader (Harvard Business Review, re-published by CIO Magazine), please click here>>

- The trouble with Steve Jobs, please click here>>

We can constantly see new innovation across many of the industries today, but what is profound is to observe some of the radical transformations taking place in certain industries, that are largely due to raw software invention, the internet and greater bandwidth. There are two types of transformations taking place. One is the move to new software and services business models. Secondly, we are seeing technology converge, and this is leading to corporate consolidations in certain industries.

Why is this so profound? Well, for us consumers, as new products and services arrive, the very way we consume these is going to continue to evolve, with greater reliance on technology - our behaviour will change as we are witnessing with the user of the internet. Prices and contract lock-ins on a variety of products and services will constantly need to be examined - and our trusted household company brands, that we have been used to, are evolving and consolidating at a rapid rate in order to take advantage of technology evolution, and in an attempt to stay ahead of the competition. So what are these sectors that are changing? Well, they include Banking, Telecoms, Mobility and Communications, Retail and Auctioneering, Education and Research, and Music and Film Entertainment to name the major shakers.

In the last five years or so new software models have often been popularised through internet revelations, and indeed continue to do so with great innovations and new business models arriving from the worlds of Search, Social Networking and many other web-based companies. But recently I sat down with Lou D’Ambrosorio , President and Chief Executive Officer of Avaya, a voice and data communications company. Here is a classic case of fundamental change that has seen a company in the last 10 years go from predominant hardware revenues to software and service revenues accounting for 80% of their global business. In Avaya’s market (where they go head to head with Cisco), they compete for the very best VOIP (voice over IP) services combining voice and data technology in order to help businesses communicate. Avaya is already a software and services company, and has made the transition from hardware, but now they are focused on what they call the ‘communications-enabled business process’ market, leveraging a range of technologies such as voice, data, video, speech recognition and others. The simple concept is that in order to drive more efficient and effective business processes, you need to combine these technologies. Now we are seeing technology convergence at play - with Cisco, Microsoft, IBM and many more companies arriving at this new horizon from different vantage points. All kinds of opportunities exist for the consumer and the enterprise as we witness a big bang in this space. What is for sure is that we will see new innovative partnerships, alliances and indeed acquisitions and inevitable consolidation in order to bring new offerings to market.

This is just one example and can be said of the entertainment market as they continue to place more reliance on data as a means to store video and music, and the ability to distribute content more freely on more platforms, primarily through the web. Major industries are changing before us, should we be alarmed, excited, or just indifferent? For investors, entrepreneurs and corporations alike, there is great opportunity ahead for the market makers, and that will be exciting to be part of and to watch. As for consumers and workers, these radical shifts in the way particular industries behave, leaves us needing to tackle change on a variety of levels. New products and services will evolve, and the consumer will likely be better off as competition continues to create the best outcomes for customers. But on the worker front, this likely means job growth, transitions and possible cuts, as well as cultural change and the loss of beloved corporate brands through consolidation.

There have been many killer applications in the last 15 years, but what is for sure is that the internet is the true killer platform - and the very soul of why many industries are turning to software and services models in order to survive, evolve and collide with other industries through technology convergence.

Watch out for the mobile device…yes we have been living with it for a long time now, but a lot of people believe this is the next killer platform with the birth of the iPhone. The iPhone has finally given us a truly flexible interface and smart software, so that companies can again look to software and services models to deliver the next generation consumer and enterprise products and services.

Industry landscapes are being redrawn and new horizons await those who are willing to board the train.

Martin Warner

Host and Executive Producer of Technology of Tomorrow 08

www.martinwarner.com

What’s your view?

A lot has been said about the focus on clean technology, green technology or ecotech - whatever you want to call it. What is interesting and stimulating to those that care about the environment is that there is clearly the interest for change, and that technology can do a lot to transform our approach to renewable energy, and sustain our planet. I recently read that according to the magazine Nature - that climate change will threaten the extinction for a quarter of the world’s species by 2050!

There are two main questions that I think need to be addressed and always come up: (1) is our planet really threatened, and what should we do? (2) can we globally organise ourselves to really take green technology development seriously…?

Most of the clean technology discussion and development, and indeed messages about our environment provided by governments, agencies, companies and key individuals are focussed on climate change, and indeed the reduction of greenhouse gases - the biggest and scariest one being carbon dioxide. The problem with the reduction of carbon emissions is that people don’t see the effect of not doing it! Like most humans we wait to see the effect and change. I am not saying we should show an ‘Armageddon’ like advert - this would give us a wake-up call, but would scare our race. Yet simply put, while the scientists argue out who is right about how long our planet has to survive and questions alike, responsible individuals, companies, governments should focus on what we DO know and drive this message to the masses. For example, we do know that carbon dioxide is a killer, the more we create, the greater the problem. This in itself should be enough to recognise its impact on our ozone layer, weather patterns and general pollution. I guess I am saying that the messaging is not clear enough or should focus on real things that most people already know and rely on constantly hearing it for change.

Secondly, to enforce this, governments can create policies and get tough with industry to ensure we DO reduce our use and reliance on fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas…no company is going to invest everything to transform their business model when they have competitive tension and responsibilities to their shareholders. It isn’t going to happen. There is too much discussion, and hype by companies claiming to do things to help our environment. We need to force companies to focus on renewable energy strategies and incentivise them to do it - governments get your wallets out! This is happening but not quick enough.

Governments have to take a stronger stance here, we do need democracies, but we also need leaders. If there is continuous education, investment and action - the masses will follow and become educated. So please act.

It is clear that the argument is not about when the planet will die, but more about the fact that this is a real problem and carbon emissions are greenhouse gases that will catch up on us quickly if we don’t act.

As for the second question, clean technology is the clearly the main enabler to solve this problem. Most scholars and experts agree with this. But the problem is that apart from Sand Hill Road (Venture Capital firms on US West Coast) generating momentum and investment for new start up technologies, companies today in industries like: aerospace and aviation, automotive and energy and many others are just not moving fast enough. The issue is not one party’s problem, but in fact a partnership between government and industry - the current competitive landscape isn’t ready to enable quicker investment in clean technologies. It is much easier for companies to speculate through R&D, and keep providing what they do. Imagine a world where petrol dried up! Of course, we’d see renewable fuel methods…bottom line - there has to be a balance of new incentivisation to help these companies get there. Clearly VC’s, key investors and some companies see the joint goal - save the environment and dominate a new market, clearly the first few companies to innovate and deliver sustainable clean technology will build healthy new returns. So it is not the return on investment or indeed the foresight - but the organisation and partnership that needs to get better quickly.

I recently read about ‘Project Better Place’ a project designed to seriously put electric cars into all countries - have battery stations instead of ‘petrol’ stations, car showrooms with real electric cars…very cool. A lot has been said, but I like Shai Agassi’s vision and courage. This guy is lobbying government and industry to get the job done, and pulling the components together. In my humble opinion, this is the only way to capitalise on bringing new clean technology ideas to market and keep them there.

The story is not over….

Martin Warner

Host and Executive Producer of Technology of Tomorrow 08

www.martinwarner.com

What’s your view?

Listen to Sir Richard Branson’s video podcast on going green

In today’s corporate world, everyone is aware of the increasing possibility of security breaches. Not only is the criminal getting smarter, with the birth of the internet there are many new fraud possibilities.

We also hear about landmark internet fraud cases, identity thefts and personnel theft from inside the business. Yes, some of the corporation’s greatest threats lie within their own walls - often unconscious mistakes, but also pre-meditated crimes.

Is it fair to say that most of these crimes are committed through technology? And that if so, is it the job of the CIO and their team to combat security issues? Well the answer to both questions is yes. Not all security is technology orientated, but most solutions can come from
technology.

Yet, as we stand today, most companies use reactive methods to prevent security breaches. A good example is that to keep people outside a companies network, the company bans known methods of entry. But the criminal mind is acting proactively. The market believes there is lot more a company can do to spot bad behaviour - this is proactive prevention.

The fact is it seems that most innovation is coming from outside - from the threat itself, and not enough proactive measures are being taken by companies themselves. Why is this so, do CIO’s share the same view? Is it we do not have the funding to research all preventative methods, is it that the priority isn’t high enough?

It is true that if there are more public cases of losses and risks taken by companies, industry would react with greater force. Something needs to shift CIOs to allocating more budget and more insight into proactive methods for security prevention, otherwise another economic earthquake could arise from poor security insight.

Martin Warner

Host and Executive Producer of Technology of Tomorrow 08

www.martinwarner.com

What’s your view?

I was recently travelling in Marrakech (Morocco) when I was asked what I did for a living? So I said I work in technology, a generalisation, but I thought good enough. The man replied, ‘who needs technology when you have the internet!’. I know what you’re thinking, but I thought it was quite simple, a child-like description of the difference between two things. So software and hardware is ok, but the internet is everything - he saw it as a
whole new world.

Having smiled for a while, I immediately compared that to Microsoft - ‘who needs technology, when you got the internet’. Was that what Gates and Ballmer were thinking? After all, their online business is loss making, and they are behind the eight ball in terms of internet development of software and services. They might have a monopoly on the OS market, and indeed on the desktop software market - but the online business is lagging behind.

A lot has been made so far of the so-called monopoly of Yahoo and Microsoft together. I think it is a natural combination and a smart fit for Microsoft. Why? Because the core capabilities that Yahoo provides today, their cultural beginnings, skills and services are clearly needed and can integrate well with Microsoft’s offerings. This is good for the market, good for the shareholders of both companies and provides a better platform for global competition.

Clearly with Google out there, this is no monopoly situation, in fact quite the opposite. If Yahoo doesn’t get bought, Google would monopolise the online space - Microsoft are simply levelling the playing field.

Can Microsoft deliver the savings, early innovative solutions and reposition its combined online business? My guess is that while they have never done big acquisitions, they will feel confident they can execute on the plan, the market will watch as they do to see if there is any fall out. The hardest thing will be to deliver the new innovative offerings early under a repositioned online business.

Martin Warner

Host and Executive Producer of Technology of Tomorrow 08

www.martinwarner.com

What’s your view?

Probably the most important step the Internet ever took was to receive the birth of Search. The ability for anyone to navigate themselves through the endless information, sitting on over a trillion websites in the world today. Search is also responsible for a considerable amount of innovation happening on the web today. Not only are the pioneers of Search raking in billions, but with distorted valuations for their companies, they have the punching power to dominate the digital marketing space, and invest and innovate faster than most companies in next generation software and services. Take for example Google, it recently surpassed HP (Hewlett-Packard) in market cap, rising to $175BN!

The market right now seems to share two perceptions about Search - firstly, we ask ourselves where will it go next? We cannot wait to see the new services of the future. Our perceptions are based on the fact that it is the fundamental infrastructure of the web and we rely on its functional need in our lives. An already impressive array of services attached to Search that serve to bolster existing communities and grow new followers. Finally, as Search provides a destination for millions of loyal visitors, there are some interesting, still relatively new, digital marketing possibilities for companies considering online ad-sales (advertising your company online, such as through Google Ad-Words).

However, there is the other perception. Companies using Search are beginning to get suspicious about their commercial models, particularly around online advertising. No one likes the traits of companies in monopoly situations; Search is accused of having too much control. This might be due to the main Search players, such as Yahoo and Google, hiding its standards and proprietary technologies, making their business models difficult to determine. Everyone safeguards what is proprietary technology, but when it is closely linked to how they charge for online advertising - that’s a problem waiting to burst. Jimmy Wales (Founder of Wikipedia) recently commented on the need to have open standards and policies in Search, with search technology driven by an open community - showing transparency in how a search engine returns its results after a query. This thinking has led Jimmy ‘Jimbo’ Wales to create the first open-source search engine called Wikia Search.

Presently, Google, Yahoo and others return search results based upon their own search criteria; the problem is that we cannot determine whether the results are biased. Moreover, their online advertising business models follow this thinking and it is mystical in terms of how a company gains its placement versus the amount it costs to achieve it. Finally, the results after receiving the placement are difficult to measure value, and even harder to trust.

Is this a big deal, well most likely yes right now, but if Search is to maintain its dominant position and continue to diversify its value, and grow its community - a few things will need to happen. Search companies will have to be more transparent in their technology and enable companies to partner with them, and develop their own software and services - sharing the wealth and gaining the trust through open standards is the only way, or Wikia Search will have its day. Not that I am trying to be poetic, but digital marketing is growing so quickly, and now other communities such as social networking are getting in on it. There also needs to be more measurable evidence of value in online advertising, lets not forget that online advertising particularly through Search is still in its infancy. Importantly, it is clear the online business models around advertising and beyond are likely to become more complex as companies compete for differentiable value, thus the need to regulate, report and provide tools for companies to maintain confidence in their investment will be critical. Otherwise, growth in the Search space will slow, and an ever-increasing cynicism over digital marketing will take root.  

Martin Warner

Host and Executive Producer of Technology of Tomorrow 08

www.martinwarner.com

What’s your view?

A lot has been said over the last 5 years about modern IT Management practices, the future of the CIO role and whether we can expect more commercial practices from the IT function.  In short, the question boils down to how much value IT can create, and is this value recognised by the CEO.  Put another way, it is the marriage of both innovation and operational effectiveness (what the CIO must bring) and executives (CEO, and leaders alike) who ‘get it’ and support the importance of technology within their firm.  

There is a lot of criticism about IT functions focused too much on ‘keeping the lights on’ and maintaining service, as opposed to partnering with the business to leverage technology for the benefit of the firm.  So there is a chicken and egg situation that exists in almost all organisations today, particularly those of scale and size.  That is, does the CIO deliver enough hands on effectiveness and fresh innovation in order to convince the business partners that they should be helping to drive value that differentiates their firm?  The breakdown often means that business leaders end up critical of the CIO and the IT function, placing more demand on the IT function, pressuring for further cost reductions and being concerned more on internal service that on changing the game in their market.  

The facts are simple, IT functions can cost as much as one tenth of the business revenues and clearly present unprecedented opportunity in most industries to differentiate the company from its competitors.  The second fact is that only when a true partnership between the business and IT exists can the business uncover deep innovation, smarter investment practices and quicker product times to market.  Finally, finding the balance between the ‘screwdriver’ engineers (who keep the lights on) and innovative business leaders with IT management experience (new generation CIO’s) is key to ensuring that you have the right mix of people to extract innovation and enable IT to stay out in front.  

That said, the question many are asking is why then do we see minimal innovation from corporate IT functions. Still, there is no sign of the ERP for IT (one tool for IT management), most IT functions still work with legacy infrastructures, fragmented business architectures and the tenures of CIO’s shortening all the time.  In fact, more and more CIO’s have reporting lines through CFO’s or COO’s showing a diminishing level of respect for technology at the top.  

Is it therefore that the business just operates too fast, and playing catch up is a complex game?  Not enough investment in IT?  Perhaps it’s just that we expect too much from technology and in fact, the enterprise technology space is simply in a wave that will evolve in time?  What is clear is that companies with world class IT practices, innovative technology and the right people - are the companies that prove time after time they can differentiate themselves in the global market today. 

What’s your view?