Viewpoint

 

and generating information. Despite the physical aspects of the technology—mainframes, punched cards, hard-copy printed reports—the emphasis was on information and its business applications primarily for report preparation, transaction processing, and business processes (such as bookkeeping). Users trusted IT experts to deal with what they viewed as complicated technology. Although managers did not understand the technology, they were aware of its business benefits and paid for it as a cost center.

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, online processing was still mainframe-based and closely guarded by IT professionals. Minicomputers were increasingly reliable and affordable as business computers, with bigger companies using them in distributed IT strategies. When PCs appeared, their relatively low price enabled greater access for whole companies and individual users alike. Consequently, end users were more familiar with IT and began acquiring and developing their own applications. Hardware, software, and telecommunications vendors took note. By the 1990s, they had changed the name of the field from IS to IT as they pushed the latest technology solutions. This shift transformed the IT function from information provider to technology promoter. The vendors then began bypassing the organizations’ IT leaders, approaching users directly.

This marketing approach also included the hidden cost of complexity, leading to user resistance and weakening the traditional IT-user relationship. Many users were indeed intimidated by “too much” technology [ 4]. Technological complexity also reduced user satisfaction with the related information, along with respect for IT personnel. Despite vendor promises that their hardware and software could do whatever users said they wanted, users often found the technology actually made it more difficult to generate information. Many users blamed IT personnel—ironic because IT personnel were often not involved in and frequently recommended against such deals. As a result, many business managers even today do not realize the business benefits of their organizations’ own technology. Consequently, they may minimize the IT budget, treating IT as purely technical support, ignoring the information compo-

nent (the I in IT) [ 2]. Ironically, the CIO of a large manufacturer with $6 billion in annual sales told us that in executive meetings he is regularly asked to fix dysfunctional video projectors because he is viewed as the number-one technology expert in the room; the CIO of a major city in Michigan said the same.

This lack of understanding and appreciation may be partly the fault of IT personnel using technological terminology when interacting with users, at least in part because they don’t know a better way. This is not just an IT phenomenon. For example, most purchasers of costly technology-related consumer products like cars, TVs, and PCs do not want to know how they are produced or the scientific principles on which they depend. They also react unfavorably to technical manuals, often refusing to read them [ 4]. One lesson is that IT personnel must learn to interact with users to identify information needs without mentioning the latest technical enhancement. Only later, and independent of users, should IT personnel deploy their technological skills to identify the technology needed to support an organization’s information needs.

This approach reorients the traditional sys-tems/business analyst function in the direction of information services, embracing users and managers as partners. IT departments could then identify opportunities to add value by delivering additional information, rather than trying to limit themselves to developing new ways to deliver more data.

Consider how a business organization approaches its potential customers. It typically employs marketing specialists to conduct market research, aiming to identify what drives and excites their needs, as well as how much they are willing to pay for products and services (perception of value). These specialists do not invite potential customers into the organization’s technological deliberations. Only after the market is understood in multiple dimensions are R&D specialists assigned to work on products. Likewise, only after first “studying” their customers should IT “marketing” personnel (business analysts) transfer their findings to IT R&D specialists ( designers and programmers) who evaluate the internal cost of addressing these needs by developing systems. IT