I Am Not Your Company’s Computer Guy
06 March 2010
If you were watching Saturday Night Live during the 1990s, you remember Jimmy Fallon’s hilarious sketches as “Nick Burns, Your Company’s Computer Guy.” If you weren’t watching or if you’d like a refresher, scroll down to where I’ve embedded an example from YouTube.
Nick Burns was the help desk guy from hell. He could help with your computer problems, but you had to pay the price of being insulted and made to feel stupid. After taking care of your difficulty, Nick would always finish by asking “Was that so hard?”
So why am I writing about Nick Burns today? Here’s why. I’m trying to differentiate what I do for my clients from what Nick does. Most people see the phrase “computer consultant” or “technology consultant” and they think of Nick, the guy from the help desk, the only one who knows how to keep the computers and the networks running smoothly. Maybe they think of someone with a kinder, gentler attitude than Nick’s, but they do think of someone who performs Nick’s role.
Well, that’s not me. Not only do I have a better attitude than Nick’s, I actually do something entirely different. I don’t man the help desk. I don’t configure the servers or run network cable. I don’t install Outlook and connect it to your email account. No, that’s not me.
What I do is to supply a role that’s missing in many small and medium businesses – informed executive oversight for the use and management of information technology. This is the CIO (Chief Information Officer) role or the I.T. Director role, and many smaller companies don’t have such a person in their executive line-up.
In fact, most smaller businesses have little in-house expertise in I.T. There’s no expert oversight, no viable process for defining requirements, and in the end no way for the company to know whether or not a software or hardware vendor has really delivered the best solution for the business.
Yet they’re probably right not to have that expertise in house. They don’t have enough need for a full-time executive devoted that. But that doesn’t mean that they have no need for the role to be performed occasionally. They do. So what usually happens is that it gets shunted off in a direction that’s not optimal for the company.
Here’s how it often unfolds. The company’s executives realize that they have a need. They think it’s for some software and/or hardware to help automate their business processes. They decide to find a vendor or vendors to fill the need.
To make the decision, the company turns to someone they trust but who isn’t really qualified. This is often their accountant (how do you think the original Big 8 accounting firms managed to grow and spin off consulting divisions?) or their computer guy. The accountant typically knows little about the field, and the computer guy, paradoxically, may know even less. Adept at the nuts and bolts operations, the computer guy usually has no experience in optimizing business processes and their automation or in managing relationships with large vendors. Or the company may appoint an executive or committee to choose a vendor to meet a particular technology need. In any case the choice is made somehow, and then they turn the entire project over to the vendor.
This approach is gambling pure and simple. Sometimes the vendor will be willing and able to devote enough resources to find out exactly what the company really needs and to provide it. In other cases (and I’ve seen them, believe me) the vendor just puts in their standard product, assumes it’s going to do the right job, provides a little training, and walks out the door.
What’s missing is informed executive oversight, oversight of the requirements definition process, oversight of the vendor selection process, oversight of the project itself to make sure that the vendor delivers. This is the CIO role, and it can only be provided by someone who understands both the business and the technology. You can’t have one and not the other.
I supply that missing link. As a part-time, consulting CIO, I manage the requirements gathering, vendor selection, and vendor relationship processes. I also give advice on effective use of technology like accounting systems, marketing systems, online marketing campaigns, online customer relationship management, website utilization, and related fields.
And that’s why I am not your company’s computer guy. But I may be its part-time CIO.
As promised, here’s Jimmy Fallon as “Nick Burns, Your Company’s Computer Guy”:
Part One
Part Two
An even worse case is when a decision is made only on recommendation by a vendor’s salesmen without checking with those that have any idea if the solution is good or not.
I recently saw a company switch to design software against the recommendation of the chief designer. The new software is far inferior to the software they used before and does not even work completely. The software also does not add the features, statistics, or central management that was expected either. Now that same management is being sold on further software from the same company that they don’t even plan to have available till 4th quarter 2011. They currently are showing artist renditions of what it will look like.
Vaporware and good marketing will get you everywhere.
Thanks for your comment, James. I see this kind of scenario too, and I think it’s a real shame.
Many small and medium business owners and executives simply have no training in and no knowledge of proper procurement practices for acquiring technology. What’s even worse, they don’t know that they don’t know. That’s why it’s so easy for them to be seduced by the first credible salesperson who comes along.
It’s also why I sometimes seem to face an uphill struggle to educate companies about why they need to hire someone like me to help with such acquisitions. After one project, the light inevitably dawns.
Does it really take a rocket scientist to realize that trying to save money this way actually ends up costing a company considerably? An entire company, it's employees, and every penny of it's finances are only as good as the weakest link.
One would be quite suprised to learn of how many of some of the largest and most powerful companies are attempting to run on a shorestring IT budget. These same companies are quite the easy target for covert spying against them (by another company or even country) all types of hacking, etc… There aren't any safeguards to ensure that the company wouldn't take a heavy financial loss; or even be completely cleaned out.
Once properly discovered it would be too late. The laws in a majorty of areas simply haven't kept up with computer security issues.
One of the most suprising issues about this is the insurance companies which are supposed to be protecting these companies. It's interesting on how they just pass along a blank check in literally any amount when something goes wrong due to lack of proper oversight.
Good points. Part of the difficulty is that IT has traditionally been part of Finance in large corporations and has been considered an expense, a cost center, rather than a crucial strategic asset. Progressive companies and CIOs have been working to change this reactionary view for a long time. But there's much more work to be done.
Smaller businesses may inherit some of the outmoded views, but they also can potentially be much more flexible. That's why it's so important for them to recognize the importance of qualified IT executive oversight, realize when they don't have it, and hire it when they need it. Bringing in an interim CIO or part-time IT Director as needed for larger projects and periodically for assessments is a wise and cost-effective option. As you point out, regular security audits are mandatory.
These same companies are quite the easy target for covert spying against all types of hacking, etc… There aren't any safeguards to ensure that the company wouldn't take a heavy financial loss,That's why it's so important for them to recognize the importance of qualified IT executive oversight,It's interesting on how they just pass the buck !!!!
I think most people can be IT experts and not even know it. If you are familiar with working on your computer from home and troubleshooting problems you may have a career in IT without even realizing it.
I think the kindest reply I can make to your comment is that there's an enormous difference between a talented amateur and a qualified professional.
I've seen the results when amateurs create websites. Even when they look nice (which is rare) they're often vulnerable to hacking because the amateur doesn't know how to protect them. See Anthony Taylor's comment about security, above. And even professionals have been known to create software that's full of bugs, easy to hack, and fails to do what it's supposed to. See some of my other posts here for details.
So I can't agree with you. A real IT expert isn't just someone who knows how to troubleshoot his or her home computer. There's much more to IT.
You're definitely right steve, I also know how to fix my computer but there are times when I can't handle the problem anymore so I ran into a professional IT to solve it. It's just like the saying "you can't serve two masters" If you think you're a good IT and Web Developer.. think again because there maybe things you are missing.