IT Projects: Expert Witness, CIO, In-House Counsel & Litigation Forum

Seven IT Tips for surviving the recession

Author:  Cath Jennings        Originally posted on 1/13/09 at:     http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2009/01/13/authors/articleauthor.aspx?liArticleID=234171

The global recession and how to cope with it will inevitably dictate the business and IT agendas during 2009. While the general consensus is that IT budgets are likely to remain relatively flat overall, circumstances will vary from industry to industry, with sectors such as financial services and travel being hardest hit. Government and utilities will see investment remain relatively buoyant.

Gartner indicates that, although 46% of CIOs believe their budget will increase, 21% expect expenditure to fall and a further 33% anticipate that there will be no change. Mark McDonald, global vice president of executive programmes at Gartner, says: "Some companies are going through large budget declines, while increases are very modest, which is holding the overall number down."

Nonetheless, many IT organisations are already shelving nice-to-have, discretionary projects and getting rid of costly on-site contractors, while at the same time adopting a somewhat longer-term, wait-and-see approach.

Why Systems Fail and Problems Sprout Anew!

Here's a very thoughtful "oldie but goodie" from 1980!!!  What do you think?  WSR

Commentary on the principles of "Systemantics"

---

Review of the book. Systemantics; how systems work... and especially how they fail by John Gall. New York, Pocket Books, 1978

---

Introduction

At last those concerned with social change have a basic textbook to explain why "things generally are indeed not working very well" despite our many efforts. As is remarked on the cover: "Have you ever wondered why the unsinkable Titanic sank... or the poor in India eat better bread than the rich in America... or hospital patients are blamed for not getting well... or why, in general, things that don't work badly don't work at all ?" Similar questions are of deep concern to those working in international organizations.

The author, John Gall, explains his point of departure in the following words:

"The religious person may blame it on. original sin. The historian may cite the force of trends such as population growth and industrialization. The sociologist offers reasons rooted in the peculiarities of human associations. Reformers blame it all on "the system", and propose new systems that would, they assert, guarantee a brave new world of justice, peace, and abundance. Everyone, it seems, has his own idea of what the problem is and how it can be corrected. But all agree on one point- that their own system would work very well if only it were universally adopted.

CIO strategy: 10 qualities of IT greatness

December 29th, 2008

Posted by Michael Krigsman @ 9:53 am

Categories: IT issues, CIO issues

Tags: CIO, Information Technology, Successful IT Group, Paul M. Ingevaldson, Strategy...

Successful IT groups are resilient, flexible, and highly responsive to organizational business needs. For many CIOs, this goal appears elusive and completely disconnected from the daily grind of servers, users, downtime, and help desks. Despite the difficulty, CIO success depends on connecting the chaotic, often crisis-driven, IT environment to high-level strategic and business priorities that matter to the broader organization.Linking a tactical IT culture rooted in reaction and response to broader strategic goals is a worthy, if difficult, challenge, which requires understanding the areas of intersection between IT and the business. Despite the obstacles, IT must cross this bridge without disrupting its own operational ability to deliver projects on-time and within budget while still achieving planned scope. To be sure, this balancing act requires careful and delicate choreography!

Google, Microsoft, Yahoo as Ford, GM and Chrysler

Previously Posted December 22nd, 2008

by Larry Dignan

http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=11314

Could Google, Microsoft and Yahoo be the equivalent of Ford, GM and Chrysler more than 60 years ago?

That thought provoking question was raised by Bernstein analyst Jeffrey Lindsay, who cooks up weekend missives designed to make you go hmmm. The argument is an interesting one. Lindsay notes that the downturn of 2001 to 2003 in Web advertising–AOL imploded and Yahoo fumbled–allowed Google to emerge.

Instead of buying Google, the future search giant went public and owned the sector. Fast forward a bit and MySpace, YouTube and Facebook had no shot at going public. Facebook had its IPO shot, but blew it. Lindsay says: Will the current downturn provide the condition for the next Google to emerge – and if so where will it come from? The problem today is that today’s internet players have formidable cash piles which they can use to buy up almost anything. The venture capital players that brought the internet sector into being have generally less cash to hand and are becoming increasingly interested in other sectors.

The parallel with the auto industry? Buick, Oldsmobile and Chevrolet were the high tech startups industry of the 1940s. They were gobbled up to become GM. I thought Lindsay was stretching a bit when I read through his research note. But then I pondered Yahoo, which has Flickr, Delicious, Rivals.com, Zimbra and a bunch of other properties in its collection. Are these properties really any different than the nameplates and brands that GM and Ford have?

Future Bits: Google’s Machiavellianism

Remember my "Executive Musical Chairs" comments in previous comments to articles presented here (e.g.Whose on Google, What's on Microsoft, and Nobody's on Yahoo?).  Did you know there was going to be a test?  Make a list of all the top tech execs moves in 2008, and for extra credit, make some predictions for the next round of "chair grabbing"  ahead in 2009.

Previously posted on December 24, 2008

By Saul Hansell 

The New York Times Bits

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/12/24/future-bits-googles-machiavellianism/#more-2127

Defining Moment of 2008: Google’s offer to help Yahoo fend off Microsoft’s hostile takeover bid.

Google’s response to Microsoft’s bid for Yahoo may represent one of the most brilliant acts of corporate Machiavellianism in recent history. Two days after the hostile offer was announced, David Drummond, Google’s chief legal officer, wrote a post on Google’s blog opposing the deal and aligning itself with Jerry Yang, Yahoo’s co-founder and chief executive, who wanted to keep the company independent.

Google’s support helped embolden Mr. Yang and encouraged him to play hard-to-get with Microsoft until the software giant withdrew its offer. Google then agreed to help bolster Yahoo’s profits by selling some search advertising for it — a deal that was ultimately scuttled in the face of scrutiny by the Justice Department.

The upshot of all this is that Google continues to gain share in the search market and Internet audience, and all its competitors remain in disarray. Yahoo has lost two tiers of top management. Microsoft just hired one former Yahoo executive to develop yet another Internet strategy. And AOL, which has been negotiating possible combinations with both Microsoft and Yahoo, remains in play, reportedly unloved by Time Warner, its corporate parent.

While Microsoft’s dream of mounting a true challenge to Google’s search dominance is elusive, the market for display advertising remains divided and up for grabs. But it is display advertising that has been hardest hit by the recession.

Defining Question for 2009: Can Google get its act together in display advertising before its rivals do?

Keeping the competition divided has bought Google more time, but it hasn’t won the battle. It is still trying to integrate DoubleClick, the advertising technology firm it bought, and it has yet to explain to the market the advantage of the combination.