| | March 20179CIOReviewand having the corresponding authority is empowering for employees. If you can explain your IT organizational structure on a single piece of paper to your parents and your 10-year-old, then you have clarity.While division of an IT organization into departments typically cannot be avoided, a team-like atmosphere for the group should be encouraged. As soon as you have departments, you have boundaries, and every boundary is a hand off between two or more departments. Every hand off is a potential source of mistakes, and a potential source of interdepartmental friction. So keep the structures as simple as possible and make it clear to staff that they are all on the same team. A complex organizational question that has recently arisen as an issue is the "external boundary" of the IT function. Where do IT end and business functions begin? For example, should super users, project managers and business process specialists be in IT or not? There are pros and cons for both options. As a starting position, everybody with access to the test and development systems, and everybody with a systems administrator level of access, should be in the IT function. However, the Internet of Things is now redefining the boundary issue as IT functions become increasingly a part of the actual product offering. So in the future the IT organization will need to reflect a role that is a combination of the "traditional back office" role and a new "fast moving, innovative, external customer facing, product offering" role. As the IT organization becomes an integral part of the product offering for many companies, the boundary between IT and product development, and between IT and customer service will change, and the IT function will need to reorganize itself. Perhaps the typical IT organizational structure in the future will change from the "infrastructure and applications" division into a "back office systems and front office systems" division. Either way, the Internet of Things is going to forever change the role of the IT function and the CIO.Despite the benefits to be gained, many managers have a tendency to try to avoid making organizational changes such as these, however. They worry that change "might have a destabilizing effect" (it might, in the short term) and will "upset some staff." They say they're "waiting for the right time." There's rarely a good time. Sooner is better than later, just make sure to emphasize the benefits of the new organization. Most re-organizations do create winners and losers. So careful planning and a lot of communication is needed to successfully implement the changes. About double the amount of communication that seems reasonable is needed. Success should be defined as: all people involved in the change understand the reasons for the change, support the need for the change, and are clear about their roles in the new organization. Then, operational efficiency is no longer a "nice to have," it's the standard set. Avoid change for change's sake, but don't be afraid of confronting anomalies head on, and lobbying for a re-org when needed
< Page 8 | Page 10 >