If I've said it once, I've said it a hundred times: IT generally shouldn't run itself as a business that sells to its internal customers. It should, instead, act as an active, integral part of the organization, collaborating with everyone else to create value for Real Paying Customers.

Something else I've often recommend: Don't think of yourself as an employee. Think of yourself as the business named You. Your employer is your customer, to whom you're selling your valuable services.

Isn't there just a tiny bit of contradiction between these two positions?

Sure looks that way. But there isn't, for two reasons.

Here's the first: Your employer can get rid of you. Your employer can't get rid of its IT department.

The decision-makers might think they can, through the miracle of outsourcing (of which "The Cloud" is one form among many). But that's a mirage. Companies that outsource IT aren't doing without it. They've merely replaced their relationship with a CIO with a relationship with an account manager, whose loyalty is to the outsourcer and whose marching orders are to grow the account.

There are valid reasons for outsourcing IT, although not the one you usually hear. "Keep the core and outsource the rest" might look great on the PowerPoints, but it doesn't hold any actual water.

Outsource to share access to expensive expertise you don't need often enough to hire an employee? Sure. To gain economies of scale? Absolutely. Outsource so IT becomes Someone Else's Problem? Don't be ridiculous. It's still the company's problem, only now there's a legally binding contract in place. Think that enhances flexibility?

Me neither.

Companies can't get rid of their IT function. They can, on the other hand, get rid of you. That makes a big difference in how you as an employee and the CIO as head of a business function should think about your separate relationships with your employer, even if you are the CIO.

That's one reason you and IT departments need to follow different relationship strategies.

Here's another: The CIO can influence how the rest of the company thinks about their relationship with the IT organization. You can't influence the company's employment philosophy.

When business executives figure they're IT's internal customers, there's a good chance this is an attitude inflicted on the current CIO by a past CIO, who in turn had been told this was the most advanced thinking in business by ... well, let's not get into that. Blame is pointless exercise, no matter how enjoyable.

As I was saying, since a past CIO was the one who persuaded everyone outside IT that they should think of themselves as internal customers, there's no reason the current CIO can't persuade them to change their thinking to a more enlightened alternative.

You as an employee? Speaking of enlightened, there still are business leaders who consider employees to be integrated members of the corporate community. They recognize that fully engaged employees, who understand the company's history, values, strategy, culture and folklore and are committed to its success are more likely to cause that success than any other source of labor.

These enlightened business leaders are still out there, but they aren't in the forefront of modern business thinking, and probably aren't in the majority. Modern sourcing strategies consider employees to be just another form of contract labor, albeit a form that's more expensive than the alternatives, and harder to get rid of when they become inconvenient.

As an employee, you aren't in a position to influence how executives and managers think about such things. Your choice is how best to respond.

And if, as is likely, they consider employees to be sacks o' skills, providers of effort, interchangeable parts and nothing more than that (and the larger the company you work for, the more likely it is that this thinking dominates), then that's the game you're playing.

You have two choices. You can either learn the rules of the game and the strategies and tactics that help you win it.

Or you can operate based on how you think the world ought to be organized, whether or not that's how things really are. You can do this. It won't work very well; you'll be disappointed quite often; and you'll complain bitterly every time the world lets you down.

But you don't have to play your employer's game. You don't have to accept the way gravity pulls either.

Nevertheless, when you trip, the direction you'll fall will still be called "down."

Permalink: http://www.weblog.keepthejointrunning.com/?p=3369

Do you find KJR valuable? If so, make sure your friends and colleagues know about it, that it's absolutely free, that I don't and never will sell my list, and how to subscribe (by clicking here).

I sometimes use Comments or reader letters in my columns. The rules:

• Comments are public, because they're ... well, they're right at the bottom of every column in the archives.

• If you send me a letter, let me know if and how I can use it (as is, sanitized, or don't be ridiculous - you'll be found out and run out of town).

• Also let me know if you'd prefer to remain completely anonymous, or whether I may give you credit by name.

• All letters and responses are the property of IS Survivor Publishing, division of IT Catalysts, Inc.

If you like this article, why not let a friend enjoy it, too? It's fine with me, and in fact I'd be flattered. All I ask is that you send the whole thing, including this notice. But don't be shy ... if you think they'd like it, don't you think they should see it? But only those people - you wouldn't want me to get a reputation as a spammer, would you?

Visit our store: