The president of a rather large technology company recently told employees he wants them to be fungible, or so a correspondent reports.

This might actually means something, although probably not. The term “fungible,” meaning interchangeable, is generally restricted to non-sentient beings after all.

Company presidents often say things to employees that aren’t worth a lot of scrutiny. The interesting question isn’t fungibility. It’s why this president chose such odd locution. My guess: Because of the economic downturn he wanted to reassure the troops (a good idea) but didn’t have any real news or anything reassuring to say (that happens), so he chose to say something vague and hard to understand (bad thing).

Companies are dealing with downturns right now. Many have leaders who have never experienced anything except prosperity — some even believed we’d see nothing but growth for the next fifty years or so, and figured they’d never have to handle hard times.

But hard times are upon us, folks, at least by the standards of the last eight years or so. And hard times are when leadership is both most important and most conspicuously absent in most organizations.

It’s easy to be captain when the weather is sunny and the wind is at your back. All you have to do is to raise the sails and enjoy the ride. It’s when the wind shifts that it takes skill to reach your goals.

So what’s it going to take? The first, and most important step is to get through your personal mourning period quickly. Yes, your personal mourning period. The world has changed, and not for the better. You’ve lost the good times, and whether you realize it or not you’re probably grieving for your loss right now.

Remember that the first stage of grief is denial and you’ll understand a lot of the behavior you see, both in others and in yourself. Right now, many leaders are in denial about the need to change perspectives, goals, strategies, and priorities. Most of all, they’re in denial about the end of an era in which growth was pretty easy to achieve.

Once you’ve stopped grieving, the next step is pretty obvious: Your company needs a strategy suited to these new economic circumstances. That’s the CEO’s responsibility, of course, but CIOs and CTOs now have a seat at the planning table, so you’re in this up to your neck.

There just aren’t all that many strategies suited to a downturn. A business can: Batten down the hatches and ride things out; buy weakened competitors at bargain prices to acquire new customers cheaply; cut margins to aggressively acquire competitors’ customers; redefine its marketplace, emphasizing its core, highest-profit customers and new segments unaffected by the downturn; or find a buyer, which changes nothing, but the top executives get a golden parachute while the situation becomes someone else’s problem.

Sadly, most leadership teams simply react to events as they happen instead of formulating a clear strategy. If your company’s leadership team is one of them, your company has chosen a “batten down the hatches” strategy by default.

That’s okay, because your most important job is visibility, which means answering questions. Any strategy will equip you to answer them, so long as your company has one. Even hatch-battening.

Now, more than when times were good, you need to be visible. Why? Employees right now are worried — about their jobs, their departments, their projects, their friends. They need you to answer their questions, even if the answer is that you don’t know yet. It’s perfectly fine to say, “Right now, our strategy is to ride this out. I don’t know how it will affect your project yet. There are no guarantees right now because the situation changes month-to-month. What I need from you is to be flexible.”

Are you visible? If you’re meeting in closed rooms, involving only headquarters staff to make decisions that affect everyone in the field, you aren’t visible, nor are you wise — the information you need to make good decisions is in the field, not at headquarters.

If you announce your decisions from a podium and then leave, you aren’t visible either. You inspire confidence by chatting with employees individually, not with a barrier between you and them.

Leaders who aren’t visible — who make decisions in private, involving only their inner circle, and only communicating by emerging to give a speech — aren’t leading.

They’re hiding.

The New Economy must truly be dead.

In the New Economy, I’ve been told by experts, the customer is king. If it were alive, how would you explain Larry Ellison?

Even notorious industry bad boy Computer Associates thinks good customer relations are important, and is promoting a new image as a kinder, gentler software company.

But then there’s Ellison, who, at Oracle AppsWorld, told his customers … his customers! … that they should customize their companies to his software. Customizing the software is wrong. Complementing it with third-party software is wrong. Building applications in-house? Don’t you dare! That would get in the way of your company’s primary mission according to Oracle: Software integration.

The right thing to do? Adapt your business to the predefined processes Oracle has thought up for you, and run your business on nothing but Oracle software, of course.

This attitude would be predictable coming from a communist, but Ellison’s a rich guy. So what is he thinking of? He’s telling us to trust a central planner (Oracle) to anticipate everything we need, and to figure that if he didn’t anticipate it you don’t really need it.

That’s a centrally planned information economy. Memo to Larry Ellison: Centrally planned economies don’t work, and it takes a long time to recover from the failed effort of trying to make them work. If you don’t believe me, take a look at the Russian economy.

Ellison’s mandate is bad for his customers for two entirely different reasons, both related to the fall of world communism.

The first: Ellison ignores the complexity built into every real company — the same complexity that causes all centrally planned economies to fail. Market-based economies don’t out-compete centrally planned ones because they’re more efficient. They’re actually inefficient in some ways, encouraging redundant effort (we call it “competition”). What makes market-based economies superior to centrally planned ones is their ability to recognize and fine-tune the satisfaction of demand.

So while an ERP vendor’s information-economy central planners can recognize and satisfy the big-ticket items like supply chain management and financial reporting, your IS organization is more likely to recognize and satisfy requirements that are closer to home, like (for example) your real estate management department’s need for an investment management system.

Nor does it stop there. Your IS organization also consists of central planners. They’re unlikely to recognize and satisfy (to take another example) your marketing department’s need for a system to schedule use of your company’s trade-show booths. That’s what personal databases, electronic spreadsheets, and Jane, who’s “good with this stuff,” are for.

Unmet need isn’t the only problem, either. There’s also the clothing-size issue: Just because a suit is well-made doesn’t mean it looks good on you. It also has to fit.

Oracle’s process designs are, I’m sure, neither better nor worse than any other carefully plotted swim-lane diagrams (the standard way to graphically describe a process design). It’s just that they almost certainly don’t all line up with your current processes, so taking Ellison’s advice means process re-engineering on a massive scale. The good news is that the process designs themselves are done. The bad news is that the good news only covers about 10% of the total effort of changing every process in your company.

Ellison isn’t completely wrong, of course. Many ERP implementations are unnecessarily complicated because of that’s-how-we-do-things-around-here thinking. It’s quite true that many companies don’t give their ERP vendor’s shrink-wrap processes a fair hearing.

But imagine your meeting with the CEO, COO, and CFO where you explain the benefit of standardizing on nothing but Oracle’s software and processes: “Sure, we’ll have to change how every bit of work in the company is done, but in return we’ll save on the cost of Oracle upgrades! Not only that, but we’ll operate exactly like every one of our competitors. Think of the benefit to our customers — they’ll be able to switch among all of us at virtually no cost!”

Good luck finding your next CIO position.

The whole thing is silly. If every company took Ellison’s advice, then every company would follow identical processes throughout — those envisioned by their ERP vendor, and only those envisioned by their ERP vendor. Taken to its logical conclusion, the result would be that every company in a particular industry would be identical to all others.

Hmmm. Maybe he is a commie after all.