All Posts in Leadership

|In: Leadership|Last Updated:

It’s Perry Mason’s fault.

Responding to a remark about CO2 and global warming a few weeks back, a surprising number of readers pointed out that global warming is “just a theory,” with the evidence falling well short of proof.

The Greening Earth Society — a fossil-fuels-industry propaganda machine — beats this drum loudly. To the GES and everyone else who rejects global warming because it’s “just a theory” I have a question: Just a theory? Just? You might as well say “just” write a program. As with writing software, when it comes to scientific theories there’s no “just” about it. The creation of testable and tested theories (in this case affirmed by the National Academy of Sciences) is the essence of science. Proof is for lawyers, which is why I blame Perry Mason.

Whether you accept CO2-driven global warming as reality or not doesn’t affect your performance as an IT manager. Why you accept or reject it just might. So here’s the question: In your decision-making, are you a lawyer — a manager who demands the elimination of uncertainty before approving action?

Lawyers require proof. They consider proposals for change as accusations against their client, the status quo, which they defend with Perry-Mason-like tenacity. “Isn’t it possible a new and better option will become available next year?” they ask. “How many of our competitors are doing this? Why not more?” “What problems will we encounter implementing this? What do you mean, you don’t know?”

And so on. No matter what the facts and logic, there’s always some uncertainty left. There has to be, of course, because recommendations are about the future … an uncertain period of time … but I don’t care. I need proof!

Faced with a lawyer manager, employees learn to give up quickly. Since lawyer-managers are also judge and jury, and the appeals process is usually a career-killer, there’s no way to win the argument. Why even start?

Lawyers are just one of the major types of decision-maker. Lest you think I’m picking on the breed, let me point out that they aren’t the worst. At least they trade in facts and logic, which means persuasion is at least theoretically possible. Next week we’ll continue with our decision-making menagerie. In our collection we’ll also find marks, zealots, politicians, scientists, and card players.

You might even see yourself in one of the cages.

Comments

|In: Career Management|Last Updated:

Wanted: Brilliant physicist, to lead the Perpetual Motion Institute (PMI).

It’s a Catch-22. In Joseph Heller’s brilliant novel this badly misused metaphor was a combat exemption clause. To get it, you simply had to apply for it. Unfortunately, the act of applying for Catch-22 automatically disqualified you from receiving it. This would also be the case for anyone applying for PMI’s leadership position.

Here’s a Catch-22-enabled leadership position that really exists:

Senior Executive Program Manager: We are seeking a Senior Executive Program Manager (SEPM) to spearhead an enterprise-wide, cross-jurisdictional systems integration project using contemporary web and message-oriented middleware solutions to share comprehensive data among divisions organization-wide.

The SEPM, an enthusiastic visionary leader/change agent, will engender support for enterprise-wide, multi-jurisdictional organizational change and establish/manage a cross-functional team implementing numerous technology projects which encompass all levels of the organization.

Program History: This program was originally chartered to address the needs of a single business unit, but quickly evolved into a model for integration throughout the enterprise. It involves an enterprise-wide framework of people, processes, standards, and technology focused on achieving business goals and objectives. This framework involves significant investments in business process re-engineering and technology, requires the implementation of data and technology standards and accountabilities that apply across the board, and necessitates the development of cross-functional, highly interdependent governance structures.

Requirements: The successful candidate must have excellent communication, presentation and facilitation skills, and be able to communicate information convincingly to different audiences to build a strong coalition among stakeholders and end-users.

Benefits/Salary: Nowhere near enough.

* * *

What’s wrong with this position? The problems are merely insurmountable, that’s all. An enterprise-wide business change program with no enterprise-wide sponsorship is hopeless. There’s no highly placed, committed executive to arm-twist reluctant business-unit heads into providing the cooperation needed for success, nor is there the groundswell of end-user enthusiasm that can sometimes overpower even the most obstructionist executives.

There’s only a champion — someone who saw potential in a small, achievable project, inflated it to enterprise proportions, but failed to understand the prerequisites of enterprise-wide change.

So there can’t be a highly qualified program manager to lead the charge. Why?

It’s Catch-22: Applying for this job automatically disqualifies the applicant.

Comments