During the last presidential campaign, Al Gore received ridicule, and inspired the best candy bar ad ever (by Snickers) by claiming he’d invented the Internet.

The only problem is, that isn’t what he said. Here’s the exact quote: “During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet.” Which, depending how you define “the Internet,” he did, in 1988 when neither business leaders nor the party of business had any idea something important was going on.

As an IT leader, this fact is worth your knowing, if for no other reason than to give credit where it’s due for the central reality of information technology in 2003.

It’s also worth your knowing for more practical reasons: Understanding how Gore got skewered just might help you avoid a common and deadly leadership mistake.

Gore’s skewering came from the public relations arm of the Republican National Committee, which planted the distortion among friendly political commentators. The RNC deserves credit for highly effective PR. The political press, on the other hand, bought the story hook, line and sinker, likely because many reporters found Gore personally unlikable. Shame on them for lazy reporting. (Check The Daily Howler — www.dailyhowler.com — for a detailed account of these events in all their glory.)

Back to you: Is there a chance you’re … Goring … someone who reports to you for similar reasons?

Perhaps you have a backstabber in your organization — someone who is adept at planting falsehoods that are damaging to a rival and close enough to the facts that the backstabber will be safe if you see through the deception?

Or perhaps someone in your department is arrogant, obnoxious, or even suffers from Asperger’s syndrome (which can make someone an excellent technologist but difficult to relate to), but does both their job and those of several other employees whose main skill is taking the credit. Do you recognize the real contributor, or do praise and raises go to the employees with whom you’re most comfortable?

It’s important to know who your best performers are, and even more important to understand what each of your performers is best at. As you work to gain this information, remember: Political maneuvering is far more evident when you’re a spectator than a participant — especially an unwitting one.

“We can’t just let users install anything they want!” This, the mission statement of the Value Prevention Society (VPS), has, in a decade, evolved from controversial policy to unquestioned postulate.

The history of the personal computer belies it. PCs succeeded because they freed end-users from the constraints imposed by centralized IT, letting them select, install, and make innovative use of whatever capabilities they could program themselves or acquire through the purchase of inexpensive shrink-wrapped software.

“Nice theory, but,” I can hear VPS members respond, “supporting uncontrolled desktops would blow our IT budget.”

This strawman argument misses the point perfectly. VPS members live in a binary world — the only alternatives they recognize are complete lockdown and total free-for-all. The real world is more interesting. So in the interest of offering solutions instead of criticism, here are some elements of a more balanced desktop support policy:

  • Establish multiple levels of supported software. The stuff you install, support, and pay for out of the IT budget right now is one level — fully supported. Next comes software IT has tested and found reliable, but doesn’t pay for or install. Call it endorsed. Third is software IT hasn’t tested, but is well-known, comes from a reliable vendor, or otherwise is deserving of some trust. Call it acceptable. And finally, there’s that other stuff. Call it disallowed.
  • Establish multiple levels of support. Problems with fully supported software are first in queue. Next come problems with endorsed software. Problems with software rated acceptable rate the lowest priority, with no guarantees beyond restoration to a standard image.
  • Require management approval. As Ronald Reagan was fond of saying, “Trust but verify.” Trusting employees doesn’t mean trusting them blindly, so if an employee wants to install (for example) a personal information manager (PIM) other than the company standard, his/her manager must approve the purchase … and, of course, the PIM must rate “acceptable” or above.
  • When integration is vital, company standards rule. If you have no CRM software in place, for example, sales representatives should be able to buy and install whatever contact manager they want. If you have implemented a serious CRM suite that includes sales force automation, the standard overrides personal preferences.

What’s that you say? It’s easier to just lock ’em down?

Of course it’s easier. That’s often the nature of a bad decision.