All Posts in Technology

|In: Industry Commentary|Last Updated:

That members of the Bush administration used Republican National Committee e-mail accounts instead of their official government accounts leads to troubling questions.

No, not the troubling legal and ethical questions. They aren’t KJR material. If you’re looking for self-righteous indignation on that subject, plenty of political blogs have already plowed that field.

Here at KJR we rarely indulge in self-righteous indignation. Our preferred vices are sarcasm and irony. With that in mind:

Many in the IT punditocracy have made much of the RNC’s amateurish systems management. It’s clear system security and recoverability went well beyond dreadful.

This is no academic concern. The RNC acknowledges it lost hundreds of thousands of e-mail messages and can’t get them back. Unless you interpret the loss as the result of malicious intent, it’s difficult to explain away the problem as anything other than total incompetence. (And can you imagine how frustrating it must for Karl Rove that he can’t retrieve his e-mail archives?)

But that isn’t a proper KJR subject either. Well, it is, actually, but not this week. You’ll have to wade through another few paragraphs for the point to emerge, though, because, elsewhere in the news:

Gloria Long Rollins, Town Manager of Walkersville, Maryland, removed the toilet paper from all restrooms in the town’s parks. Vandals, you see, had set some paper on fire in a men’s bathroom. And so, to combat vandalism, graffiti and drug use in the parks, visitors will henceforth have to bring their own, whether it’s toilet paper, spray paint, drugs or kindling.

Here’s the connection, and its relevance: Bush administration members aren’t alone in ignoring the official systems IT provides them, and Gloria Rollins isn’t alone in overreacting to irritating infractions of the rules. The combination is, to coin a phrase, a vicious cycle.

Okay, I didn’t really coin the phrase. Still, it is a cycle and it is vicious. Please make allowances.

The Bush-league question for KJR readers is how many business users in your company make use of Gmail, Yahoo! Mail!, or Hotmail for business use, and why. The Walkersville question is how you respond when they do.

Here’s the usual response. I’m sure someone somewhere calls it a best practice:

1. IT writes a policy making the use of private e-mail accounts illegal.

2. IT explains to all managers and staff that this is the policy, and that failing to adhere to it will result in disciplinary action, up to and including termination.

3. Someone actually enforces the policy, including termination, proving that in more than one small village, the local idiot has gone missing.

It isn’t that the use of private e-mail accounts is a good idea. Of course it isn’t, as the RNC was kind enough to demonstrate.

It’s that the proper response isn’t to remove the metaphorical toilet paper. It’s better to ask the offending parties, in a friendly, engaging, and entirely unthreatening tone of voice, “So … er … when you compare Gmail to our corporate e-mail system, why do you like Gmail better?”

And then, when they tell you (“Gmail gives me gigabytes of storage. You don’t.”), take what they say seriously.

E-mail is just one example of this common phenomenon: If end-users don’t like the systems you provide, many will find alternatives they like better. If they hate your BPM (business process management) system they’ll put together their own tracking sheets in Excel. If they detest your locked-down PCs they’ll buy their own Macintoshes.

And if they hate your CRM system (“customer relationship management,” but it’s a poor use of the term) they’ll use Salesforce.com, or install Act!

(Not that it matters, but if Yahoo! was to host Act!, where would it put the exclamation points? Oh, never mind.)

For some unaccountable reason, instead of assuming these employees come to the office wanting to succeed at their jobs, many in IT assume they’re malicious vandals who in other circumstances would set fire to the toilet paper in Walkersville’s public restrooms.

I don’t want to push the metaphor too far. I’m not saying Gloria Rollins should have asked her vandals whether they were mad because she didn’t buy Charmin. Even if she had, I’m guessing the vandals would have been too drunk to answer.

So let’s leave it at this: When the employees in your company try to avoid the systems you provide to make them more effective, find out why.

They have a reason. You need to know what it is. Then you can figure out what to do about it.

Other than firing them.

Comments

|In: Industry Commentary|Last Updated:

Service levels, you’ll recall, are two-part measures. They define a minimum threshold of acceptable performance and tally how often a service provider meets or exceeds it.

Enter the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press. In an excellent example of service levels in action, it defined a minimum threshold of acceptable knowledge of current events –getting two thirds of a questionnaire right (sample question: Who is the current Vice President of the United States of America?).

Then it tallied how many of those surveyed met the threshold.

Pew found, perhaps unsurprisingly, that those who watch The Daily Show and The Colbert Report on the Comedy Channel tied regular newspaper readers for top honors (54%). Those who watch Fox News met the standard 33% of the time, outperforming only watchers of network morning programs. Draw your own conclusions.

It’s tempting to blame this mess on intellectually lazy Americans, Katie Couric, Roger Ailes, or all of the above. Temptation being what it is, I will.

Underneath the symptoms, though, is a challenge you and I face every day as we deal with vendors, staff, managers, vendors, information outlets, colleagues, and vendors in the workaday world of information technology: The challenge of seeing what isn’t there.

To illustrate the point, go back to last week’s column, which described Factcheck.org’s critique of a current U.S. Chamber of Commerce ad. The ad provides an alarming statistic — that lawsuit abuse costs your family $3,500 per year.

I received quite a few e-mails challenging my statement that the U.S. Chamber … well, I said it was lying. The e-mails pointed out that the Chamber’s math was perfect. Lawsuits did cost $235 billion in 2005 and that this does come out to $3,500 per family, if you assume an average headcount of four (bad assumption, by the way).

The problem with the ad isn’t what it said. It’s what it left out — what isn’t there. It left out:

  • How the Chamber defines “lawsuit abuse” (apparently, it’s “filing a lawsuit for any reason at all”).
  • What fraction of all lawsuits falls into the “lawsuit abuse” category (close to 100%).
  • How those who paid the legal fees and fines managed to transfer their costs to your family (and wouldn’t that make for a popular seminar?).

It’s far easier to deceive through omission than through falsification. Omission is far harder to spot.

In your professional capacity you’re inundated with product specifications and performance statistics, staff reports and recommendations, project proposals and justifications, all trying to persuade you to do something or other. If you’re like me you’ve become adept at skimming them to get the gist of what they’re trying to tell you.

Gist is a useful substance, right up there with beef jerky and Maxalt. It has its limitations, though, and top among them is that gist doesn’t help you spot what isn’t there. Quite the opposite. Gist is for understanding what someone is trying to tell you. As a result, it helps them conceal much more than it helps you reveal.

If there’s a magic formula for spotting what isn’t there I’m not aware of it. I do have favorite examples. Here’s one:

Imagine you asked a vendor if HP supports Vista for its 2840 color laser multifunction device (to take an example at random — that I happen to own one is sheer coincidence). Imagine the vendor answered in the affirmative.

The answer would be true. It would also be seriously deceptive. You can get a 2840 driver on HP’s website … which works for USB-attached devices but not network-attached ones. You can also download HP’s admirably conceived Universal Print Driver (UPD). It lets you print to the 2840 through either a USB or a network connection.

But only in black and white, and it doesn’t support the scanning function.

Phrasing your question to be in a position to accurately evaluate the product is something of a challenge.

How do you spot what’s missing? First, don’t skim — read carefully. Second, apply your experience. Think about all the ways you’ve been deceived in the past, look for parallels, and ask about them.

And third, don’t try to be clever. This question isn’t at all clever: “Here’s what I’m trying to accomplish. How will your products help me do it? Tell me step by step.” It might not be clever, but it gets the job done.

Of course, to ask this you do have to know what you’re trying to accomplish.

Comments