Leading IT: CIO’s and IT Steering Committees

IT Steering Commitees pictureSome Chief Information Officers (CIO’s) love having an Information Technology (I.T.) Steering Committee.

Many hate having one.

Why the big disparity?

And, which of the two opposing viewpoints is right?

Well, the answer can be found in the behavior of the desert shrub, Prosopis velutina, commonly known as the velvet mesquite, and found primarily in the Sonoran Desert of California and Arizona.

I know this might seem a bit zen-like, but allow me a moment to explain.

This desert shrub manages to survive in the harshest of conditions, suffering amid summer temperatures easily toping one hundred degrees Fahrenheit. During the winter, temperatures drop well below freezing. There is little rain in this environment, and seemingly anything living in the desert appears to have achieved an incredible miracle.

How does the Prsopis veluntina stay alive?

It’s seedlings are quick to send out roots the moment they hit the ground, and rapidly establish a shallow, but crucial, initial foundation.

Next, they extend out those roots, doing so over time, eventually stretching their reach to a distance equal to about the height of an 11-story building (about 160 feet).

By doing so, the mesquite is able to survive, and thrive, as a result of having very deep roots (i.e., by tapping into sources of ground water that are deep underneath the dry and barren surface).

What does any of this have to do with CIO’s and I.T. Steering Committees?

By and large, savvy CIO’s know that an I.T. Steering Committee is a means to establish a vital foundation in their organization, and then they utilize that foundation to extend their roots and gain traction throughout the rest of the organization.

Usually, if a CIO changes jobs and enters into an organization that lacks an I.T. Steering Committee, it is one of the first – and most important – steps that they will take.

But, you might ask, if that’s the case, then why are there some CIO’s, in fact a lot of CIO’s, that don’t like an I.T. Steering Committee.

The answer to that seeming paradox will be described next herein.

    I.T. STEERING COMMITTEES: DUAL EDGED SWORD

Let’s first make sure that we are all talking about the same thing.

An I.T. Steering Committee is a high-level group of usually the topmost executives of a firm, and they meet on some kind of regular or semi-regular frequency to help provide guidance to the I.T. function of the organization.

This sounds nice.

In practical terms, this is very, very hard.

The reason it is hard involves the dynamics of the topmost executives of a firm.

When you bring together the topmost executives, you are putting yourself into the limelight, all at once, among your peers, and you are either going to come out shining or come out torn to shreds.

It is a dual-edged sword.

You are enabling a group-like condition wherein the entire group can all at once denounce what you are doing, and do so in a circumstance where there is no place to hide.

Imagine a pile on, with maybe the CIO at the bottom.

Ugly.

Saw one circumstance where the CIO showed-up, and rather than the executives debating each other, they reamed out the CIO, with one starting the pile-on as a trigger, and the others gleefully joining in.

Like sharks that smell blood and cannot help themselves but to go in for the kill.

For some CIO’s, it is just too risky, and they prefer to instead try to work with the topmost executives one-on-one, and avoid entirely the chance that they all might get together and want to collectively talk about I.T.

Furthermore, the topmost executives usually have very strong personalities, and like they say, trying to get them to do anything of an aligned nature is like trying to herd cats.

In that sense, there are certainly rational reasons to NOT have an I.T. Steering Committee.

If trying to get together the topmost executives is going to mean that you, the CIO, are going to get bounced out of your job, well, naturally, job suicide is not something one seeks normally to voluntarily do.

In addition, there are some CIO’s that are just not suited to handle an I.T. Steering Committee.

They are not the socio-political types that know how to appropriately establish and navigate the rough waters of an I.T. Steering Committee.

They would be wise to stay at least a hundred miles away from having an I.T. Steering Committee.

OK, you might now be thinking, if it’s that hard, then why even try?

Usually, without an I.T. Steering Committee, the CIO is going to be between a rock and a hard place, over and over again.

Here’s a good example of the rock-and-a-hard-place, which I could see coming but the CIO refused to acknowledge that it could happen.

There was a big budget I.T. project that the Chief Marketing Officer (CMO) really wanted to have done.

Meanwhile, there was a large I.T. project that the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) also wanted done.

There was not enough I.T. budget to do both (and, by the way, this is pretty much the situation all of the time!).

How does the CIO choose between the CFO and the CMO?

Suppose the CIO chooses the CFO, and does so maybe because the CIO reports to the CFO.

Seems sensible, you say.

But, now, the CMO has their sights on the CIO, and hopes one day to knock the CIO out of the firm.

That’s not a good monkey to have on your back.

Well, you say, the CIO should have done the CMO’s I.T. project, instead of the CFO’s I.T. project.

I think that not doing the I.T. project of your boss is probably not the best career move, if you know what I mean.

So, the CIO ends-up in that terrible rock-and-a-hard place circumstance.

This happens over and over again, across and among all things that the CIO is doing, whether choosing I.T projects to work on, whether allocating laptops and tablets, or providing break/fix services to users, and so on.

How to get out from this squeeze play?

Have an I.T. Steering Committee.

The topmost executives meet, do some verbal arm wrestling, and make compromises among each other for the limited resources available from I.T.

The attention of who approved something shifts from somehow the CIO having to make that decision (and thus be the one squarely in the gun sights), and instead it is an outcome of the interactive negotiations among the topmost executives.

Sure, the CFO might lose out to the CMO on that I.T. project, but it is not because the CIO was forced into making some Gordian knot like choice, but instead due to the CMO making a more compelling case and winning out over the CFO during the I.T. Steering Committee meeting.

Thus, the I.T. Steering Committee is tremendous vehicle to help provide governance for the I.T. function.

Driving that vehicle takes some genuine smarts and hard work.

The CIO has to know that they have the “Right Stuff” to do it.

And, the CIO must know that the organization is ready for doing so – some firms have no other kind of similar top-level steering committees, and so it is especially hard to start-up an I.T. related one in that circumstance, and so it is worth reconsidering the situation if the organization has not done anything akin to it, and perhaps has a company culture antithetical to such a notion.

In recap, if the CIO is the Right Stuff, and if the organization already has a culture that accepts such a notion, the creation and ongoing use an I.T. Steering Committee can be a core aspect of ensuring that I.T. achieves its organizational mission, and that the CIO is able to succeed in the organization.

Let’s next get into some specifics about how to make this actually work.

    A ROSE IS A ROSE BY ANY OTHER NAME

The word “committee” can be a death knell for the I.T. Steering Committee.

In some companies, they detest committees, and think of a committee as overly bureaucratic, and something that is a waste of time and effort.

You don’t want to get stopped before you even get out the gate.

So, if needed, give the thing a different and more palatable name.

Some call their I.T. Steering Committee an I.T. Steering Council, or an I.T. Steering Commission, etc.

Figure out what fits for your organization.

For example, one CIO tried to at first use “I.T. Steering Board” but the CEO didn’t like the use of the word “board” since it sounded like the Board of Directors and so it was potentially misleading and confusing.

Though you might think the name of the thing is relatively unimportant, it can be extremely important.

If the name gives the wrong connotation, or if the name is seen as off-kilter (one firm tried “I.T. Steering Command”), it is not going to be attractive to the participants and will fail before it hits the ground.

Another one that I got a laugh about, and fortunately the CIO wisely changed, was “I.T. Steering Tribunal” – which I pointed out sounded like a witch hunt and maybe someone getting burned at the stake.

    GET THE RIGHT PARTICIPANTS

Let’s assume that you have thought carefully about the name, and you have devised an appropriate naming for your I.T. Steering Committee (a name that fits for your firm).

Now, who will serve on this august group?

Usually, you aim for the highest executives that you can get on it.

The reason to aim high is simple, if you have an I.T. Steering Committee that has say Vice Presidents, they are unlikely to be actual decision makers, and so whenever the I.T. Steering Committee meets, it won’t make any decisions, and you’ll have to wait to see what happens when those VP’s all go back to ask what the true decision makers want to have done.

I realize that you might say, well, suppose those VP’s have been authorized to act on behalf of the topmost executives that they represent.

Yes, that can be done, but, I assure you, in the end, when big decisions need to be made, they are probably not going to stick out their necks, and will want to play it safe by saying that they still need to check-in with their respective bosses.

In short, if feasible, get the highest executives on the I.T. Steering Committee, which might mean say the CFO, CMO, COO, etc.

It might also mean the various Business Unit heads, since they are likely to have a stake in I.T. too, and if they don’t believe they are getting their fair share, they ought to be in the I.T. Steering Committee too.

Does this mean that only the topmost executives should be members?

Not necessarily.

Had one circumstance where the organization had a SVP of Strategy (reported to the COO, and so technically was not a topmost executive), and he was instrumental in shaping the overall direction of the firm.

He was well liked by the topmost executives, and they tended not to make any big decisions without his input.

Added him to the I.T. Steering Committee.

He was pleased and became a big ally of the vehicle.

Had he been left by the sideline, the odds are that he would have taken potshots at it, doing so behind-the-scenes, and likely undermined its long-term viability.

One thing though to keep in mind, if you start to open the door to members that are less than the top, it can open the floodgates, and all of sudden you have a one hundred person sized I.T. Steering Committee, which is unwieldy, diluted, and impractical.

What you can do is establish a base set of members (hopefully the topmost executives), and then always allow for “guests” that are able to attend meetings from time-to-time, which are not actual members, but can attend as needed.

It is like creating a secret club, for which the members feel honored and special, and others will want to be a part of.

This is contrast to having an I.T. Steering Committee where the members don’t want to be there, and no one else wants to be there either.

Best to be on the side of having something that is being sought and considered highly desirable.

One other quick point, watch out for the classic “substitutions” ploy.

Here’s what happens.

For one I.T. Steering Committee, the COO said he could not attend a particular meeting and would send his right hand person – seem innocent enough.

Upon attending the meeting, the CMO and the CFO both noticed that the COO was not there, and found out that the COO had sent a substitute.

You can probably guess what happened next.

At the next meeting, the CMO and CFO both sent substitutes.

Soon, the I.T. Steering Committee consisted of the clerks that worked on the factory floor (well, not really, but the point is that it can be a slippery slope to allow substitutions so be on the wary).

    STARTUP ANGST

One CIO decided that having an I.T. Steering Committee was great, and he had run one at the firm he used to be at.

He had not started it at the predecessor firm, instead he had inherited it.

Well, he opted at his new firm to send out an email to the topmost executives, invited them to be members, and set a date for the first meeting.

He had a party to which few guests arrived.

He had failed to properly establish the basis for the I.T. Steering Committee, and he had relied on email to convey the value and importance of it.

Bad move.

This worked at his prior firm because it was already an ongoing mechanism and well accepted in the firm. Use of emails to setup meetings was fine.

When you want to start something like this anew, you’ll need to put together a campaign, just like running for office.

You’ll need to make sure that your boss is OK with the notion, and will be supportive.

You need to go see each of the members, individually, and explain what it is all about.

You need to do your homework and figure out how the I.T. Steering Committee will be run and operated.

All of that needs to be done prior to even having the initial meeting.

Remember the tale above of the CIO that had his first meeting and virtually no one showed-up, well, he then found it much harder to try again, since he had already used up his initial goodwill, and digging out of the hole was now much worse than if he had started it well.

Also, one other handy tip.

Try not to have the first meeting be especially meaty.

If you start with some really tough topic, let’s say the company is considering dumping its core ERP system, and you bring that up at the first meeting, the odds are that it is so contentious that the meeting will leave a foul taste in the mouths of your members.

And they might not want to come back for further such meetings.

Therefore, avoid anything overly ambitious for the first meeting.

There is another side of that coin, though.

Do not do nothing at the first meeting.

If the first meeting only consists of handshakes and hellos, it will leave the impression that nothing important will be done by the I.T. Steering Committee, and the members will view it as unworthy of their time.

It is the Goldilocks phenomena.

The porridge should not be too hot, not too cold, but just right.

Pick a topic that has some meat, so that the members will get a chance to exercise their wings, but not so blazingly complicated or tremendous that it becomes a battle royale.

    ONGOING CARE AND FEEDING

Running an I.T. Steering Committee is a commitment.

If you start one, be ready to keep it going.

Otherwise, you’ll look incompetent and unable to get things done.

Some CIO’s take on the duties entirely by themselves.

This is likely a mistake.

There is a lot to be done, including for example taking minutes of the meetings, publishing the minutes, doing follow-up with the members and their staffs, preparing briefing materials, and so on.

A CIO that devotes their attention to all of this is likely to be missing doing other tasks for the I.T. group, and though the I.T. Steering Committee is pretty important, you cannot do it to the disservice of forsaking the other areas of I.T.

Generally, a CIO will involve some other trusted member of the I.T. group to help with the I.T. Steering Committee.

Though some might turn to their secretary, and though such a person might be highly valued, it is usually better to use someone versed in I.T. per se, such as a top notch Business Analyst in your I.T. group.

Of course, do not pick some I.T. member of your group that is a heads-down techie, since this is an effort that requires the kind of business diplomacy not usually seen in the typical techie.

You should also consider establishing a regular schedule for the meetings.

At first, if there are lots of important items to be covered, and if time is an important factor, you might have the meetings say monthly.

This is a lot of burden though, both on the members (busy topmost executives) and you, so only go monthly if the circumstances warrant doing so.

You normally would then drop down to bimonthly, and then quarterly.

If you start-up on say a quarterly basis, the problem is that it takes so long for the next meeting to arrive that there is no momentum and no sense of connectedness by the members.

A higher frequency at the start gets things underway, and then it can settle into the lesser frequency.

One firm was doing their I.T. Steering Committee only on an annual basis.

This is bound to be less effective since it is so rare to occur.

It would have to be an I.T. group where there was nothing especially happening, or where the outside effort by the CIO to confer with the members one-on-one was going so well that it did not warrant using up the time and attention by bringing the members together more frequently.

    SPECIAL MEETINGS

In addition to having a regular schedule, be prepared for the need for a special meeting.

One firm had been hit by a severe virus.

The CIO decided that it made sense to bring together the I.T. Steering Committee so that at one time, in one place, he could brief all of the topmost executives, and also share with them what he was planning to do about the virus.

There are likely going to be circumstances where a crisis or something unusual occurs that will make the potential for having an off-schedule I.T. Steering Committee meeting beneficial.

As always, only call for such a meeting if it makes sense, and if you are prepared for it.

When I had talked to the CIO in the case above of the virus hit, he was merely going to inform the members about the virus, but he had not prepared any kind of solution.

A wise CIO goes into such a meeting with solutions in-hand, otherwise, the members, all being strong egos and problem solvers that daily solve company problems, might take the matter into their own hands, and suddenly the CIO is on the defensive, trying to explain why some crazy plan they have devised won’t work.

Go into such a meeting with a solution in-hand.

But, be also ready to listen and adjust.

I say this because if the CIO walks into such a meeting and appears inflexible, and even though the members might silently go along, they probably will afterward take shots at the plan, doing so in the cover of darkness.

Plus, they will realize that coming to the meeting is like some kind of old Russian governmental committee trick, wherein all decisions have already been made, and they are merely the puppets expected to rubber stamp it.

Most topmost executives want to have their say, and you’ve got to allow for room in your solutions for that kind of latitude.

MORE THAN MEETS THE EYE

I mentioned earlier that there is a lot of work involved in a well-run I.T. Steering Committee.

Indeed, one aspect involves preparing for the meeting.

If you are going to be discussing say the I.T. budget, you’d better have a well prepared presentation about the I.T. budget.

And, you should be prepared to be potentially attacked about how the budget is being spent.

There are many CIO’s that walk into their I.T. Steering Committee asking to increase their budget.

Little do they realize that they might immediately get attacked that the budget they already have is not being used well.

Members are not going to pour more money into something that they think is not spending its money well to begin with.

I remember one I.T. Steering Committee where the members not only complained about how badly the I.T. budget seemed to be spent, but they even started to discuss taking money away from I.T., and the CMO even said that he would take the money that was spent toward marketing systems and start his own shadow I.T. group with the money (which he claimed would be better spent).

Preparation is key.

Meeting with members beforehand is key, especially if there is something particularly being brought up for one of the members.

There was a Data Warehouse that the COO wanted, but the CIO had not conferred beforehand with the COO, and the CIO assumed that whatever was proposed about the Data Warehouse would be quickly supported by the COO during the I.T. Steering Committee meeting.

When the CIO revealed the price tag, which had not been shown to the COO beforehand, the COO spoke up and said he could not support such a cost.

As I say, meeting with members beforehand is a crucial part of preparations.

Likewise, after the meeting, the odds are that you’ll need to follow-up with the members.

If someone feels they got blindsided during the meeting, you’d better get over to see them right away, and figure out how that happened, and find a way to placate the matter.

The follow-up will often include making contact with subordinates of the members.

Some CIO’s go to the subordinates before having gotten the go ahead from the topmost executive, but this can be considered an intrusion onto someone else’s turf, plus possibly lead to confusion as to what is going on.

During an I.T. Steering Committee meeting, it is handy to indicate that follow-up is needed, and get an indication from the members as to whom they would like the follow-up to occur.

This opens the door to doing so, allows the designated subordinate to freely communicate with you and do so without concern that their boss will crush them for doing so, and serves as an indication that the CIO is thoughtful and does follow-up to what they say they will do.

By the way, it is best to have an agenda for the I.T. Steering Committee meetings, and run the meetings with proper facilitation.

Some CIO’s take on the facilitation role themselves.

If the CIO has that kind of acumen, then it is probably OK to do so, but it also means that the CIO is no longer readily able to function as a fellow member of the tribunal.

Usually, it is better for the CIO to use someone as the facilitator, and remain therefore able to act in other capacities, and it is also easier too that if the facilitation is failing that the CIO can do something about it (note: if the CIO is the facilitator, and if the facilitation is poorly done, it can be an awkward situation since no one wants to tell the CIO that they are doing a rotten job of it!).

I remember one I.T. Steering Committee where the CIO decided to have each member of the group became the facilitator, doing so on a round robin basis.

Usually a bad idea.

Topmost executives might be good at many things, but not usually being a facilitator.

Though I get the notion that it is perhaps a means to have them have a stake in the meetings and get involved, it is probably not the ideal way to achieve that end.

You can always have them give a presentation or do something during the meeting that creates that same kind of commitment, but avoids them having to act as a facilitator, which is a special skill.

Speaking of which, asking some lowly member of the I.T. group to be the facilitator might also be difficult, since they might be intimated by the members of the I.T. Steering Committee.

Keeping in mind that they are the topmost executives, you need a facilitator that has the style and seniority to be able to sufficiently and adroitly handle such a group.

You also need to establish rules about how the group will be run.

There is the vaunted “Roberts Rules of Order” and it can be a guide.

Do not though decide to make the I.T. Steering Committee meetings into a congress-like affair of looking up arcane rules of order, and trying to impose some lengthy laborious process onto the meetings.

Will there be voting on actions?

If so, will the vote be done anonymously or explicitly?

What carries the vote in terms of a majority rules or some other basis?

These aspects need to be figured out beforehand, and also shared with the members so they know what to expect, but shared in a fashion that they appear to be logical and helpful, and not appear to be drudgery and mired in stuffiness.

    MORE THE MERRRIER, SOMETIMES

Should there be one I.T. Steering Committee, or more than one?

I get asked this question all the time.

Generally, there should be one I.T. Steering Committee that is the topmost, consisting of the topmost executives at the topmost position of the company.

That being said, suppose you have a major business unit for one of your subsidiaries.

Can it also have an I.T. Steering Committee?

Sure, but I would normally say that it should be considered subordinated to the mighty one, the one that is at the topmost of the firm.

Likewise, suppose that you are starting a major I.T. project that will introduce a new ERP system across the whole company.

Rather than the I.T. Steering Committee getting mired in that particular project, though it is an 800 pound gorilla of I.T. projects, I would suggest that you form an I.T. Project Committee that focuses on that particular project.

It too would then ultimately report to the grand I.T. Steering Committee.

In short, I am saying that there can be multiple I.T. related committees that have a steering-like purpose, but you should have a topmost one to which all others ultimately report.

If you don’t do so, and if you allow lots of so-called “I.T. Steering Committees” then it will be quite confusing throughout the organization and no one will likely care or respect any of them.

To distinguish them, you might call them sub-committees or use some other naming that fits to your firm.

For example, one company called their topmost committees as “Committee” while the subordinated ones were called a “Team” as a naming convention.

They were in the midst of focusing on improving quality throughout the firm, so they for example started a high-level group called the “Strategic Quality Committee” and then had setup subordinated groups for quality initiatives in specific areas, such as the “Finance Quality Team” and the “Operations Quality Team” (this was within their accepted norms of organizational groups and groupings).

The downside of having lots of such committees and subcommittees can be that it eventually becomes an army of groups running around the company, and no one knows what one is doing versus another one, leading to mass confusion and personnel dreading the notion of yet another committee coming at them.

Keep this in mind of you spawn a lot of subcommittees from your main I.T. Steering Committee.

    ONE SHOE DOES NOT FIT ALL SIZES

An I.T. Steering Committee can be the savior for CIO’s that otherwise will get sliced and diced by the executive team, doing so by shredding the CIO behind-the-scenes.

By getting the executive team together, it allows for the dynamics among the executives to play out, and can take undue attention away from the CIO, and shift things toward the nature of the I.T. budget, I.T. resources, I.T. priorities, and lead to doing so in such a manner that the topmost executives understand how things came to be.

Notice that I am not saying that the executives will necessarily be happy about the outcomes, in the sense that if the CMO gets his project pushed down in priority by the I.T. Steering Committee, he or she is not going to be a happy camper simply because it was a group decision.

But, at least the CMO cannot as readily attack solely the CIO, which, without an I.T. Steering Committee, could easily be the case, since the CIO is often perceived as the one that decides who gets what from the I.T. resources bucket.

And, the collective wisdom of the topmost executives must have been that the CMO’s project was not as important, not as valued, not as beneficial, as some other efforts, and so in that sense the organization presumably is better off, because if the CMO project had gone forward, it would have perhaps denied or delayed other presumably more important and more valued efforts.

An I.T. Steering Committee can be an important way for the organization as a whole to understand how it is using its limited and precious I.T. resources, and hopefully more optimally allocate those resources.

It can also be a means to spur innovation.

In one I.T. Steering Committee, at a healthcare firm, the Chief Medical Officer identified some nifty new technology that she had been reviewing, and the other executives suddenly realized the value that it could provide for the products and services of the firm.

It is unlikely that the Chief Medical Officer would have brought up the topic to the executives in any other forum, and also would not have had the opportunity to share it with the entire group, and also that the group was able to quickly brainstorm, since they were there assembled as a group.

When it works, the I.T. Steering Committee is a wonderful mechanism.

Research studies show that by-and-large, firms that have a working I.T. Steering Committee (one that is properly run), tend to have greater satisfaction with their I.T. and tend to put it to better use.

If you firm is the right kind of firm to effectively make use of such a mechanism, and if the CIO and the CEO see eye-to-eye about the value, it is something you ought to get underway.

Some circumstances do not warrant the I.T. Steering Committee, and can potentially make things even worse, and so as they say, one shoe does not fit all sizes.

Make sure you have the right shoe, and the right size.

Enough said.