I saw this post on Ade McCormack's blog today - "If IT does not alter an outcome, its role is meaningless" which was, in turn, based on a post by Paul Wallis. The two of them made a number of interesting comments:
IT's sole reason for being is to enable that flow of data.(Paul)While I don't disagree with their basic premise - that IT must make things different if it is to matter - I do disagree that the only way IT can do this is by moving data around effectively. This perpetuates the myth that systems cannot decide or act but must wait passively for a person to do something. Automating operational decisions is both practical and effective. It means that systems don't have to wait and can act, changing an actual outcome all by themselves. It means they can do this while conforming to the rules and policies of the organization that owns them and while taking advantage of what can be deduced from the data collected over time. The idea that a system is merely a conduit to help others act is,I fear, part of the problem not part of the solution.
If IT does not exist within a sequential process which alters an outcome, its role is meaningless(Paul)
The IT function is often too focused on the delivery of a system as opposed to the delivery of better circulation within the business (Ade)
Systems must alter outcomes to be relevant but to do so they must automate the decisions that enable action.
Just as an FYI I am reviewing Ade's new book and will post a review once I have had a chance to read it.
Subscribe to this blog by RSS
Hi James,
Thanks for the kind words about the concepts behind the article I wrote. I must say that I do agree with your views about automation, and I feel that that comes right back to the article I originally wrote here, and a little background may help here.
I worked for many years within the Oil and Gas industry working with control and closed-loop optimisation systems. These systems would take all of the decisions needed to control manufacturing plants, day-in and day-out, even being linked to to commodity markets to make the most cost effective multi-million dollar decisions - the mother of all automation!
This is echoed inthe article where I say "Within a manufacturing environment, the Management Information Systems and Control Systems form the link in the chain to create a better product or more profit - a conduit to effect change."
So, yes ... it is not just people which act on data, but the systems themselves. However, the automation systems are only part of a bigger business picture. Looking at these systems in isolation is where we can lose competitive business advantage. See the automation systems as a link in the business chain which are fed by, and in turn feed, other business processes and we keep our IT solutions aligned with business need.
Hi James,
Funnily enough last week I posted a comment on my blog relating to your guest post on Enterprise Decision Management, which was released for posting late this week. This captures my views on this subject.
My sense is that you are ahead of the game, and the issues you address will need to be addressed sooner rather than later.
I think the ratio of people to software in terms of business decision making is indeed changing in the direction that supports your view.
In my view the future is only certain for those that can do business at least cost, whilst out innovating competitors, all within the context of a properly governed organisation.
Automated decision making has a critical role to play in this.