Grabbing a Headline or Two
Cynical comments about CIOs on a recent blog post caught my attention. Not only are CIOs the individuals who get the dirty jobs of having to reduce staff, cut dollars and hold everything together, now they have to be a punching bag, too.
I, honestly, don't understand where these people who write these things come from. They sound all important, as though they have lived in the CIO's shoes, or if they have been a director in an IT department, they think they know how to run the place.
They're quick to point out that they can right the ship that's been listing since the CIO took office, yet they're in the backseat screaming as the car teeters on the precipice. They're not, I repeat, not in the driver's seat. And, unless this person has been a CIO, he doesn't have a right, nor has he earned it, to chastise their work.
I laughed when I read this blog, toward the end, where the writer waxes on about: "How is the value of a CIO calculated today? Cost savings, return on investment, or some other fiscal metric. This is an easy way to measure success, but it's not the metric that matters most," he writes. But, my question is, who has asked the CIO to do this? The hospital/health system CEO? The board of directors? Not one CIO I know does work on their own in a silo. The silo came from the vendor, and all the CIOs that I know work at the pleasure of the hospital president or CEO (and board). When I started writing about health IT back in the 1990s, I heard stories of CIOs who were at odds with their hospital executive leaders because an implementation didn't go well or the system didn't meet the organization's needs or was implemented by IT when the organization didn't want the technology. The fallacy with this is why would a CIO and his staff implement technology that no one wanted? It's career suicide, I believe.
The blogger continues that metrics for him are defined by the CIO reducing his e-mail traffic by 80 percent (sounds like he might be simmering against a former CIO who didn't do what he wanted!) and "deploy a mash-up tool that enables new analytic and customer delivery solutions" (though, again, he's driving his own agenda, here. The organization may not have asked for that tool yet, because most non-IT leaders and health system boards of directors will think this is a waste of the hospital's money and will not ask the CIO or IT department to implement such technology). The blogger also suggests that the CIO "deploy a prediction market that encourages the enterprise to look forward." (Okay, I'll give the blogger this one. It might be a good idea, but in practicality, who would use it? One person in the organization? Maybe the CFO?)
I also don't understand why people who blog love to lump everyone together. Yes, there may be CIOs who have more fiscal responsibility, but isn't the CFO the individual who handles the finances? The CIO probably manages two percent, okay maybe five percent of the purse strings. Since when is the person in charge of technology also in total control of the finances?
Finally, he writes, "don't call yourself the chief information officer anymore. You are only the ‘chief' because you have (inappropriately) been given fiscal responsibilities. Being the gatekeeper should not be what makes you important." Again, two, maybe five percent of fiscal responsibility is only a short order compared to other areas.
"If you want to stay relevant, focus on business operations and the positive outcomes you can deliver with technical solutions." Amen to that, but all of the CIOs who I have spoken with over these past 10-plus years do this each day. They focus on the business operations (sometimes muddled by hospital/health system politics) and positive outcomes (until the wants and needs of the organization change - which can be monthly or annually).
"Your job is not about ‘information.' It's about relationships and connecting the silo functions of your business. (I would agree with the blogger's comments here, but this is really old news. We all know that the CIO's roles and organizational responsibilities are changing. How many CIOs have taken it upon themselves -- or been promoted -- to now have responsibility for other operations in the organization that are outside of IT?) Four CIOs I know immediately came to mind. They wouldn't be getting these promotions and additional job responsibilities if they did shoddy work; they'd instead be shown the door. (I've recently read some bloggers who argue that the CIOs have been given more responsibility outside of IT because their organizations want them out of IT altogether. To which I reply, "Give me a break!")
Finally, please don't preach unless you've lived the CIO life. I haven't lived the CIO life, nor will I ever purport to be a CIO. I worked for a small software vendor earlier in my career as a technical writer, so that's the closest I've come to IT. I may not have worked in an IT department, but I sure know how to keep my fingers still until I have something useful to blog or write about. I would never try and put myself above the dedicated men and women who work and lead IT initiatives at hospitals and health systems, just to steal a headline or two.