The IT Skeptic posted a new blog entry that has a really good point; don’t run IT as a business (http://www.itskeptic.org/dont-run-it-business-run-it-part-business).  I was reading the post and I definitely can identify with stating we should run IT as a business (in fact, I still say that often, but keep reading as to why).  On the other hand, I agree with the point of view that IT needs to be part of the business.  After all, I haven’t heard of any company that has separate HR and payroll departments just for IT.

So why do I say to run IT as a business?  Because in certain environments (such as health-care, for example), in my most humble and personal opinion, it’s easy for “the business” to see IT as a financial black-hole; a department that keeps sucking up loads of cash with no justification of value.  In that certain scenario, IT should be called RD; the Rodney Dangerfield department – where it “gets no respect.”  So how can IT show its value and move into a position of being a strategic asset?  Simple – run IT as a business.  Build a Service Catalogue, market those services, build a client/customer relationship with the business, and start building a financial mindset into the culture of management.  Ultimately, all profits and cost savings that come from IT will be translated to the business.

Now, here’s where I say “yet, don’t run IT as a business;” when it comes to departmental interactions and creating the vision as to what IT provides.  I work for a children’s hospital, but when I answer the question “What is it you do,” my response is “I provide high quality health-care to all children, nationally and internationally, regardless of their financial ability to pay.”  Why do I give this answer?  First, when my new director started his job he made me memorize it.  Secondly, and most importantly, it’s a statement meant to give a mindset that I’m part of a bigger organization and am not just working as part of an IT department.

In his blog, the IT Skeptic does the smart thing and takes “the middle ground” by saying larger and traditional organisations could benefit from having IT as a business, while smaller companies may not.  While I agree that bigger corporations could definitely benefit from IT acting as an independent business, I also don’t discount some benefits for smaller ones.  And of course, not running IT as a business may be the answer for bigger companies as well.  Ultimately, I’m going to cop-out of any hard-line opinion and really say that how you run IT will really depend on how business leaders want to interact with it.  For some CEO’s, keeping IT as a cost centre fits their mindset on how to treat IT.  Other executives may be leading innovation and merging IT with the business anyway, which would ultimately end any dispute over this matter.

So I say it’s really a sliding scale, and something the IT and business leaders will have to figure out.  At the end of the day, it’s really about enabling the business to be as efficiently productive as possible.

* Note: I’m transitioning my dictionary from American to U.K. to improve my market value (http://www.itilandme.com/?p=257).  Please pardon any inconsistencies.

avatar

Started working in IT in 1999 as a support desk analyst as a way to help pay for food during college. Studied Electrical Engineering for two years before realizing biochemistry was more fun than differential equations, and so ultimately graduated with a Biology degree in 2006. Having (reluctantly) failed at getting accepted into dental school, embraced working in IT and has gone broke becoming an ITIL Expert. Likes to jog, sing camp songs, quote Mel Brooks movie lines and make dumb jokes and loves working for an Israeli tech company where December 25th is a regular work day.