andrew mcafee vs. tom davenport enterprise 2 · andrew mcafee vs. tom davenport enterprise 2.0...

Number 2, 2008

Green Powerat Southern Company

Southern Company CIO Becky Blalock helps drive the utility’s green IT initiative

ANDREW McAFEE VS. TOM DAVENPORT

Enterprise 2.0 rematch

McCORMACK AND HOLLIS

on IT’s futureCHAMPY AND

FRIGANDon weathering a

downturn JOHN SEELY

BROWNon the social

life of information

EMC ON 2008 Nmbr2_final.indd 1 5/20/08 9:33:29 PM

2 ON Number 2, 2008

EditorGIL PRESS

Managing EditorsCHRISTINE KANEANDREA E. STILL

Design DirectorRONN CAMPISI

Contributing WritersJIM CHAMPYTIM DEVANEYCARL FRAPPAOLOSTEVE FRIGANDJEAN GOGOLINSARAH JENSENNANCY LANGMEYERMICHAEL McCREARYJASON M. RUBINTOM STEINDAVID VELLANTE

Editorial content for ON is managed by:Libretto, Inc.560 Harrison Avenue Suite 501Boston, MA 02118617.451.5113www.libretto-inc.com

Copyright © 2008 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, or by any means, without prior permission from EMC Corporation. EMC and EMC2 are registered trademarks of EMC Corporation. All other trademarks mentioned in this publication are the property of their respective owners.

TO SUBSCRIBE: www.EMC.com/on

2 Printed on recycled paper consisting of

10% post-consumer waste.

A (very short) history of Enterprise 2.0. At the height of its power in the late 1980s, Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) had more than 120,000 employees worldwide. They were connected by Easynet, the largest private network in the world at the time, and by VAX Notes, arguably the world’s first Enterprise 2.0 tool.

In the more than 10,000

communities of VAX Notes,

DEC employees collaborated

and shared information on

everything from product

development to marketing

programs to personal hobbies.

As one VAX Notes user said,

“No longer should a network

be considered as the collection

of machines and the wires that

connect them, but rather as

the collective intelligence of

the people the network brings

together.” 1

This has been true since

the advent of the modern

corporation when, for the

first time, a vast number

of people were brought

together to work, in specific

functions and specialties, for

a common purpose. Andrew

Carnegie may have nailed

the most important success

factor for any corporation or

organization, then and now,

when he said: “The

only irreplaceable capital an

organization possesses is the

knowledge and ability of its

people. The productivity of

that capital depends on how

effectively people share their

competence with those who

can use it.” 2

The adoption and

adaptation of Web 2.0 tools

for business use, which has

resulted in a proliferation of

Enterprise 2.0 tools in recent

years, is a very exciting trend,

as I can attest from personal

use. These tools are easy to use

and allow for timely and rapid

collaboration among people

around the world and for easy

sharing of text, audio, and

video files. Most important,

they contribute to the

preservation of organizational

memory while also helping to

uncover hidden experts and

useful connections across a

globally dispersed corporation.

But the challenge still

remains what it has been

for the last century and a

half: How do you harness

the collective intelligence

unleashed by improved

Cover photograph by Stan Kaady

greetings

H4426

technology for the benefit of

the business?

DEC ranked 27 on the

Fortune 500 list in 1990 and

was the second-fastest-growing

corporation on the list from

1979 to 1989. It was sold to

Compaq for $4.5 billion in

1998. VAX Notes could not

have saved DEC, nor was it

the reason for its demise. But

it serves as a useful reminder

that while technology may

bring a sense of excitement

and “empowerment” to the

user, it may not change many

entrenched dimensions of

our organizational lives. It

certainly cannot, by itself,

guarantee business success.

gil [email protected]

1 Quoted in J. Pearson (ed.), Digital at Work, 1992, p. 157.

2 Quoted in T. Stewart, Intellectual Capital, 1997, p. 128.

Better technology cannot, byitself, guarantee business success.


Number 2, 2008 ON 3

14REMATCH: Revisiting the Enterprise 2.0 Debate One year after engaging in a spirited debate on Enterprise 2.0, Andrew McAfee (who famously coined the term) and Thomas Davenport (the foremost authority on knowledge management), revisit the discussion and share how their thinking has since evolved.

04 NOT SEEING THE FOREST FOR THE TREESSurvey results reveal high awareness of Enterprise 2.0 technologies but no consensus on definition.

06 EXPECT THE UNEXPECTEDWhen the law firm Blank Rome LLP implemented a virtualization strategy, it discovered benefits beyond those promised.

08 ASSET OR LIABILITY? In accumulating vast stores of information, companies are not only creating new value but new vulnerabilities. Using the metaphor of a balance sheet, the authors suggest an approach to mitigating that information risk.

12 SMART ENERGY MANAGEMENT Southern Company, an Atlanta-based utility, is reducing power consumption by implementing green IT initiatives.

18 IT TODAY AND IN THE FUTUREEMC’s Chuck Hollis and Financial Times columnist Ade McCormack recently discussed their favorite topic (IT) by phone and let ON listen in.

22 DIFFICULT TIMESDuring a downturn, it’s important to acknowledge the challenges employees are facing and seize the chance to become a more capable organization.

24 CRUNCH TIMEJim Champy offers guidance on how to manage IT during tough times so you’re positioned to grow when a rebound comes.

26 INFORATI FILESJohn Seely Brown, former chief scientist at Xerox PARC, talks about the social life of information.

inside


4 ON Number 2, 2008

first

BY CARL FRAPPAOLO Since the term Enterprise 2.0 was coined

in 2006, it has achieved significant attention. Nearly half

(44%) of surveyed organizations indicated that Enterprise 2.0

is imperative or significant to the success of their business.

Perhaps more importantly, only 29% felt it had minimal or no

impact on business success. It follows to reason that Enterprise

2.0 likely has the attention of senior management and is being

acted upon strategically in many organizations.

But that is not the case. Although Enterprise 2.0 is generally

considered strategically important, most organizations (74%)

claim to have, at best, only a vague familiarity with it. (41%

stated there was no clear understanding.)

Viewed together, these two data points appear illogical.

What is the cause of this disconnect?

Unlike the case with most emerging technologies,

Enterprise 2.0 technologies are predominately well-

understood. Most survey respondents claimed to have high

awareness concerning individual Enterprise 2.0 technologies.

At the same time, however, there is little consensus in the

market on the definition of Enterprise 2.0. When we asked

survey respondents to select the definition that most closely

matched their own from a list of popular versions, no single

answer won a clear majority. Herein may lie the answer to the

puzzle.

While there is an appreciation of how Enterprise 2.0 is

critical to success, there is little understanding or agreement

on how it can be leveraged strategically across the enterprise.

Most organizations are not addressing Enterprise 2.0 in

a deliberate manner (which leads to the chasm between

perceived critical need and the level of understanding).

This explanation is supported by the nearly half (46%)

of the surveyed organizations that predominately deploy

Enterprise 2.0 technologies in an ad hoc manner. Only 26% of

the companies take a mostly or exclusively strategic approach

to Enterprise 2.0. Much of the current Enterprise 2.0 activity is

characterized as rogue usage, non-strategic in nature.

One might argue that this is not a bad situation; Enterprise

2.0 can thrive even if viewed only at a tactical level with no

clear overall strategy. But there is potential risk in allowing

“blind tactical adoption” to continue. Centralized, strategic

deployments of Enterprise 2.0, as opposed to ad hoc insular

applications, will likely result in a more expedient, efficient

and maximized realization of enterprise-wide benefit. p

Carl Frappaolo is vice president of marketing intelligence at AIIM

International. This article and the accompanying charts are based on an

AIIM survey of 441 individuals, conducted in January 2008.

1 How critical is Enterprise 2.0 to your organization’s overall business goals and success?

2 How well is Enterprise 2.0 understood in your organization?

pppppppppp

pppppppppp

pppppppppp

pppppppppp

pppppppppp

pppppppppp

pppppppppp

pppppppppp

pppppppppp

pppppppppp

10%Imperative

41%No clear

understanding

27%Average

18%Minimal

11%Not at all

33%Vaguely familiar

14%Not sure how

this differs from

Web 2.0

13%Well aware and

are expressly

addressing it

Enterprise 2.0: Not Seeing the Forest for the Trees

34%Significant


Number 2, 2008 ON 5

3 Awareness levels regarding Enterprise 2.0 and related technologies

4 Which of the following definitions of Enterprise 2.0 most closely aligns with your definition?

5 Is implementation of Enterprise 2.0 in your organization driven more by ad hoc usage or a strategy?

E-mail

Search

Instant messaging

SMS/text messaging

Blogs

Bulletin boards/discussion forums

Web/tele/videoconferencing

Chat rooms

Portals

Wikis

Web content management

Workflow/BPM

Taxonomy

RSS

Podcasting

Web services

Social networking

Social bookmarking

Social voting/ranking

Mashups

Social network analysis

Collaborative filtering

0% 25% 50% 75% 100%

pFully understand pMostly understand pSomewhat familiar pVaguely familiar pNo idea

29%The applica-

tion of

Web 2.0

technolo-

gies

in the

enterprise

13%The next

generation

of

enterprise

content

manage-

ment

12%Technology

that enables

people

to

collaborate

and/or

form online

communi-

ties

12%The use of

emergent

social

software

platforms

within

companies

or between

companies

and their

partners or

customers

9%The next

generation

of collabora-

tion

8%The next

generation

of

knowledge

manage -

ment

7%A user-

centric

approach

to working

with

enterprise-

focused

content

systems

7%Exposing

the

collective

wisdom of

a net-

worked

workforce,

partner,

and

customer

base

5%A new

set

of technolo-

gies,

models, and

methods

used to

develop

and

deliver

business

software

4%The ability

to snap

together

software

services

to enable

business

agility

2%The

democra-

tization of

information

and

content-

centric

systems

1%Leveraging

metatags

to tap into

collective

wisdom

11% 35% 28% 21% 5%

©

Exclusively

ad hoc

usage

©

Mostly

ad hoc

usage

©

A balanced

approach

©

Mostly

strategy

©

Exclusively

strategy

WHAT THE DATA REVEALS1 Enterprise 2.0 is significant to the success of many organizations …

2 But Enterprise 2.0 is not well understood …

3 There is fair awareness of specific Enterprise 2.0 technologies …

4 But no consensus on the definition of Enterprise 2.0 …

5 Leading to ad hoc, rather than strategic, deployment of Enterprise 2.0.


6 ON Number 2, 2008

With virtualization,

†“ONCE WE STARTED GETTING THE VIRTUAL SERVERS RUNNING, WE QUICKLY BEGAN TO REALIZE ADDITIONAL BENEFITS BEYOND THE

SPACE AND ENERGY SAVINGS. THEY’VE MADE AN ENORMOUS DIFFERENCE TO OUR OPERATIONS.” LARRY LISS, CTO, BLANK ROME LLP ©

PHOTOGRAPH BY RYAN DONNELL


Number 2, 2008 ON 7

Any worthwhile product brochure will list the benefits of the product being described. In the back of many buyers’ minds, however, is the nagging question, “What aren’t they telling me? What unexpected surprises await once I get the product into my environment?” And while it’s true that new technologies can sometimes present troubling issues not addressed in the sales collateral, occasionally an organization gets that most wonderful of surprises: the unexpected benefit.

By Jason M. Rubin

expect theunexpected

Virtualization is one

such young technology that

is building a track record

for delivering benefits

beyond those promised. For

example, the basic premise of

virtualization—being able to

deploy as many as 20 or more

virtual servers on a single

physical server—instantly

suggests the clear advantages

you’ve undoubtedly already

read about. And make no

mistake, virtualization does

deliver what it promises. But

as Larry Liss, chief technology

officer at Blank Rome LLP,

learned to his delight, that

was just the beginning.

CONSOLIDATION

AT THE CORE

“Going back several years,”

he says, “we were starting to

look at ways of consolidating

servers because we were

quickly running out of

physical space in our data

center. That was our chief

concern, along with the

obvious energy costs that

were required to run all this

equipment.”

To get an idea of

what comprises “all this

equipment,” consider the

scope of Blank Rome’s

business. With a staff of more

than 1,200 personnel in eight

U.S. locations, as well as an

office in Hong Kong, Blank

Rome is an American Lawyer

“Am Law 100” law firm that

is still growing rapidly even

after 60 years. The company’s

main data center in

Philadelphia once had more

than 150 physical servers

in operation, with about 25

more located in other offices.

Today, thanks to a well-

planned virtualization

initiative currently in its final

stages, Blank Rome is looking

at consolidating 150 physical

servers down to 20. The end

result is a sharp reduction in

equipment and energy costs.

REALIZING THE

BENEFITS BEYOND

Those were the expected

benefits. What excited Liss

most were the unexpected

benefits.

“Once we started getting

the virtual servers running,

we quickly began to realize

additional benefits beyond

the space and energy

savings,” he says. “High

availability and the ability to

provision new applications

faster are two key things that

came out of this initiative

that we didn’t focus on

originally. But they’ve made

an enormous difference to

our operations.”

Before, with a data

center overloaded with

physical servers, Blank Rome

experienced occasional

outages caused by hardware

failure. With a virtual

environment, however, if

there is trouble on one server,

traffic automatically shifts

to another server. “This

capability alone has paid

off for us a number of times

already,” says Liss.

Additionally, fast

provisioning means Liss’s

group can bring a new

application online quickly,

without having to buy and

install a new server. In fact,

it can be done in a matter of

hours or days rather than

weeks. “This benefit became

very clear to me when we

needed to provision an entire

set of applications and servers

for a new Hong Kong office,”

Liss reports. “We were able

to set it up locally on a single

rack, test it, and then ship it

to Hong Kong—confident

that it was going to work.

Now we’re doing the same

thing in New York and D.C.,

where we have smaller data

centers and will have smaller

storage area networks in each

location.”

DRIVING GROWTH

Folks in the Philadelphia

data center can monitor the

Hong Kong servers from

their homes or offices and

handle any issues that come

up remotely. And because

provisioning is so much

faster, planning windows can

be shorter to accommodate

rapid growth.

“The ability to absorb

growth is essential to our or-

ganization,” says Liss. “I don’t

want to go to the boss and say

we can’t accommodate some

new undertaking. We want

to be in a position to not only

handle the firm’s growth, but

also to help drive it. With

virtualization, we can do

that.”

So while saving space

and costs are important

advantages of virtualization,

it’s the unexpected benefits

that may end up being

more valuable to the

business. Soon, information

technology executives will

not only come to expect the

unexpected benefits, but

demand them as well. p


8 ON Number 2, 2008

It’s a new day in the courtroom:

Plaintiff attorneys are finding

that e-discovery of unstructured

information—e-mail in particular—

represents a new source of litigation

leverage. In a number of lawsuits,

electronic evidence has been a

key factor in swinging a case. In

others, e-discovery missteps have

resulted in fines and sanctions. As a

consequence, e-mail archiving and

document and records management

capabilities no longer are solely

focused on narrow IT interests—

such as keeping storage costs low—

but are much more aligned with

the legal and executive functions of

organizations.

INFORMATION AS A LIABILITY

Three main drivers are contributing

to the increased importance of

INFORMATION:

Over the next five years, CIOs must strike a delicate balance between implementing

technologies and practices that limit information risk while providing services

that increase business productivity. Sound straightforward? Think again.

By David Vellante and Michael McCreary

ORASSETLIABILITY?

ILLUSTRATION BY HARRY CAMPBELL


Number 2, 2008 ON 9


10 ON Number 2, 2008

information liability management:

An explosion in unstructured content

Organizations’ increased agility and

globalization

Rapid evolution of information risk

and value

For several years, unstructured content

has grown substantially faster than

structured information has. According

to market research firm International

Data Corporation, more than 80% of all

the information in organizations today

is unstructured. Because they contain

highly structured data and metadata,

corporate systems such as ERP, financials,

CRM, and supply chain can be credibly

used to recreate a sequence of events:

who placed an order, for what, when, for

how much, and on what terms. However,

unstructured information such as e-mails,

documents, spreadsheets, voicemail, and

images are problematic: They present

a morass of difficulty when trying to

determine the relevancy of information

and replicate a decision flow in a manner

that is provable with any degree of

certainty. This represents a huge liability

for organizations as information volumes

grow exponentially (see Figure 1).

A desire to form global networks in

which information is a fundamental

currency underscores the very nature of

electronic information management as

countervailing forces tug at information—

both as a liability and an asset. Risk—the

exposure to financial loss directly tied

to information—spans the spectrum of

litigation, security, privacy, and regulatory

p

p

p

ORASSETLIABILITY?concerns. Reward—

the economic value

of information

measured in revenue

or productivity

gains—results from

the ability to easily

search, find, aggregate,

analyze, and share

information.

Consequently, CIOs

face a conundrum:

As organizations

move to mitigate

information risk, they

necessarily introduce

technologies and processes that constrain

the value of information by limiting

flexibility and context. Moreover, as

systems and organizations become more

diffuse, capturing all information in a

central repository becomes impractical if

not impossible, leaving many executives

asking the question: “Are we gaining or

losing ground on this problem?”

INFORMATION AS AN ASSET

Today’s organizations create an almost

unimaginable amount of electronic

information, both structured and

unstructured. Every project, idea, plan,

and communication is now created

electronically, resulting in massive stores

of documents and messages spread

throughout the organization on desktops,

file shares, collaboration tools, e-mail

systems, websites, portals, and wikis.

This glut in electronic information is

both a blessing and a curse as IT struggles

to store and secure it, the business

struggles to find and share it, and the

general counsel prefers that it all just go

away.

BUT WHERE SHOULD

ORGANIZATIONS START?

In the past, process efficiencies were

largely gained by re-engineering

inefficient approaches and taking

advantage of automation. A byproduct of

this method was a vast amount of well-

structured electronic information

to support decision making, much

of which is now being stored in data

warehouses.

To harness latent value within

unstructured information, organizations

need to build robust taxonomic views

of their business, as they have with

structured data. One place to find such

a view is within the dimensional tables

of data warehouses. This data may be

used as a baseline for establishing the

taxonomic views necessary to begin to

consistently understand an organization’s

unstructured data (see Figure 2).

Specifically, information within data

warehouses—such as accounting periods,

geographies, and hierarchies—can be

leveraged to weigh the outputs of and

organize unstructured content.

Ultimately, the goal is to establish a

single lens by which an organization sees

itself and its business. Such a view, applied

to both structured and unstructured

data, will go a long way toward helping

better manage escalating unstructured

information risk and mining incremental

value from data assets.

STRUCTURED BUSINESS PROCESSES

Transactions Text and Metadata

Common view of how the

organization sees itself and its business

ECM

DIMENSIONAL

DATAWAREHOUSE

DATAWAREHOUSE

Figure 2 Bridging the Structured/Unstructured Information Gap

TAXONOMIC

FINANCEAPPS

MFG.APPS

R&DAPPS

HRAPPS

PCSFILE

SHARES

COL-LABORA-

TIONE-MAIL

EXPOSURE

E-mails, spreadsheets,

files, documents (unstructured information)

CRM, ERP, financial (structured information)

Figure 1 Information Growth

NUMBER OF INFORMATIONAL

RECORDS/FILES

YEAR

’00 ’05 ’10 ’15

UNSTRUCTURED BUSINESS PROCESSES

SOURCE: WIKIBON.ORG

SOURCE: WIKIBON.ORG


Number 2, 2008 ON 11

BALANCING INFORMATION

ASSETS AND LIABILITIES

Effectively managing information

liabilities scattered across the enterprise

and harnessing information for business

intelligence without limiting agility

will require a true information lifecycle

management (ILM) perspective. This

includes views of what constitutes

an organizational record (i.e., an

information asset you want to keep) and

the implementation of a new set of tools

supporting these records.

In the past, comprehensive enterprise

ILM efforts have failed. The truth is, no

large organization has solved this problem,

and most records management functions

and legal departments have little idea how

to tackle it. One hurdle is the mindset that

this is a “change management” problem.

We often hear: “If users would just take

the time to put files in the right folder, add

the right metadata, retain everything Legal

says needs to be held, and not leave data on

their laptops, the problem would go away.”

While this assumption may be partially

true, it is completely unrealistic. Today’s

employee is highly mobile and works daily

with hundreds of messages, files, database

records, and websites, all accessed through

various computers and mobile devices.

In order to manage and secure these

decentralized volumes of data, new tools

must do a defensible job of automatically

understanding document content

and context in order to make lifecycle

decisions. Moreover, it is critical that

documents are managed at the point of

creation and that encryption is built in.

Auto classification is not a solved

problem, but algorithms such as

Probabilistic Latent Semantic Indexing

(PLSI) and Support Vector Machines (SVM)

produce accurate results comparable to

those generated by humans. The goal is

legal defensibility, not perfection.

AN INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

MATURITY MODEL

Such a vision will require IT organizations

to accommodate the policy edicts of many

parts of an organization. This means

balancing maturing processes with

other document and ILM activities, and

integrating siloed security, compliance,

retention, and other practices. Developing

cross-organizational standards and

eliminating redundancy will dramatically

accelerate efforts to exploit new systems.

We are just beginning to understand

this vision in terms of business

requirements, key metrics, technologies,

and challenges. Nonetheless, mid- and

long-term plans must begin to incorporate

the notion that information value can

be viewed and measured using a balance

sheet metaphor, where information assets

and liabilities, while always evolving,

can be observed as snapshots in time. The

composition of that information balance

sheet can be measured, albeit somewhat

subjectively, and affected by specific

strategies and actions that, like a financial

balance sheet, can become an indicator of

health, viability, and opportunity.

The Wikibon Project proposes an

information management maturity

model (see Figure 3) that articulates how

organizations are evolving to meet these

challenges. The basic premise is that as

organizations become more aware of and

take action to mitigate risks posed by the

growth of unstructured information, they

will naturally begin to constrict the value

of the very information they are trying to

protect by placing restrictions on its use.

This will lead to organizational tension,

but ultimately will facilitate the resolution

of conflicts between risk and value by

bridging the information management

gaps between structured and unstructured

information.

As Figure 3 shows, each stage of this

model is presented in the context of risk

and value. Based on our research, which

includes case studies of large and mid-

sized organizations, most companies

are in Stage 2 of the maturity model—

where they are “plugging the holes” to

immediately reduce information risk—or

at Stage 1 of realizing that information,

especially e-mail, creates vulnerability.

ACTION ITEMS

Bridging the information management

challenges of both structured and

unstructured data is key to a successful IT

strategy. Organizationally, the IT function

must be prepared to serve many masters to

achieve this, including audit, legal, records

management, and business units.

Information asset and liability

management is not just about storing

and securing IMs, e-mails, voice, files, IP,

collaborative tools, and the like. It’s about

providing flexibility to the business and

understanding value, specifically what is

actually stored and how it can be exploited

in the context of how an organization

views itself. Auto-classification of

unstructured information and strategies

to deliberately evolve and apply structured

dimensions to unstructured content are

key components of this approach. CIOs

must begin to investigate technologies and

strategies to accommodate this level of

automation. p

DAVID VELLANTE is a co-founder of The

Wikibon Project (www.wikibon.org), a

community of practitioners dedicated to

improving the adoption of technology through

an open source sharing of free advisory

knowledge. He can be reached at

[email protected].

MICHAEL McCREARY is a Wikibon member

and formerly head of Pfizer’s legal IT group.

He recently joined Rational Retention, an

information management and records

retention software startup. He can be reached at

[email protected].

Figure 3 An Information Management Maturity Model

RISK

VALUE

SMOKING GUNRealization that e-mail is particularly vulnerable

PLAY THE HOLEFocus on e-mail and IM archiving, establish records management policies and repeatable processes

VIEW THE “WHOLE”Holistically view structured and unstructured data in the context of risk

“NIRVANA”ILM where risk and value are intrinsic to all applications and data, independent of structure

AUTO-CLASSIFYProactive risk mitigation reduction and value creation

S T A G E S O F E V O L U T I O N

server room q courtroom q board room

1 2 3 4 5

ORGANIZATIONAL TENSION

SOURCE: WIKIBON.ORG



BY JEAN GOGOLIN IT departments are power guzzlers.

Collectively, according to the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

U.S. data centers consumed 61 billion

kilowatt hours in 2006—enough to power

five million households. Assuming 2.5

people per household, that’s roughly the

population of Calcutta.

In order to provide the “five nines”

availability their customers require,

today’s data centers often consume as

much power as large industrial facilities—

so much, in fact, that most augment the

power they receive from the nation’s

aging electrical grid with extensive

backup systems. Over three or four years

of operation, energy costs for a large data

center can equal the initial capital outlay

for the IT equipment itself.

A FOCUS ON ENERGY EFFICIENCY

The incentive to reduce IT energy use is

strong. It’s particularly strong for utility

companies, since their IT departments

use large amounts of the very power the

companies themselves produce primarily

by burning coal. Fortunately, some utility

companies have found that reducing

their IT infrastructures’ energy needs also

improves their carbon footprints—in

effect, making them greener.

One of these is Atlanta’s Southern

Company, which serves 4.4 million

customers in the southeastern United

States through Alabama Power, Georgia

Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power.

Southern Company’s IT department,

headed by CIO Becky Blalock, began

focusing on energy efficiency in 1999

when it consolidated two data processing

centers into one. “We started going green

before most people were even talking

about it,” says Blalock, who has been with

the company for 30 years.

Southern Company’s data center

consolidation resulted in reduced square

footage, fewer pieces of equipment,

retirement of old equipment, and more

efficient lighting and cooling systems,

which actually now use more power than

the computing resources themselves.

Together, these moves yielded a 78%

energy savings in the first year alone.

Today, Southern Company’s IT

infrastructure comprises a team of 1,100

people in 627 locations and has a budget of

PowSOUTHERN COMPANY:

$330 million. The Atlanta data center uses 500,000 kilowatt hours

of electricity every month, and usage is growing at 10% a year.

“Since we consolidated the data centers, we’ve continued to

take additional steps to save energy,” says Blalock. “One of the

most important is virtualization.” In the Windows environment,

the department is virtualizing the load of 190 servers on eight

physical Dell servers, saving 300,000 kilowatt hours and reducing

CO2 emissions by more than 180 tons each quarter. In the UNIX

environment, the center has standardized on Sun servers running

Solaris and plans to begin virtualizing those by the end of 2008.

The result, according to Dan Traynor, director of IT

infrastructure and head of the department’s Green Place to Work

initiative, is that although the number of servers supported is

growing at 40% a year, their power consumption is growing at

only 10% a year.

In another energy-saving effort scheduled for Q3 of this year,

Blalock plans to put 20,000 of the company’s 26,000 PCs into sleep

mode when not in use. Total energy savings from that effort are

expected to approach four million kilowatt hours per year, or

about $326,000.

Southern Company’s 510 terabytes of stored data also are

a target of energy-saving efforts. Blalock’s department bought

its first SAN in 2001 and has been consolidating storage ever

since. The next step will be to improve storage allocation by

implementing storage virtualization.

The Green Grid (www.thegreengrid.org), a national 80-

member nonprofit industry organization focused on data center

power and efficiency, has noted that despite the fact that power

consumption is one of the most important issues facing IT today,

there is a distinct shortage of guidelines and resources available to

companies who want to drive change.

GREEN INITIATIVES BEYOND IT

Southern Company has taken it upon itself to drive that change

on its own, developing green initiatives that go well beyond its IT

infrastructure.

One such initiative is the Smart Ride van pool program, now in

its tenth year. Participating employees in and around metropolitan

The

OF SMART ENERGY MANAGEMENT

“Since we consolidated

the data

centers, we’ve

continued to

take additional

steps to save

energy. One

of the most

important is

virtualization.”

—Becky Blalock,

CIO, Southern

Company



Atlanta save 1.3 million miles of driving per year—the equivalent

of five tons of CO2.

When it makes good business sense or improves work-life

balance, managers may allow employees to telecommute.

Currently, 150 call center agents work from home.

Yet another program is the advanced metering infrastructure

instituted by Georgia Power, one of the first utilities in the U.S.

to do so. Thus far, more than 10,000 smart meters have been

installed, saving meter readers 40,000 miles of driving a month;

the current plan is to upgrade all meters by 2012. Ultimately, the

company will be able to offer electric usage information online

and turn electrical service on and off remotely when people

move.

Southern Company also has instituted an e-billing system

under which 10% of the company’s 4.4 million retail customers

have so far elected to view and pay their electric bills online.

Blalock decides which new initiatives to institute by talking

with other CIOs, colleagues, and suppliers like EMC. “The best

information I get is from people we do business with,” she says.

GENERATING ALTERNATIVE POWER

In the southeastern United States, where little wind or water

power is available, generating cleaner power is a challenge.

But Georgia Power has begun buying 22,500 megawatt-hours

a year of green energy from the DeKalb County landfill, which

produces methane. Customers can purchase that energy in 100-

kilowatt-hour blocks for a $4.50 surcharge on their electric bills

each month. Alabama Power and Mississippi Power also offer

their customers a renewable energy choice. Customers may buy

as many blocks as they wish, and the power is then added to

the electric grid. So far, fewer than 1% of the company’s retail

customers have chosen this option, but several large commercial

customers have, including Robbins Air Force Base and IKEA.

Southern Company plans to invest nearly $4 billion in

additional environmental controls over the next three years.

It also partners with Georgia Tech and other organizations in

exploring alternative energy sources, such as a wind farm off the

Georgia coast.

Providing alternative sources of energy to its service area

on a large scale will probably happen well into the future. To

date, Southern Company has spent nearly $400 million on

environmental research and development. New technologies for

coal, natural gas, and nuclear power offer the most promise, but

the company is also experimenting with co-burning renewable

biomass energy sources.

A GREEN FUTURE

Like other utility companies, Southern Company faces

considerable challenges. It expects to add more than 1.1 million

customers by 2025, which means it will need to add almost 15,000

megawatts of generating capacity to meet demand.

Traynor describes the IT department’s Green Place to Work

program as having four objectives. “We show leadership by

cutting power consumption in IT,” he says. “We show partnership

by providing technology solutions like advanced metering. We

encourage employees to vanpool, telecommute, and get involved

in environmental action in their communities. And we’re trying

to do a better job of telling our green story.

“Most of what is green saves money,” he continues. “It turns

out being eco-friendly is good economics.” p

er“We started going green before most

people were even talking about it,”

says CIO Blalock.

PHOTOGRAPH BY STAN KAADY



†ONE YEAR AFTER DEBATING WHETHER ENTERPRISE 2.0 IS TRULY A TRANSFORMATIVE TECHNOLOGY OR JUST AN INCREMENTAL EVOLUTION OF COLLABORATIVE TOOLS, ANDREW McAFEE AND TOM DAVENPORT RESUME THE CONVERSATION.

ENTERPRISE 2.0 McAfee and Davenport REVISITING

a 2.0 optimist

“I am a little more

bullish than Tom

on the ability

of some new

technologies to effect

operational changes,

even without an

accompanying

organizational push

from the top,” says

Andy McAfee.



THE DEBATE page !6 „

no utopia

“There are people

who are overstating

the impact of these

technologies,” says

Tom Davenport. “I

find these ‘techno-

utopians’ and their

sweeping statements

very troubling.”



ON: When people talk about Enterprise 2.0, are they all talking about the same thing?andy mcafee: One of the things

I tried to do early on was nail

down what I hoped would be a

tight definition for Enterprise 2.0.

Other people are trying to use the

same phrase to mean everything

interesting that’s happening

with IT. For me, Enterprise 2.0

represents the use of emergent

social software platforms. Here’s

what I mean. If I send Tom an

e-mail, you don’t know about it

and you can’t access its contents;

it doesn’t add up to anything

valuable at the enterprise level.

A platform, on the other hand, is

a digital environment where the

content persists and grows over

time, and it’s consultable by the

rest of the organization. Social

means that the information is

contributed by people as opposed

to being generated automatically.

And emergent implies that these

systems are trying hard to not

dictate structure or workflow, so

users experience it as being fairly

close to a blank slate, but the

structure does appear over time.

tom davenport: Well, I guess

the only real difference I have

regarding definition is the

question of whether this is all

completely new or just part of a

continuum. There have always

been tools with which to create,

share, and store information.

There are certainly more now,

and it’s easier to do it now, so to

me, it’s a matter of degree not a

matter of difference. I’m interested

in emergence, too, and there are

certainly some organizational

information environments that

should be managed in an emergent

way. But there also are information

environments that need curation

and editing.

ON: What is the potential of these technologies to change organizations?tom: I’ve always felt that Andy

was pretty responsible as far as

talking about how this is going to

transform organizations. But there

are people who are overstating the

impact of these technologies, say-

ing that social networks, by them-

selves, can build better customer

relationships, increase business op-

portunities, transform service de-

livery, flatten silos, and on and on.

I find these “techno-utopians” and

their sweeping statements very

troubling. I’m not saying don’t add

social networks to your portfolio,

but don’t think that they’re a pana-

cea for whatever information chal-

lenges your organization is facing.

andy: I’m just old enough to

remember the first wave of

the Internet and the hype that

accompanied that. I remember

going to conferences and

presentations where people would

put up things like Porter’s Five

Forces diagram and say, “This

doesn’t apply anymore. All these

rules are off.” Now, that’s just not

true. The only technologies that

are powerful enough to get rid of

those kinds of existing structures

are nuclear weapons.

Still, I am a little more bullish

than Tom on the ability of some

new technologies to effect

operational changes even without

an accompanying organizational

push from the top.

ON: How can an organization be sure its Enterprise 2.0 deployments are creating value, rather than just providing employees with a virtual sandbox to play in?andy: I was at a conference with

Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales,

and I asked him if he was an

inclusionist or a deletionist.

And he did a brilliant job of

answering the question. He said,

“I’m an eventualist, and I think

that eventually the Wikipedia

community is going to get

these kinds of issues right.” I

think that applies to Enterprise

2.0 deployments as well, and

I appreciate that in a lot of

companies, the initial experiments

are not necessarily going to be

successful right away. But that

doesn’t mean they won’t be

eventually.

tom: I agree with that, and I

think the way we will succeed

with this technology, or frankly,

with any collaboration-oriented

technologies, is to be fairly

rigorous in looking at what works

and what doesn’t. I’ve been giving

a new talk that I call “The Science

of Collaboration,” which says

“I’m not saying

don’t add social

networks to your

portfolio, but

don’t think that

they’re a panacea

for whatever

information

challenges your

organization is

facing.”

Tom Davenport

“In a lot of

companies, the

initial experiments

are not necessarily

going to be

successful right

away. But that

doesn’t mean

they won’t be

eventually.”

Andy McAfee

On June 18, 2007, at the Enterprise 2.0 Conference in Boston, Andrew McAfee, the associate professor at Harvard Business School who coined the term in 2006, debated the merits of Enterprise 2.0 with Thomas Davenport, who holds the President’s Chair in Information Technology and Management at Babson College. A year later, ON was curious to see if the two had reached any agreement on what Enterprise 2.0 is and whether it truly represents a powerful new IT toolset. The following are edited excerpts from their conversation.

ENTERPRISE 2.0 McAfee and Davenport REVISITING THE DEBATE



the companies that are really

successful using the Web are

very scientific about it. They look

very carefully at blogs and try to

understand what works. We need

to approach collaboration with

that level of discipline.

ON: What’s your vision for Enterprise 2.0 over the next five years?andy: My optimistic vision is

that a professional services firm,

for example, would deploy some

level of toolset that makes it

extremely easy for them to find

the colleague elsewhere in the

company who’s the best person

to help them with Problem X.

I think of a tool that allows me

to broadcast my experience and

my knowledge within the firm

and makes it very easy for people

to find me and ping me. It also

makes it very easy for me to build a

network of people I respect or trust

for various reasons and exploit

that network.

tom: Well, we’ve been talking

about expertise, networks, and

directories in professional services

firms for a long time. I think

it is an interesting illustration

of emergent organization of

information versus top-down

taxonomy. Years ago, the firm I

was working in tried to create

an expertise directory, and I was

always frustrated by the fact that

the top-down taxonomies couldn’t

capture anything I knew about.

On the other hand, the terms I

used to describe myself were not

necessarily what somebody else

was searching for. You really need

some mix of the two.

andy: I’d like to have a couple

of people employed in the

company who are the new style

of corporate librarian, what wiki

fans call a “gardener.” These are the

people who go in and add to the

structure of these more emergent

environments.

One of the things that makes

me optimistic is the number

of senior executives who are

starting to say, “I sense something

happening here. I see my kids on

Facebook. I see how hard it is to

attract and retain young people.

I sense this different energy

happening. And I feel like there’s

some train leaving the station and

I’d rather be on it than off it.”

tom: Well, I certainly hope they

do. And if they do it because of

these technologies as opposed to

the last generation of technologies,

fine with me. But I guess I’m

pessimistic because they didn’t

do it when all this stuff was being

described years ago for knowledge

management. Certainly these

technologies make some aspects of

it easier. But I never really thought

it was the technology that was

holding companies back before. I

hope I’m wrong. p

ØFor more on Enterprise 2.0 and related topics, visit Andy’s blog at http://blog.hbs.edu/faculty/amcafee/ and Tom’s at http://discussionleader.harvardbusiness.org/davenport/

McAfee (left) calls himself an optimist

about Enterprise 2.0 while Davenport is far

more skeptical about its transformative powers.

PHOTOGRAPHS BY LEAH FASTEN



† PREDICTING THE FUTURE OF IT REQUIRES ONE PART “FEET ON THE GROUND” AND ONE PART “HEAD IN THE CLOUDS.” IN THEIR ONGOING DIALOGUE ABOUT IT, BLOGGERS CHUCK HOLLIS AND ADE McCORMACK STRIKE JUST THE RIGHT BALANCE.

on entwinement

“If IT becomes too

entwined in the

business, it’s part of

the business and no

longer IT,” says EMC’s

Chuck Hollis.

MIND-MELD McCormack and Hollis IT TODAY AND



rock star redux?

Financial Times

columnist Ade

McCormack predicts

“a global shortage

of IT talent, with a

rise in demand and a

rebirth of the IT rock

star.”

IN THE FUTURE page @0 „



ON: Let’s start by discussing IT as it is practiced today. ade mccormack: Today, businesses

can’t exist without IT. However,

it’s not apparent what value IT

provides. I see a strong need for IT

to get its act together and present

its value proposition to users.

chuck hollis: Ade, you use the

word “entwinement” in your

book—going beyond aligning with

the business in order to become

part of the business. Of course, if

IT becomes too entwined in the

business, it’s part of the business

and no longer IT.

ade: There are the extremes,

from one where IT won’t go near

business people for fear of being

physically assaulted, to the other

end, where IT is driving the

business agenda.

chuck: We’re starting to see

an emergent trend where IT

organizations are proving their

value through the governance of

information. Have you seen this?

ade: Yes. In fact, I see information

as the first step in terms of

validating IT investments. In my

book, I discuss the importance

of circulation management—the

flow of data, information,

knowledge, and ultimately,

wisdom around the organization.

Circulation management

paves the way for collaborative

technologies—such as wikis and

Web conferencing—and how

they allow the sharing of not only

information, but also knowledge.

ON: What’s IT’s involvement with the new knowledge-sharing and management technologies? chuck: Here at EMC, as I work

on developing our social media

proficiency, I find it’s less about

technology and more about

people and social engineering.

It’s not an IT thing, although IT

can show leadership. Through

social computing, IT has access

to not only all the computers in

their organizations, but also an

ecosystem of billions, potentially.

When you draw the picture

that way, a very different type

of thinking emerges. IT doesn’t

have a strategy for this yet, nor are

there any “best practices.” Some IT

leaders are realizing there’s a new

way to engage with the business,

in a collective sense, but few are

doing it.

ade: I recommend that IT

implement these technologies

all over as quickly as they can. If

knowledge is generally resident

in people’s heads, not on people’s

computers, it’s in the interest of

the shareholders to institutionalize

that knowledge so it can be shared

with others. The knowledge

management stream is very

important because, on the balance

sheets, there’s no monetary

reference to intellectual capital.

That’s about to change, in my view,

as knowledge management starts

to interest the CFO.

chuck: At EMC, we’re capturing

roughly 4,500 knowledge workers’

interactions—the threads, the

discussions, the wiki postings. It’s

institutional learning, or perhaps,

knowledge management 2.0—

searchable, tagged, ranked in terms

of usefulness, commentary on top

of commentary. It’s a very different

approach from the traditional

mode of sitting down and typing

at a computer. People are doing it

because they want to, and we’re

capturing amazing knowledge.

ON: What skills should IT invest in for the future? ade: In general, IT managers

are good with technology,

but uncomfortable sitting

in the boardroom discussing

profit, balance sheets, risk, and

governance. If CIOs truly want to

make IT strategically relevant, they

need to equip themselves with

business skills that enable them to

survive in the boardroom.

chuck: There’s no seat at the

table unless you understand the

business. Many IT people got

where they are because they’re

smart technologists, but now that’s

holding them back.

IT owns all the company’s

information, perhaps the most

important asset in the company. If

they start thinking of themselves

as CFOs of information, they’ll

learn the business.

ade: Historically, IT has enjoyed a

position of power and while CIOs

may come across as naïve, they are

conscious of their empire.

With information governance,

you’re now offering the CIO a

route into the boardroom. This

appeals to their power mindset but

“At EMC, we’re capturing

roughly 4,500

knowledge workers’

interactions—the

threads, the

discussions, the

wiki postings.

It’s institutional

learning,” says

Hollis, pictured

opposite, left.

MIND-MELD McCormack and Hollis IT TODAY AND IN THE FUTURE

Ade McCormack, columnist for the Financial Times, author of The IT Value Stack: A Boardroom Guide to IT Leadership, and founder of consulting firm Auridian, and Chuck Hollis, EMC’s most popular blogger, met through each other’s blogs. They exchanged observations during a transatlantic phone conversation with ON about where IT is today and what it might look like in the future. Here are edited excerpts from their discussion.



also encourages the development

of a business mindset, with

language the CFO and CEO

understand. CIOs can move away

from operational IT delivery and

become more strategic in their

outlook.

chuck: That’s true. In fact, we’re

already seeing some CIOs get to the

boardroom through the lens of all

the information they have.

ade: There’s real value lying

untapped in those organizations,

and IT doesn’t realize they have

a unique perspective on the

business. They need to start

waving that around in front of the

users. Otherwise they are going

to be swapped out by predatory,

commercially alert third parties.

ON: Fast forward to 2015—what’s IT going to look like?ade: The IT person of the future

is going to look more like a user,

but offer the value of a strategic

enterprise perspective, while

users will have a business unit

perspective.

chuck: In 2015, there will be 10 to

15 times more information, with

an inherently mobile, knowledge-

based, globalized workforce that is

comfortable not only collaborating

within the enterprise, but outside

of the enterprise. IT managers

will find themselves at ground

zero for what I believe is the most

significant transformation in our

economy ever—from an economy

of transactions to knowledge and

information. Because of this, IT

will have a very different function,

with very different motivations,

skills, and behaviors than we have

seen in the last 10 years.

ade: I believe there will be a global

shortage of IT talent, with a rise

in demand and a rebirth of the IT

rock star who says, “Employ me

on my terms.” This will require

a new type of management, with

IT managers losing control. IT

workers will be sitting at home

on Facebook in their shorts, and

there’s nothing we can do about it.

chuck: The alternatives are worse,

which we can discuss more on our

blogs. p

ØTo join the ongoing conversation, go to Chuck’s blog, http://chucksblog.typepad.com and Ade’s, http://ademccormack.typepad.com.

To survive in the boardroom, CIOs

need to equip themselves with

business skills, says McCormack.

PHOTOGRAPHS: HOLLIS BY LEAH FASTEN McCORMACK BY ANDREA ARTZ



During an economic downturn, employees experience anxiety around a number of issues. These may include:

Potential job loss and reduced income Depletion of savings and investmentsInability to handle new demands created by workforce reductions Increased competition within the organization for fewer resources, with less willingness on the part of groups to support each other The impact of work issues on family membersUnpredictability about how long and deep the downturn will be

·

·

·

·

·

·

Or how you just might create a morecapable organization

Difficult TimesMANAGING DURING

BY STEVE FRIGAND

The mere act of identifying

these factors can raise feelings

of discomfort and insecurity.

So, how do we help our

organizations make it through

this downturn and come out

stronger and more capable

than before? Comedian Steve

Martin might suggest we

take things less seriously, for

example, by slipping a slice of

bologna into each shoe before

heading out to work. Although

adding lunchmeat to your

wardrobe is impractical, the

underlying idea is valid: It is

critically important that we

shift our attitude from one of

fear and powerlessness to one

of dealing more lightly and

proactively with our situation.

DON’T JUST PASTE ON A

“SMILEY FACE”

As leaders, we often assume

that our thoughts about

negative topics such as

downturns should remain

private, hidden from

employees and coworkers.

We mistakenly believe we can

go about “business as usual.”

But our colleagues and family

members notice shifts in our

mood and behavior, often

before we’re aware of them

ourselves. Our attitude affects

others, whether we want it to

or not, and it is important that

we take responsibility for that

impact.

It can be helpful to hold a

group meeting to acknowledge

shifts in the economy and

address the resulting impact

on the organization and

individuals. We can encourage

team members to share what

pressures and distractions

might be reducing their

productivity. Depending on

levels of trust, this information

might be shared anonymously,

through individual meetings,

or in a group setting.

LET PEOPLE KNOW THEY’RE

NOT ALONE

Following a layoff, the

employees remaining in

an organization often feel

overwhelmed as they try

to perform their own jobs,

the work of those laid off,

and duties imposed by new

austerity measures—all while

missing their ex-colleagues

and fearing that they might

be next. They may wrongly

believe they’re the only ones



in the enterprise who feel that

way. Such a belief can actually

increase stress levels, reduce

productivity, and leave the

employee feeling less secure.

But sharing such feelings in

a group setting can not only

mitigate their impact, but

also lead to action plans for

addressing key workplace

challenges.

SEIZE THE OPPORTUNITY TO

REVIEW PRIORITIES

A slowdown is actually a

good time to reconfirm your

organization’s purpose and

vision. Determine which

core values and processes

will help you through the

downturn. Suspend or

eliminate initiatives that,

although “nice to do,” will not

improve your position once

the economy is back on track.

And take advantage of this

time to retool and “sharpen

your saws” in order to realize

greater capability during the

next boom.

BE A POSITIVE ROLE MODEL

Model the behavior you want

employees to exhibit, and

encourage stress reduction

techniques to enhance group

effectiveness:

Resist the temptation to “declare martial law.” Engage others respectfully, and avoid the overuse of positional power. Work reasonable hours. We are not really productive and we do not make sound decisions when we work 18-hour days. Be open and direct with employees about what is going on in the organization, and provide explanations for important decisions.

·

·

·

Do not sacrifice integrity for desperation. You may never be able to rebuild your reputation with your group. Recognize others for achieving key results, honoring organizational values, and taking courageous and appropriate risks.

The economic downturn

needn’t paralyze your

enterprise with fear and

anxiety. Rather, it can be

an opportunity to harness

the realigned power of your

organization. p

ØSteve Frigand is founder of MetaView Consulting & Coaching and is the Distler Family Endowed Lecturer at Tufts University.

·

·

refocus

During a

downturn, it’s

important to

identify the

core values and

processes that

will help you

get through a

difficult stretch,

says consultant

Steve Frigand.

PHOTOGRAPH BY KATHLEEN DOOHER



The realities of the global credit crunch are taking their toll. At a minimum, many companies will not experience much growth in the months ahead, and some are seeing their revenues shrink. Concerns about the severity and duration of a downturn are raising questions about IT spending. After all, IT is a major component of most budgets and makes an easy target in the inevitable sweep of corporate cost cutting.

But before you get out that red pencil, remember the old saw that no company ever shrunk its way to greatness. IT is such an important enabler of

CRUNCH TIME How to manage IT so your business will continue to grow after the economic slowdownBy Jim Champy

on change

jim champy is chairman of

Perot Systems’

consulting practice

and the best-selling

author of several

books on business

leadership and

performance.

His latest book

is Outsmart! How

To Do What Your

Competitors Can’t.

AS

IA K

EP

KA

ILLUSTRATION BY CHRISTIAN NORTHEAST



efficiency, business change, and growth, that cuts must be carefully—almost surgically—considered. Keep in mind that times of chaos and challenge can also be times of opportunity. In fact, smart businesses are known to grow in hard times. They take advantage of their competitors’ fears (and the “shrinking mentality” that results) to boldly grab competitors’ customers with new ideas and initiatives. [Jim Champy wrote about such companies in his book Outsmart!, discussed in ON No. 1, 2008. –Ed.]

Taking an optimistic view of what’s possible—rather than focusing on the dark spectrum of retrenchment—here’s some advice on how to manage IT to support business performance during hard times.

THROW OUT THE IT

BUDGET.

OK, I don’t mean you should jettison your sense of financial discipline. Many companies have no choice but to reduce costs during hard times. But cost cutting can distort a company’s resources in perverse ways. For example, budgets sometimes act as entitlements; a typical approach to cost savings is to ask everyone to share in a fixed percentage of reduced spending. Avoid the easy temptation to share the pain equally, and take the harder route, asking what the future of the business really needs from IT and what you can afford to stop doing.

Too often, IT budget actions gut the new initiatives—development projects and capital investments in new technologies—that a company needs to support business in the future. In the meantime, spending on old, costly infrastructures continues. I am often struck by how a company with billions of dollars in annual revenues can’t find a few million to spend on what is really needed from IT. Starting with a clean budget spreadsheet, the opportunity today is to think hard about IT spending and make tough choices about where future returns will come from.

CAN SPENDING MORE

ON IT IMPROVE THE

EFFICIENCY AND

PERFORMANCE OF THE

BUSINESS?

This is a dangerous question to ask because the answer is almost always yes—but it implies a risk. Technology, applied intelligently, can improve operations efficiency and deliver major expense relief in areas such as customer service, logistics, and manufacturing. But when money is tight, management will expect to see quick results. You had better be sure you can execute on the technology and business process changes required to generate the planned efficiencies. Otherwise, spending more money in hard times can be a career-ending move.

CAN IT HELP GROW

THE TOP LINE?

This may be the most important question to ask. Keeping a company strong requires growing revenues. Conversely, the cost of shrinking a company can be felt for many years, especially if it undermines the company’s competitive capabilities.

CAN IT HELP

YOU REACH NEW

CUSTOMERS, IN

CURRENT OR NEW

MARKETS?

Remember the world is truly flat, and there are billions of new customers out there. Can IT help expand what your customers spend with you? This may require a superior product or service or just being more price competitive. In hard times, customers will also be shopping around for a better deal. It’s a chance to own more of the market if you can perform.

CAN IT HELP YOU

CREATE NEW

PRODUCTS OR

SERVICES?

When I look at companies like Shutterfly, Sonicbids, and Partsearch, I see products and services that would not exist without information technology. What products or services could you invent—or reinvent—that technology now enables?

And as you manage through hard times, con-tinue to ask how IT can help you maintain your company’s unique capabili-ties. Remember, the stron-gest companies will survive and become even stronger, and, as in all economic cycles, hard times will come to an end. p



In your book, you argue that information acquires meaning only through social context. Explain that.What we’re saying is that an

utterance takes on much more

meaning when you understand

the context it came from. In the

old days, everything happened

face to face, and the context was

implicitly understood. Today

we’re having conversations

across cultures and over all kinds

of distance media, whether it’s

IM, e-mail, or Skype, and the

context is not necessarily shared.

For example, not long ago I was

walking down a road in a village

in China, and my cell phone rang.

The caller had no idea I was at

the other end of the world, and

because I didn’t render the context

for him, he probably thought I was

being a little bit rude. I’m sure he

didn’t understand that my desire

to cut the conversation short was

because of the cost of the call!

You call yourself a chief of confusion. What does that mean?We live in a world where things

are changing so rapidly and

information is so confusing.

I feel myself almost always

moderately confused. What did

that message mean? How do I

interpret what I just heard? So I

decided to acknowledge that the

question is often more useful than

the information. Just saying to

somebody, “Did you really mean

what you just said?” gets them to

step back and reflect on what they

said, which often produces more

value.

What’s been the most significant change in information management in the last decade?Google and cloud computing put

together have been dramatic. This

ability to index the world and then

to use that index for all kinds of

purposes is really astounding. I can

sit in my armchair and do almost

as much—if not even more—than

I did 10 years ago with nine full-

time librarians working on my

behalf. The ability to engage in

incredibly rich interactions and

take on amazing problems on your

own now is totally possible.

Can you give another example?We are not only generating more

data than ever, but we also have

new and powerful ways to image

the data. For example, technology

that was developed for gaming

lets us visualize very complex

systems. Recently I was playing

with a protein inside a virtual

three-dimensional cave, and I got

wrapped inside the protein and

saw how it was folding itself. I

began to understand for the first

time why modeling the dynamics

of proteins is so incredibly

complicated.

THE INFORATI FILES John Seely Brown chats about confusion, proteins, and the social life of information By Tim Devaney and Tom Stein

last words

IN HIS PAST LIFE, John Seely Brown was chief scientist of Xerox Corp. and director of its Palo Alto Research Center (PARC). In the simplest terms, his job was to shape the future.

During his tenure, Brown expanded the PARC staff, adding artists, linguists, anthropologists, and sociologists to a roster of world-class physicists, mathematicians, and computer scientists.

In 2000 he co-authored The Social Life of Information, a book that has steadily gained popularity since it was published. “It seems to be speaking to people in ways that even seven or eight years ago it was not,” Brown says.

In a corporate context, you’ve said information from the top is not getting down, and information from the bottom is not getting up. What did you mean?The CEO has no way of

understanding what people five

levels down are thinking because

the management chain is famous

for only passing up those messages

the CEO wants to hear and not

what the real game is. As a result,

it’s very hard for people five levels

down to actually get heard. There

are a couple of ways this is being

circumvented. One is blogging.

Another is idea markets, where

people in an organization can buy

options on whether they believe

this or that product will succeed in

the marketplace. That technique is

turning out to be very interesting

in terms of giving people in the

trenches a voice.

Is there a gap between Information Age hype and reality?I think something more serious

is happening. The world is very

confusing and uncertainty is

rising, which means that we

often are in a situation where the

unintended consequences of acts

can easily swamp the original idea.

The past seven years has been a

study in unintended consequences,

almost without fail. p

ØFor other Inforati profiles, go to www.emc.com/inforati.

ILLUSTRATION BY CHRIS CAMPISI


An information infrastructure reveals the potential of your information.

Information has the power to illuminate your world—but only when it’s accessible, searchable, shareable, and actionable.

An information infrastructure makes this happen. It enables you to store information efficiently. Protect and secure it

continuously. Add intelligence to leverage its value. Automate its management. And virtualize your entire environment. The

result is information that reveals its true potential, illuminating what’s possible and moving your world forward.

Learn more at www.EMC.com/life.

of information

Release the power

EMC2, EMC, and where information lives are registered trademarks of EMC Corporation. © Copyrght 2008 EMC Corporation. All rights reserved.


Powering a World of Storage Solutions

Intel Storage Building Blocks—Enterprise Proven Reliability.Struggling with data growth and rising storage costs? Simplify. And standardize.

Intel® Xeon® processors enable dependable, ef cient, and scalable storage platforms designed to meet the needs of a robust IT environment.

Copyright © 2008 Intel Corporation. All rights reserved. Intel, Intel logo, Intel. Leap ahead., Intel. Leap ahead. logo, Xeon, and Xeon Inside are trademarks of Intel Corporation in the U.S. and other countries.

EMC ON 2008 Nmbr2_final.indd 28 5/21/08 10:32:32 AM

andrew mcafee vs. tom davenport enterprise 2 · andrew mcafee vs. tom davenport enterprise 2.0...

Documents