Blogs

Nothing drives me crazier than see organizations throw gobs of money after information systems that were purchased without sufficient diligence being done up front about what they actually need those systems to do. Too often, figuring this out gets derailed by petty politics and business-as-usual, and the result is a technology that later is disparaged as being less than good.

The irony is that we do plenty of homework before buying a microwave oven that costs a whole lot less than any ECM, BPM, or other content solution I’ve ever heard of. So why on earth don't we apply the same discipline to the acquisition of information technology?

The answer is that conducting the necessary research is hard. It requires gathering information from everywhere within the organization that the new system is intended to touch, and analyzing it to identify the core functionality that is required. Crossing departmental boundaries in this way can elicit slow and less-than-constructive responses as managers reflexively defend against what they see as encroachment upon their turf. Resentment then can build in both directions as the researcher tires of the runaround and the “researchees” grow weary of the questioning. After a point, who would want to put up with all this?

You would. Or at least, you should.

Nobody is saying this diligence is fun to conduct, but it is central to ensuring you receive maximum total value from what you eventually acquire. Buying a microwave that turns out not to have the features you wanted most is annoying, but it isn't especially critical – not in the least because you will probably be up to a new one in a matter of only a few years. Your information system, however, likely will be counted on to operate for a decade or more, so it's important to get it right since you will have to live with – and invest in – its shortcomings for a long time to come.

So please: do here what you do in the kitchen, where there's so much less at stake.