Edward White of the Collaborative Institute says that every organization
has “white spaces” (or dead zones or blank areas) — i.e., gaps in our work
relationships or processes where no one seems responsible for the process
or the results, yet they affect everyone. They are organizational places
where the work force will cooperate with each other only to the extent
absolutely necessary to get the job done, but they won’t really collaborate
(something that requires much more consensus, ownership and alignment in
decision-making and problem-solving.) White asks: “How much time do we
spend managing the ‘boundaries of our discontent?’ Conflicts that occur in
the white spaces mean that the associates involved will spend their time
talking about, handling, and working around the politics and personalities
of these relationship issues rather than focusing on real work.” So what
should an organization do about these white spaces? First, admit it has
them, then address them with explicit rules (called “Operating Agreements”)
for collaborative teams to follow in order to build high trust across
departments and business units. A problem won’t go away by itself: it needs
to be recognized and dealt with. (Triangle Business Journal 30 Jun 2003

New Legacy?

New Legacy?

Old mainframe applications are bad enough, but isolated client-server and customized packaged applications are turning into a new legacy nightmare–First In A Series



By Bob Lewis

Posted February 07, 2003 12:00 Pacific Time

“Imagination is the only weapon in the war against reality.” — Jules de Gautier

Gartner has achieved fame and fortune through the publicity it generates from regular publication of outrageous “TCO (total cost of ownership)” calculations. It’s time for Gartner to share the fame if not the fortune.

Future Information Environment

From John Wilson –

This could be a chance to put the “I” in CIO in a meaningful way. To do so, we need to address real Information issues, not just technology and transaction systems issues. These might include, in increasing order of complexity and scope:

Addressing the real overlaps on information providing among DAPS, UIS, PSOS, HR, FRS, etc. (essentially an expansion of the Sander memo idea to where there is duplication and confusion as distinguished from ignorance).

Addressing the real information needs of the management of the institution and what to do about them. DAPS began a series of interviews with deans and other administrators but it kind of got side-tracked by events.

Addressing the lack of a university sense of what is required to have an effective information environment for management, process improvement (e.g., determining the key factors in student success by discipline), etc.

Continue reading “Future Information Environment”