Managing Technology

Wireless networks and microcharging will change the Internet as we know it.

What kinds of companies and products can benefit most from the use of new information technologies (NIT), such as the Internet, broadband networks and mobile communications? Books and airline tickets sell readily over the Web whereas automobiles do not. Furthermore, what types of business transformations does NIT enable? A company might, for example, use NIT to eliminate middlemen, such as distributors, that separate it from its customers (called classic disintermediation). Or, instead of getting rid of middlemen, it might choose to embrace them (remediation). Or it might build strategic alliances and partnerships with new and existing players in a tangle of complex relationships (network-based mediation). All three mediation strategies depend on various factors, such as a product's customizability and information content. By fully understanding those drivers of NIT, companies can begin to predict the potential transformations of their industries, especially in terms of how products are marketed and sold. To that end, the authors have developed a systematic framework that identifies which drivers are important for each of the three mediation approaches. Using this tool, companies can determine both the optimum ways to transform their businesses and the NIT investments required to accomplish such changes.

In recent years, large companies have invested a great deal of money & #8212; and faith & #8212; in process-enabling information technology, IT that facilitates the execution of entire business processes rather than individual tasks. But all too often, such investments fail to pay off: The new systems fail to live up to expectations, register a measurable financial impact, improve work processes or bring about organizational change. Technical snafus, a scarcity of good advice for managers and failure to follow such guidance are not the problems. The fundamental issue is that managers usually follow what amounts to a universal checklist, one that assumes that all implementations are basically alike. Taken as a whole, the list is merely a collection of undifferentiated findings and conclusions rather than a synthesis that would help with the particular implementation effort at hand. The executive in charge of the effort is left to discern which findings apply, under what circumstances and why. Instead of a longer or different list, this article offers a synthesis that highlights how big IT implementations differ from one another and how managers should handle the differences in order to realize the full promise of technological change.

Executives make few moves more critical than their decisions about which technology-infrastructure investments will promote future strategic agility. To pinpoint best practices, three IT experts marshaled 10 years of data from 89 leading enterprises. One finding was that when companies describe their IT-infrastructure capabilities as services instead of equipment (say, the provision of a fully maintained laptop computer with access to all company systems and the Internet), they do a better job of putting a value on what they are buying. Understanding the 70 IT-infrastructure services that emerge consistently from the research can help executives identify which investments will make sense for which strategic business initiative. And understanding whether the contemplated initiative is supply-side, internally focused or demand-side can help managers decide whether to make the infrastructure investment on a business-unit level or enterprisewide. The authors find that leading companies are making regular, systematic, modular and targeted IT-infrastructure investments on the basis of overall strategic direction. If other companies can learn to recognize which IT-infrastructure capabilities are needed for which kinds of initiatives, they can have some assurance that the investments they make today will serve the strategies of tomorrow.

In an often overemphasized focus on efficiency, many companies turn to packaged information-technology systems to manage business processes. University of Michigan Business School professors C.K. Prahalad and M.S. Krishnan suggest they should be more concerned about strategy & #8212; and getting line managers and IT managers to use information systems in ways that facilitate strategic change. A new applications-portfolio scorecard helps managers assess information infrastructure before making investments. Six key considerations are each IT application’s role in strategy, whether the knowledge embodied in the application (say, salaries in a payroll application) is stable or evolving, how much change will be needed, where the application will be sourced, whether the data is proprietary or public, and the application’s freedom from conformance defects. Those parameters differ for different functions. Managers may not need the latest software for a stable function. They may decide not to purchase a customized package, because it could be out of sync with the vendor’s future software. Only those companies that deeply analyze what they need from each IT application will acquire the right portfolio. The authors’ work with 500 executives revealed that few managers believed their information infrastructure was able to handle the pressures from deregulation, globalization, ubiquitous connectivity and the convergence of industries and technologies. Though fully aware their organizations lacked rapid-response capability or flexibility, the managers rarely knew how to fix the disconnection between the quality of IT infrastructures and the need for strategic change. Considering that information-infrastructure expenditures are generally 2% to 8% of companies’ revenues, new measures to address the disconnection are essential. A corresponding change in the mind-sets and the skill sets of smart line managers and IT managers also is helping improve overall competitiveness.