Data has always been in the center scene. Information processing, including communications, has always been the primary purpose. Different types of computers have been developed. Different layers of software have been devised. We put the computers in dedicated facilities and called them data centers. It was not by chance, data has always been the prima donna.
Of course, in time, we needed to formally define organizational bodies for governing data centers and computer systems. Normally, it began in different state departments first such as one computer for Military Ballistics Research Department, another for US Census etc. Then it became enterprise level and we needed central, enterprise level planning, execution and control of computer systems within public and private legal entities. At this point in time, Chief Information Officers emerged (CIO).
The name CIO were suggesting everything about its responsibility area. A role, built around information. Computer and communications systems’ importance got higher and higher every day which resulted in the increased power of CIOs. They were not just managers of cost centers but major business partners. Beyond that, they were business enablers. CIOs were prevalent in governmental bodies and private companies, and they still are.
However, in the last decade, especially in private sector, CIO visibility has been deteriorating. What happened to CIOs? Where are they?
CIO role is splitting and giving birth to other roles.
One is Chief Technology Officer (CTO). If you give the right meaning to the term “technology”, CTO role must be superior to CIO role because information and communication technologies referred in the name CIO is just a subset of technology. But in practice, in private sector, if you are managing information technology infrastructure (e.g. servers, network, data center, platforms, client computers and peripherals) you are the CTO. Some CTOs also handle software development function, especially in relatively smaller companies. CTOs commonly don’t carry profit generation responsibility. These were all CIO duties…
Other is Chief Data Officer (CDO). It is the most interesting, actually. When this role was invented, most of the CIOs could not figure out the organizational location and the responsibility perimeter of CDOs. They thought CDOs should report to CIOs. It is understandable. CDOs are usually responsible of data governance, data analysis, business intelligence & critical reporting, education & culture, data architecture, data privacy, database management and data platforms, data engineering. They are supposed to have P&L accountability but in practice, usually they do not. The list can be shorter or longer depending on the setup. Looking at the topic of CDO definition from that point of clarity, it was right for CIOs to be confused and to feel their premises lost to CDOs because all those have always been CIO tasks.
The other role is Chief Information Security Officer (CISO). As the name suggests, CISOs are taking care of all information security tasks such that information protection & confidentiality, identity and access management, investigations, information risk management, information incident management, regulatory security compliance etc. These were all CIO responsibilities actually but CISO roles mostly have been established by regulations as an independent senior position for preventing conflict of interests between CIOs and information security directors under them.
As a result, in the private companies, number of CIOs are declining; CISOs are increasing in a robust way; CDOs are vaguely surviving, there are reasons for this but these are beyond the scope of this post; CTOs are increasing as the new form of CIOs. At the government side (I follow USA structure, both civilian and military organizations) CIOs are powerfully going on their mission.
That’s the question: Why? Why are CIOs losing their castles? In theory, there were “data” centers, enterprise level management needs for “information” & communication systems and perfectly matching role description as the CIO… What happened in a sudden?
Frankly, I don’t know all the answers but I can put one or two things: Characters of CIOs have an effect. Most of the CIOs could not contribute to company profit through business development. Being an enabler was not powerful enough anymore. It was very hard for a CIO to over-achieve. Managing a bunch of engineers and very complex information systems became a sterile factor within companies. Burden was so heavy on the shoulders of CIOs… CEO and CFO were considering them as cost black holes; moreover, it was very difficult to be compliant with regulations, growing daily. Being a good CIO has been like being a sort of super hero. On top of all those, accelerated change in information technologies required more specialized managers…
But… But.
At the end, it is business, it is life. Things happen, there is entropy in the universe and increase in complexity is inevitable. That’s for sure, one man could not solve everything but if CIOs could have showed bolder character on their domains, things would be different.
Personally, I still am supporting the notion of CIO rather than other Cs emerged from CIO lndscape. Because, to me, life is information processing and the "I" in the middle of CIO represents a lot.
Think.
No comments:
Post a Comment