Everything I Need to Know about IT Management I Learned from Star Trek - Introduction

When I was the Chief Information Officer at a large university I found myself in front of many different types of audiences. The audiences I always enjoyed the most were students. I once explained to a roomful of students what a CIO, or Chief Information Officer, did at the university. After I patiently explained the job, one of the students exclaimed, “Oh I get it – you’re the head geek!”

That gave me the idea to link everyone’s favourite geek TV show, Star Trek, to some leadership lessons for the real world. These basic leadership lessons have universal applicability, particularly for I.T.

Now I have to admit, I am a huge Trekkie. To prove it, I own a poster with one of my favourite rule lists, “Everything I needed to know about life I learned from Star Trek.” (I told you I was a geek.). The rules are as follows:

1. Non-interference is the Prime Directive. 
2. Seek out new life and new civilizations. 
3. Keep your phaser set on stun. 
4. Humans are highly illogical. 
5. There's no such thing as a Vulcan death grip. 
6. Live long and prosper. 
7. Having is not so pleasing a thing as wanting; it is not logical but it is often true. 
8. Infinite diversity in infinite combinations (IDIC). 
9. Tribbles hate Klingons (and Klingons hate Tribbles). 
10. Enemies are often invisible – like Romulans, they can be cloaked. 
11. Don't put all your ranking officers in one shuttlecraft. 
12. When your logic fails, trust a hunch. 
13. Insufficient data does not compute. 
14. If it can't be fixed, just ask Scotty. 
15. Even in our own world, sometimes we are aliens. 
16. When going out into the Universe, remember: "Boldly go where no man has gone before!" 

The longer this poster stayed on my wall, the more I wondered: how do these rules apply to creating digital information systems solutions at a university? I originally developed some interesting answers to this question in a presentation I gave a number of times. I decided it would be useful to write a series of 16 blog posts to answer the question in more detail.

My plan is to walk through each of these rules in a separate blog post and connect them to IT leadership challenges in higher education. Each rule will have a separate post, and I will update this posting to contain an index of links to each rule as I write them. Each rule in the list above will become a link to the related blog post.

~

Is Klout Evil?

Klout is embarrassing. I feel guilty when I check my score. Is it just about ego affirmation?

Klout is a roller coaster. I wrote the best blog post of my life and my score went down. I re-posted someone else's funny picture on Facebook and my score soared.

Klout is depressing. I thought I was a reasonably popular guy in the real world. In the time-space continuum of the Internet according to Klout I ain't so cool. Ouch.

Klout is a Harry Potter sorting hat. On Twitter I've automated Klout scores to appear beside every post. Now I only read posts by high scorers - the Gryffindors of the Internet.

Klout is omnipotent. It knows all about you even if you aren't a member. It publishes your score even if you haven't joined. Oh well, thats what you get for living life in the public space of the Internet. Too bad.

But is Klout evil? Hardly.

~

Library Magic

One late evening of the early fall of 1977 I suddenly understood the concept of marginal utility. In an island of quiet surrounded by a sea of fiction I figured it out. In retrospect the discovery was not that complicated. But my days had been filled with running to classes, meeting new friends, and recovering from frosh week. No time for reflective thought. It is amazing what a lonely study carrel can teach you.

This actually wasn't the start of my love affair with libraries. That started many years before. My elementary school library taught me all the things I needed to know about life that Mrs. McKnight, my grade 4 teacher, couldn't teach me. Like why the Cuban missile crisis almost destroyed the world. And why chemistry really led to better living. And why 18th century British infantry wore red. Random stuff. But I was learning to learn. The school library gave me the opportunity to learn what the structured curriculum was never going to teach anybody. It was a portal into new universes.

As I got older I started to do formal research in the library. By high school learning demands were broader. The school's library wasn't big enough. The lure of the downtown mega-library pulled me into its time distortion field. Hours spent wandering through stacks of unplanned knowledge. A small project on polar bears turned into a journey of discovery. Pulling out unrelated volumes on polar exploration and Polish cinema sent my mind into unexpected worlds.

Apparently the library that gave birth to my understanding of marginal utility is changing. I've seen more computers and more team space and more teaching functions come into the library. I've seen new additions to buildings. I've sat on library steering committees and watched money get moved from books to online journals. And best of all, I've seen Starbucks occupy some musty unused corners.

But lets think about those changes. More information. More opportunity for reflective thought. Just not so lonely anymore. Seems like the new things are good and the important things are still there. Yeah. Now it's time for a latte and that new book on Polish cinema. And while I'm doing that I can browse the films on my iPad using the library's wireless. Knowledge, technology, and good coffee. Perfect.

~

BYOC ... Bring Your Own Computer!

I've seen a lot of news recently about Bring Your Own Computer (BYOC) to work. Driven by an abundance of reasonably priced options for smartphones, tablets, and laptops, folks want to bring their access devices from home to work. Given the freedom of choice, most people tend to buy something that meets their personal needs. The problem for the central IT department is that we get comfortable with them. Then we want to bring them to work.

BYOC is more of a cultural problem than a technical problem for central IT. Historically, end-user computer access devices were dumb terminals. No data belonging to the organization was permanently resident on these devices. No functionality to manipulate the data was built into the device. All corporate data was controlled behind the end-user access point. The illusion of control was absolute. Central IT had complete authority over the data everywhere.

Evolution kicks in and processing power comes to the terminal. We replace terminals with PC's. The PC can collect corporate proprietary knowledge, download it, and save it on portable media. Suddenly everything is at risk. Corporate IT departments respond by locking down personal computers. Standardized hardware and software is enforced. External access is limited and monitored. Control is necessary and accepted because the stakes are high.

But today that paradigm is being shattered. The latest stage of evolution is BYOC. Users are demanding choice. Yet if IT can't enforce standard devices, is corporate security doomed? I doubt it. I think we can we learn from history. What succeeded in the day of dumb terminals? It wasn't control, it was trustworthy information. What succeeded in the day of PC's? Greater user functionality and service.

Central IT should worry about protecting proprietary knowledge, intellectual property, and personal privacy. If you build information services with security in mind from the ground up, none of that data should reside on end user devices anyway. Architect your systems to give users the service they deserve on the devices they want.

Absolute control of end user devices was an ephemeral luxury for central IT groups. That luxury is fading into the sunset. Client service is not about the device, but the information systems available. That might be a lot harder to achieve without locked down standard devices. But it sure means your clients are going to be happier. Boxing up a standard, plain vanilla device is easy. Providing real service to your clients is hard. But worth it.

~

Why I Love Google ... and Apple ... and Microsoft

I woke up this morning and realized nearly all my core web services are Google products. Email, calendar, web sites hosting, chat, blog, portal, and yes, even search, are all Google. What astounds me is that almost none of them are best of breed. WordPress is a better blog tool, Outlook has more email and calendar features, and there are many more sophisticated web site hosting environments. Almost all of these non-Google tools have better individual features. But Google wins every time because of integration. Their tools work well together. I login once and have access to everything.

They succeed because they have created an architecture of simplicity. Google has managed to make my online life simple. I reward them for that act of clarity through loyalty. Almost by default I will choose a Google web service over a competing product because they make my life easier. I don't have to do any of the integration work. They do it all for me. I can focus on getting the things done that I want to do. I don't have to fuss with the disparate technologies and jump through hoops to make them work together.

Same goes for Apple. Entertainment in my life could have become incredibly complex. But iTunes on all our family computing devices works seamlessly. We can share our library, add to it, back it up, and so on without thinking about it. Apple seems to know what we want before we want it. No complexity on my part. My Mac is the computer equivalent of a finely tuned Porsche. It works perfectly. Any Apple hardware works with it in perfect harmony. Simple, easy to use integration allows me the luxury of not having to worry about hardware problems.

The difference between Apple and Google: Apple products are best of breed. But you pay a substantial premium for them. Integration comes at a price with Apple. Their hardware may be the best, and you need to be willing to make the investment. I'm willing to spend more on Apple to mitigate the risk of hardware failure. I'm willing to accept weaknesses in Google products because the cost of learning and integrating multiple web services is too steep for me.

I even love Microsoft for much the same reason. Microsoft Office is beautifully integrated. Elegantly consistent across the core Office product lines, the folks from Redmond make my life easy. Without giving a thought to the underlying complexity of the task I can write a detailed Word document with integrated Excel spreadsheets and PowerPoint diagrams. The end result looks perfect. Not a single flaw indicating the contents were built using three very specialized and unique software tools. Microsoft is the original master of embedded integration.

The consistent secret to success for Google, Apple, and Microsoft is integrated architecture. Individual features are easily copied and transcended by competitors. Well-designed, principle-based architectures are unbeatable because they are seamlessly integrated. Now if could just get Gmail to embed my iTunes podcast with a PowerPoint slide show ...

~

Leadership and the Network Effect

One of interesting properties of information technology is the 'network effect.' As more users join a network, the more valuable the network becomes. A network of one node is useless. Image FaceBook without the internet - it would be a pretty boring place. A network of 2 is better. A network of 10 becomes more interesting, and Facebook with a hundred friends is a lot of fun. Add a growing network to FaceBook and it becomes an interesting place.

In our business culture great leaders are often viewed as solo performers. Such notions are emphasized by commonly held beliefs that "it's lonely at the top." Biographies are written about Steve Jobs and Lee Iacocca and Jack Welch emphasizing the strength of the individual and not the teams of supporting players. Yet none of these leaders became successful by being a pure solo artist. Every one of them worked with a network of supporting players.

Their own networks grew over time as they expanded their influence. I would suggest it is a mutually reinforcing affect. As their network of contacts expanded, their career grew and thrived. As their own star rose, more folks wanted to join their network. Successful leaders use the network effect to their advantage. They thrive on having multiple points of view, multiple sounding boards, and multiple connections.

The network affect is an overlooked but critical aspect of leadership success. As we think about future leaders, let's not fall into the trap of looking for solo players and rugged individualists. Lets keep our eyes open for the network builders. Real leaders get things done through an ever-expanding circle of friends.

~

Economics of Cloud Computing in Canada

Cloud computing is primarily an economic innovation. The technology is interesting and important, but cloud computing is fundamentally driven by changes in the economic model of computing. What does this mean to Canada and the higher education community? I gave a speech at the Cybera Summit in Banff earlier this month that included a section on cloud computing in Canada where I addressed this question. I thought the ideas presented there would be worth sharing via a video clip from the Summit.

~