Have we come to the end of the IT revolution?

Over on my personal blog, Bob Quiggan and I have been discussing Kondratiev cycles. Those who are interested can find the posts here, here and here.

One of the issues that arose in the discussion is whether or not we have come to the end of the IT revolution. Bob thinks no, I am beginning to think yes.

In saying this, I am not saying that technological improvement will stop, nor am I saying that there are not further productivity gains to be had. Rather, I think that we have come to the end of the easy gains.

When I look at the organisations I know, I am hard pressed to see real IT gains over the last few years. Here I am referring to business improvement and productivity gains, not changes to technology itself.

My gut judgement is that current organisational forms and management styles work against further gains.

The first round of the IT revolution gave great processing gains. To go beyond this point, we need to change organisational structures, and I cannot see this happening.

Am I wrong? I would be interested in comments.

Management Perspectives - most visited post

Every so often, I look at the most visited posts to get a guide to visitor interest.

Looking at the most recent list, Australia's new minimum wage - July 2008 was by far the highest scorer, followed by The Importance of Demography and Demographic Change - update.

This post scores consistently well. The impact of aging populations on recruitment is becoming an increasingly popular topic, in part because organisations are now feeling the impact of reduced numbers in the traditional entry level age cohorts.

Still on demography,Global Demographic Trends - Asia came in at number four, Global Demographic Trends - A few macro numbers at five, both just behind Common Management Problems Series 1 - managing up. This post scored well in part because it is an entry post to a series.

Number six was Changes in Public Administration and their Impact on the Development of Public Policy 1 - Introduction, followed by Project Management for Professionals - Introduction. Looking at this post I realised that I had still to add in the series linkages.

If things aren't wrong, don't try to fix them

I suppose that it is an occupational hazard for consultants (and new senior managers too) that we want to fix things up, to improve them. Sometimes this is a very bad thing.

Some organisations face real problems and require radical action. However, most organisations rub along. Here action to improve things can in fact make them worse, unless the initial diagnostic has been properly carried out.

Then there are organisations that are in fact working well. In these cases, the desire to improve can lead to disaster by disrupting the very things that have made the organisation a success.

Part of the problem here is that organisations are quite complex animals. This can make it very difficult to understand the relationships between all the elements making up the organisation.

We live in a measurement world. Yet many of the most important elements in organisations such as its culture are "soft", not easily quantifiable. A focus just on those things that can be measured may disrupt those that cannot.

A further problem is that both managers and consultants are prone to the influence of fashion. We can see this in the way that management language changes over time. Concepts rise and then fall.

Management fashions can contain worthwhile ideas. However, too often they are not based on hard analysis but on subjective judgements. If implemented without thought, they may have adverse effects or even destroy the organisation itself.

I do not have a solution to this, beyond the need to exercise a degree of caution.

Guide to job seekers - Ronnie Anne's Work Coach Cafe

I have continued to enjoy Ronnie Anne's Work Coach Cafe. This is a seriously good blog for those seeking to switch jobs. It also provides me with a wealth of material for my various comments on management issues and problems.

Common Management Problems - combined posts

Back in November 2006 I began a series of short posts on common management problems that I had encountered as a manager or professional adviser.

I have just been updating the list. Those interested can find the entry page to the whole series here.

Australia's new minimum wage - July 2008

Some employers are crying foul over the $A21.66 increase in Australia's minimum wage, bringing the minimum weekly wage to $A543.78. I cannot agree.

Very few Australians are on the minimum wage. Those that are would be hard pressed to rent accommodation in the private market place plus pay for food.

Australia used to have the concept of the basic wage. As originally envisaged, this was meant to be the amount that a family with a single wage earner could live on. Pretty obviously, $543.78 is a long way removed from the concept of a basic wage.

Employers are worried that the increase in the minimum wage will flow on to those higher up the change. This is a legitimate worry. However, it has to be put in perspective.

The gap between the bottom and the top has been widening. If Australia cannot afford to pay its lowest income earners a wage that will allow them to at least survive in minimum comfort, then we have a real social problem.

I would argue that we need to look at a new approach that will allow all Australians to share to some degree in our growth. Without this, we are a pretty poor society.

Reasons for slow posting

I have been struggling to find the time to post. I have therefore decided to draw a line under the past and instead aim to keep up with current posting.

Appeals to Authority and the trap of experience

Over on his blog, Thomas and I have been having a conversation about the value to Australia of a national space program. I am a supporter, Thomas is opposed. I mentioned that I had had an involvement in this area in the past. Thomas accepted that experience, but politely maintained his position.

Thomas was of course right to do so. However, as happens in discussions with Thomas, our conversation took my thinking in a different direction, the problems associated with appeals to authority and the associated trap that can be created by our own experiences.

My mention of my past role in the national space program could be interpreted as an appeal to authority. I have done this, therefore you should listen to me.

At a personal level I am in fact very suspicious of appeals to authority. As soon as x says that I am a scientist or a Government minister, therefore you should listen to me, warning flags go up the mast.

Just because x is a Government minister, a scientist or, for that matter, someone previously involved with the re-establishment of a national space program does not, of itself, make their views valid.

If a Government minister makes an announcement about a new policy, explaining what it is and the reasons why, we can classify this as giving information or opinion. If, as happened sometimes with anti-terrorism legislation, a minister says that we should go along with a change because the Government knew best, then that is an appeal to authority.

Of course we have to take into account experience and knowledge. When Thomas writes about American politics, I read with interest because he knows his stuff. When a scientist speaks about his area of expertise, I listen because he or she is an expert. However, I never accept even expert views in an unqualified fashion. Experts are wrong too often.

Our thinking, writing and actions always draw from our own experience and knowledge. Further, that knowledge is transmuted through the mental constructs that we use to interpret the world or our own fields of knowledge. With time, our experience accretes to our thinking in ever thickening layers like the build up of silt on a delta. The silt can provide fertile crops, but the river itself slows and meanders.

In consulting, we talk about the half life of knowledge as around a year. Consultants mine their own experiences and knowledge in dealing with clients. If they are not adding new knowledge, then they run the risk that the world will have moved on without them.

I frequently refer to my own experiences in writing. Like everybody, I use those experiences to interpret the world. However, I have always to be conscious of the danger that my views may no longer be relevant.

I love history because here I can bring to bear my full range of knowledge and experience in asking questions of and interpreting the evidence. Unlike science where some of the greatest discoveries are made by the young because they have a greater capacity to break out, the writing of history often gains from the silt of experience.

Current events and activities are a different matter. Here we have to decide what experience is still relevant, what must be put aside.

Take public policy and administration as an example. Over the last year or so, I have written about this area a lot, tracing through and interpreting some of the changes that have taken place. I think that I can claim to have a reasonable degree of expertise.

This helps me to interpret and explain. However, it can also be a problem. In dealing with Government systems whether as a consultant, contractor or employee, what is is what matters.

At an operational level, this requires a split personality. All the knowledge of what was, what might be, what should be, has to be put aside because it can interfere with the simple requirement to get a job done. In fact, over ten years ago now I decided to withdraw from consulting to the Government sector because I felt that it had all become just too hard! I wasn't enjoying it.

Drawing this meander to a close, I think that in making and interpreting claims to authority based on experience, it pays to be cautious. Like the old position of engineer on an aircraft, the world may simply have moved on.

Systemic Rigidities in Modern Management 1 - Setting the Scene

In Problems of redundancy and systemic failure I pointed to what I saw as a disconnect between the way organisations were organised and the way people worked. In this post I want to extend my argument using a generalised public sector case study.

Consider a modern public sector organisation.

This has a corporate plan that is meant to describe what the organisation will do over a five year planning period. Each year a business plan is prepared, describing activities over the following twelve months. The individual units within the organisation prepare their own twelve month business plans. There are also a series of published policy statements and strategies setting out approaches and aspirations in particular areas.

The organisation is headed by a CEO. There is a departmental executive that meets regularly to consider policy and operational issues. Each major unit within the organisation has its own executive that also meets regularly to consider policy and operational issues within the unit. Because Departmental activities can cross units, there are a variety of coordinating measures in place, including standing and ad hoc committees as well as standardised consultation procedures.

Activities are monitored and controlled through standardised monthly reporting procedures that measure results against plan. The CEO has a performance based contract with the Government. Very senior staff are also on contract. All staff are meant to have performance agreements that cascade down the hierarchy.

The organisation operates in an area that can be politically sensitive. For that reason, there are a series of rules and procedures governing external contact including the media. These include clearance procedures for every public piece of official paper whether in physical or electronic form.

The organisation manages substantial assets and has a significant revenue stream. A range of measures exist to prevent fraud and ensure probity. The organisation has also adopted project management approaches with a defined cross-organisation methodology.

Apart from its own internal policies and procedures, the organisation operates within a complex web of centrally defined policies, procedures and reporting requirements intended to govern broader public sector activities.

I suspect that this description will sound familiar to many. It all sounds so reasonable. Yet the problem is that the system does not work very well. Part of the reasons for this reflect the unique features of the public sector environment, part are common to all organisations.

In my next post I will look at the public sector features.

Most visited posts

Every so often, I look at the most visited posts to get a guide to visitor interest.

Looking at the most recent list, The Balance of Payments, Australia and the sub-prime crisis had by far the largest number of individual visits. This was followed by Common Management Problems Series 1 - managing up, something that gave me pleasure because this is one of my favourite series.

A little later came Global Demographic Trends - Asia, then The Importance of Demography and Demographic Change - update. Looking at this post reminded me that I needed to update it. But that will happen at another time.