Welcome to your ultimate human resource management information


acintelligence.com keyword stats



Most current MSN search phrases:

employee  

Why I.t. Standards Fail

"It is one thing to enact legislation, quite
another  to  enforce  it."But my biggest concern in terms of standards
is their enforcement. I think we are now at a
-  Bryce's  Lawpoint in the I.T. industry where we must
admit standards are useless without some form
Not long ago Shane "Locutus" Shields wrote anof automation to substantiate adherence to
interesting blog entitled, "What is the usethem. Over the years I have seen numerous
of standards?" whereby he expressed hisattempts at standardization in the I.T. field
disillusionment with standards in theand those that are simply enforced by human
Information Technology (I.T.) field. Hisjudgment, such as through a bureaucratic
discontent is not without precedence. Most ofprocesses, inevitably dies a slow death.
us have at one time or another yearned forWithout some form of automation to validate
standards in our work effort, only to beconformity to standards, the human being will
thwarted by the grim realities of an industryfind a way to avoid complying with them. Sad,
that doesn't like to embrace standards. Webut  true.
all admit standards are a good idea and we
should all be heading in that direction,One of the benefits of growing older is that
someday... but that day never seems to comeyour hindsight becomes clearer. Although I
because there are forces at play deliberatelyhave seen numerous attempts at
resisting  such  efforts.standardization in the I.T. field, it is hard
to find any true standards as vendors have
First, the primary reason for standards is toall put their own unique spin on it. For
seek some sort of conformity in our workexample, COBOL was intended to be the first
effort. Such uniformity simplifies productuniversal programming language but this never
development, maintenance, usability, and, Godhappened as hardware manufacturers
forbid, the interchangabiity of componentimplemented their own nuances in their
parts. Standards materially improvescompilers, thereby creating multiple
communications between people and saves time,interpretations of COBOL. Perhaps the only
simply because everyone has accepted andtrue standard I've come across in this
adapted to the standard, thereby causing themindustry was ASCII text which was invented by
to communicate on a common level (aka, "onRobert  W.  Beamer.
the same page"). Imagine where the
entertainment industry would be today ifBack in 1970 my father first called for
there were no standards in musicalindustry-wide standards for the development
composition. People would have to reinventof systems. This was done at the annual
the expression of music with each new song.convention of the old Data Processing
But because we took the time to developManagement Association (DPMA; now the
standards, musical composition can be readAssociation of Information Technology
and written by anyone on the planet. ThisProfessionals - AITP). At the time, DPMA was
also means standards can be taught anda powerhouse in terms of size and resources
applied  on  a  universal  basis.and could have easily undertaken such an
effort but, unfortunately, balked at doing
Standards also provides a means to measureso, as has numerous other industry
work effort, which is one reason why someassociations.
people object to them. Instead of performing
in a uniform manner that can be compared andOne recent attempt has been the "Business
contrasted to others, some I.T. people preferAnalysis Body of Knowledge" (BABOK) by the
nonconformity to cloak their work effort inInternational Institute of Business Analysis
secrecy, thereby clouding comparisons. The(IIBA), which is an interesting set of tips
excuse from such people is that they do notand techniques, but is certainly no means a
want to be "encumbered" or "stifled" bybody of standards. For example, there is no
standards. In reality, they are just tryingdefined conceptual foundation or glossary of
to  protect  their  job.terms defining such fundamental concepts as
"system," "business process," "procedure,"
Without standards, cooperation and"software," "information," "data," etc. These
communications between parties breaks down.are all taken for granted and it assumes
From this we can deduce that standards is aneveryone has the same interpretation (which
inherent part of teamwork. Instead of thethey most certainly do not). Although it is
chaos involved in a heterogeneous environmentwell meaning, it misses the mark. Without a
(where everyone is allowed to "do their ownconceptual foundation, the techniques
thing"), standards offers the tranquility ofembodied in the document, are like trying to
a homogeneous environment where people arebuild an atomic bomb without first knowing E
all "rowing on the same oar" in a concerted=  MC2.
manner. From this perspective, it could
easily be argued that standards promotesCONCLUSION
productivity in the workplace. This means
standards require an intuitive manager whoStandardization offers the benefits of
understands the value of teamwork anduniformity, predictability,
uniformity in work effort. Unfortunately,interchangeability, and harmony. If this is
most managers today still prefer "ruggednot of interest to you, than there is little
individualism" instead, representing thepoint in trying to participate in a standards
antithesis  of  teamwork.program. But if you do wish to participate,
understand there is more to implementing
Another problem facing standards is thestandards than to just say "that's just how
reality that whoever dominates market shareit is going to be done." There has to be some
becomes the de facto standard and jealouslysound rationale for their governance. In
defends it from intruders. We have seen thisaddition, you must address the enforcement
on more than one occasion in the I.T. fieldissue. Standards will be adhered to by the
and frankly there is little we can be dodegree of discipline instilled in the staff;
about it. We could turn to governmentIf well disciplined, your chances for success
agencies to act as arbitrators, but they haveare good, but if discipline is lax,
not proven to be an effective vehicle for theautomation is required to assure standards
establishment of standards, at least in theare  being  followed.
I.T. field. Instead, a coalition of industry
related companies would perhaps be a betterIf you would like to discuss this with me in
alternative, with maybe some governmentmore depth, please do not hesitate to send me
prodding  to  move  things  along.an e-mail .



1 A B C D E 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118