How many more systems do we really need?

Blogger: Lyn Robison

Most large enterprises already have lots of information systems. In fact, a ballooning portfolio of legacy systems has become a significant liability at most enterprises. Even though their enterprise already has too many systems, many IT professionals firmly believe that implementing new systems is their job.

Implementing new information systems is supposed to be the means to an end: delivering higher productivity and better information for decision makers. For many IT organizations, however, system implementation has become an end unto itself without any consideration of whether or not additional systems will actually lead to higher productivity and better information for decision makers.

Examples of the means becoming the end can be seen throughout history. In countless military conflicts, the winning army realizes the conditions for victory first, and then fights. The losing army fights first, and then seeks victory. Likewise, a winning IT organization realizes that they can often deliver higher productivity and better information without implementing any new systems. A losing IT organization looks first to implement new systems, regardless of whether or not those additional systems will actually help their enterprise achieve their goals.

In today’s economy, who wins, an enterprise that has lots of legacy systems that produce bad information, or the enterprise that has a few systems that provide useful information?