[ad_1]
In a recent call for revenue, Jamie Dimon, CEO of Jepimorgan Chase, said: In a second.
How can an organization with the largest budget in terms of gross domestic product (GDP) lag behind in one of the most important industry trends? After all, the global transition to cloud computing has been in full swing for years.
Was it control or a miscalculation about the importance of the cloud? Probably neither. Opportunity stems from a commitment to technology choices that precede the creation of the problem.
In other words, it is often the locksmith who is responsible for shutting down supplier systems.
Practically every organization goes to the cloud and fights with locks. Interestingly, those companies that are known to be the pioneers of technology are often the ones most affected by the lockout of vendors – actually because they are bidding on new trends early on. In particular, the locking of the provider’s databases often hinders modernization efforts on the road.
In the following, we will look at the main ways in which IT leaders accidentally increase their exposure to technology vendors. Three approaches to adoption are very common – and they are responsible for disrupting future modernization initiatives.
See also Top Top Cloud Companies
1) Constructive trap from resume
Enterprises are expected to regularly review their IT leaders and adopt new technology. What could be better than measuring a leader’s creativity in their rhymes? Not surprisingly, then, IT executives have long been known to collect brands and brands on their rims.
Enterprise software vendors have known about this event for a long time and make good use of it when selling to start-up accounts. Although executives in the information space seem vulnerable, building resilience is a weak point in most organizations.
Once a new infrastructure or method is acquired, it can quickly come to the symbolic Holy Gray from the noise of the past. Given the strong emotional purchasing power of the IT leader, the technology is invulnerable, even if it is known to be incorrect or out of date.
There is a fine line between being a visionary and being stubborn. The distance a company takes from the choice of technology makes the difference between the two very clear. Instead of building on technology, IT leaders are better at emphasizing value and impact.
See also the best data analysis tools
2) The first motor benefit trap
Data analysis is the ultimate competitive advantage. There are a few superheroes that have not been used to emphasize the importance of data over the years and perhaps no colorful patterns. The closest second is in nature Processing Data. The ability to process large amounts of information, process information quickly, or process information in a new way can be a unique competitive advantage.
However, at the macro level, individual data processing systems are very limited. Efficiency in business processes and how information is transferred from one processing level to another are the culprits that keep the enterprise from getting the most out of their data.
This puts IT leaders in a difficult position. Continuous adoption of multiple technologies can promote the competitiveness of the organization. At the same time, it typically requires highly skilled manpower to manage these systems. Often the benefits of new technology and the cost of operation are mutually exclusive.
For example, as cloud database offerings mature, custom solutions or manpower-intensive technologies such as HDPU will quickly disappear and cloud offerings will prevail in the long run.
As with the rest of the developer above, IT leaders who prioritize the first move are at risk of undermining a particular technology and preventing the organization from moving forward.
See also Data Data Analysis Trends
3) A universal trap that goes
The third challenge in this analysis is often the result of strong correction. After years of adopting a variety of technologies, an organization has reached a point where it is unable to maintain a comprehensive technology system and is unable to see limited returns from its investments.
At this point, IT leaders may be tempted to drastically change TAC and turn the entire organization into a small, select group of technologies. Such an action would require many, if not all, applications and clients to rewrite in the process.
This all-encompassing approach is fraught with danger. First, there is the risk of failing to complete the initial rewriting of applications. Second, it is the ancient practice of “cutting boats” and immediately locks in the teachings of both leaders. And The selected technology.
See also Top High Data Production Tools
Hit the balance of how to move
Finally, the adoption of technology is a strong reflection of the famous Innovator Dilema, as illustrated by the late Harvard Professor Cleton Christensen. As he puts it, at any given time, current technology and processes are hampering creativity due to the current level of commitment.
Typically, Innovator Dilema is used to explain that a manufacturer is not able to promote its products, but its invention applies equally to IT departments that are prohibited by vendors.
This does not mean, however, that early adoption is generally worse. Much to the contrary. However, technology adoption discipline is still very low. To strike a balance between the various aspects of the above requires a sophisticated approach and strategic vision and the search for robust solutions that combine additional application.
About the author:
Mike Was is the founder and CEO of Datometry.
[ad_2]
Source link
