I think there are two problems here

First is that companies don't have their processes straightened out. In every reasonably large project I've worked on, the greatest bottleneck has been trying to write the business rules. For instance: The company directory that couldn't go online because the phone numbers, department assignments, secretarial assignments, office locations, etc. etc. etc. were all maintained by different people, in different formats ranging from databases to spreadsheets to WordPerfect files. No one would give up their little piece of control (power) over "their" information.

Computer systems rely on concise, or at least unambiguous, rules. When the existing business practice doesn't fit these criteria, it's not ready for automation.

The second problem, which depends on the first, is that software vendors tell companies that they can replace expensive, experienced personnel with some new product. The reason this works is that no business wants to believe they are guilty of the first problem I mentioned. "Since our processes are well thought out, they can be automated."

Your multi-billion dollar pharmacy company has gone to step three -- replace the experienced people with shaven monkees -- without going through steps one and two -- standardize the process and automate it.

"Where companies have their business processes worked out (a small minority)."

The rest of the companies just run what I call chaos centers. A Director or VP who realizes that they need to get enough organization together to survive long enough to get their extended severance package (golden parachute), applies band aid after band aid and hack after hack to existing systems and business processes to survive until another company hires him/her away or he gets laid off with a 2 year severance. No system, just chaos, and maybe you get lucky once in a while, and the rest of the time you play the "blame game".

The turf battles are the worst, and I left a great technology beta in 1997 at SABRE, knowing that the turf battles would rage on for years. Three YEARS after I left the company, the company finally accepted my technology as the standard for the entire company. The technology took about a year to create, and three years to adopt. Funny, I wonder if they even still have a programmer left who knows how it works.

I think the second problem you see is the reality at most companies now. The new MBA/VP who arrives is told to reduce costs and just goes after the heads with the largest salaries and bonus (who don't have some kind of "insider knowledge" on one of the owners of the company ). In other words, if you're a good worker, and you're not hoarding technology or keeping the secret of who the boss's "extra" children are, then you're sacrificed.

So, the new MBA/VP cuts the people familiar with the business processes who don't have an "insider card", and leaves the rest and the low salary new hires, and the Indian outsourcing company with the remaining mess. When it all falls apart after 2 years, he blames his peer departments and business partners who could not provide him with "good service" and walks away with a 2 year severance, only to play golf and scan out his next victim.

Sorry, I'm a little bitter about this now. Instead of a 2 year severance, I think they should get two years in Huntsville or San Quentin (prison).

Glen Austin

Welcome to IWETHEY!