Leading Techies

Basic Keys to Information Technology Leadership Success

by Robert E. Simmons, Jr.

Autobiographies of great leaders in any field of endeavor all point to their reliance on a few basic concepts that form the core of their leadership success.

While I do not profess to being worthy of a "great leader" title, I have had the good fortune to have functioned in the Chief Information Officer (CIO) role for three companies, one small, one mid-sized and one very large, and to have worked with CIOs and other technology related personnel in many leading technology related organizations. From these experiences, I have reached several conclusions and formulated some core concepts about what causes some technology related organizations to be successful in their various missions, and what causes others to be viewed as utter failures. I will attempt to summarize my conclusions below:

Leadership. Most successful technology related organizations have outstanding leadership. Most failure-prone such organizations have poor leadership. Doesn't sound like a unique revelation, does it? However, leadership of a technology related organization is somewhat unique. I will expand on this concept later.
Cultural Values. Most successful technology related organizations exist in an organizational culture that has a defined set of values to guide the behavior of the individuals within the organization. These values are constantly reinforced by the actions and examples of the organizational leadership. (Note that I do not use the term "management"! More on this later.)
Team Culture. The values set referred to above is the basis for creating a team dynamic within a group of people who, as a rule, have little or no experience working in a team culture.
The Nature of "Techies". Most people in technology related fields of endeavor are the same people who spent their afternoons in high school learning how to use their slide rules, calculators or personal computers (depending on their ages). Most did not play football, basketball or hockey, the traditional team building activities of youth. The closest that many of them may have come to participating as a member of a team might have been the school Math Team. They have spent many years focused on their own knowledge and skills (We should be glad that they did!) and their own personal achievement ... not the achievement of a team. Do not reach the conclusion, however, that they are not competitive. Most are fierce competitors ... against each other! This tends to create nasty "one-upmanship" within any team of "techies". They must learn team concepts, embrace team values and become excited about being a member of a successful team. They must learn to subordinate their personal egos to pride in the accomplishments of the team. This is a difficult transition for many, but most succeed if there is excellent leadership to encourage them without denigrating them.
Historical Technology Leaders. Historically, technology organization leaders have evolved almost entirely from the technical ranks ... the Peter Principle at work. Without strong exposure to team dynamics, and placed in a world outside the technical domain, these upwardly-mobile "techies" rarely succeed. They usually lack the leadership, business and other skills to effectively lead the group to superior team performance.
Mission Focus. Technology organization leaders must be firmly grounded in the mission of the overall organization. Preferably the highest ranking technology leader is a direct report to the ultimate leader of the organization (CEO, CO, etc.). How else can the technology leader understand the role that technology must play to achieve the overall goals of the organization? Without the close relationship to the CEO and other top level leaders, the overall goals of the organization will not be effectively supported by the technology function. I feel so strongly about this that I don't think that I could accept a CIO job without a direct reporting relationship to the CEO.

Let's return to the leadership versus management issue referred to previously. The word "management" implies that something or someone must be managed. If something or someone must be managed then he/she/it must not be inherently capable of functioning independently and properly.

If one accepts this definition, people who are managed must be inherently incapable of independent and proper function. I do not believe that most technology personnel fall into this category. In fact, I do not believe that most people fall into this category. Therefore I have reached the conclusion that most people, and particularly technology people, cannot be effectively managed and therefore must be led. Things, processes, and procedures may be managed, but not people.

"But how do you lead these "techies?", you might ask. The answer is simple. You lead "techies" like you lead any team, whether it is a football team or a combat platoon. Here are a few of the components:

	Leadership by example ... practice what you preach.
	Leaders must be willing to, and periodically make, the same sacrifices that are required of the team members..
	Leaders respect each and every member of the team and treat them with the same degree of dignity and honor ... from the janitor to the guru. Each team member's contribution is essential to the mission of the team.
	Eliminate the word "manager" in all titles for persons leading people. If the "manager" only manages processes, programs or things then the word "manager" may be used. Create a real distinction between the titles of the leaders and the managers.
	Do not require the leadership of people to drive compensation. Many "techies" do not have the ability, nor do they desire to lead people. However, some of these same people must be paid at "manager" level salaries to compensate then properly for their contribution to the success of the team and to afford them with the "respect" that they have earned within the group. To do otherwise is to risk constant dissention in the group and high employee turnover.
	Evaluate leaders primarily on their leadership and the growth of the people on their teams. Deadlines, and budgets are always important, but these goals are met by the members of the team. Team members must be led to constant improvement, then the deadlines and budgets take care of themselves.
	The technology team leader must be a technology "generalist" ... someone who has a varied technical background. This "generalist" background enables one to understand and relate to the technical issues faced by the teams and to be respected by the team members. Someone without basic relevant technical knowledge will be rejected by the group and will, as a result, be an ineffective leader. A football coach who has never played football rarely is a successful coach. You must understand the game.
	Leaders create a culture, based on a shared set of values. A team member who cannot adopt that culture, and embrace it fully, must be removed from the team, lest the values of the team become corrupted.

Example Value Set for a Technology Organization

The following are value statements that I believe, based on my experience, are mandatory for team building success and mission success:

Attack problems, not people.

Fix problems, not blame.

Debate is encouraged.

Plan your work and work your plan.

As long as you don’t care where you’re going any road will get you there.

Quality takes priority over other concerns.

Individuals are most important to the team.

The team is most important to individuals.

Arrogance and selfishness are forbidden.

You are becoming a wise person when you begin to understand how little you know.

Honest mistakes are expected, repeated stupid mistakes are unacceptable.

We will use "The Golden Rule" to govern our actions toward each other and the user community.

We will set all expectations properly.

We will avoid gossip and innuendo.

We will stamp out unnecessary bureaucracy wherever we find it.

We must stir the pot occasionally to see what's burning on the bottom.

Contributions, not connections are the keys to success.

Much can be accomplished as long as you don’t care who gets the credit.

A rising tide floats all boats.

The reader will note that all of these value statements are focused around team behavior ... the concept of "we" rather than "I". Nothing new here. Coaches and military leaders have known and understood these concepts for some time.

The conclusion ... leadership of technology people should be left to leaders who can relate to "techies", not necessarily "techies" leading "techies".

The author wishes to acknowledge the gracious editorial assistance and advice of the late Lawrence P. Benson in the development of this article.

[ Home ] [ Up ]

Click Here for more information. Click Here for client support.