CIOs, even those at companies that are well along the path of a tech transformation, should have a clear view of all the possible tech initiatives and areas of focus. Detailed conversations with more than 1,400 CIOs as well as our own experience helping businesses execute complex technology transformations have yielded a broad array of insights, best practices, and guidelines. We’ve synthesised them into a Tech:Forward framework that highlights three interconnected vectors, within which are eight specific “plays,” or domains of activity
The Tech:Forward framework essentially became a road map that everyone understood and could use as a common reference, cutting off unhelpful discussions and reducing miscommunication. Not only did the board approve the tech-transformation plan, but the workers’ influential union representative endorsed the program to all the company’s IT employees. Since then, the leadership team has implemented quarterly review cycles, using the Tech:Forward framework to track progress, break through barriers, and align on the next round of initiatives.
It is important to call out that the identification of the activities themselves isn’t the main reveal—CIOs will be familiar with most if not all of them. This Tech:Forward model has proven most useful, however, in helping organisations understand the scale of needed change and think through interdependencies across vectors and plays.
Vector 1: A reimagined role for technology that’s focused on the business. Effective technology functions maintain close ties with other business functions, but best-in-class CIOs take this a step further, with technology driving the business. That requires reimagining technology’s role through technology-led business models and technology functions becoming the steward of digital user journeys, given their unique perspective across business functions such as marketing, sales, and operations. In organizations that have truly reimagined technology’s role, the role of the CIO is also often elevated.
Vector 2: A technology delivery model built for flexibility and speed. Modern technology functions set up their delivery models to keep pace with the fast-evolving needs of customers and employees. Using agile methods (including in budgeting), teams prioritize and carry out activities that have the greatest potential to realize performance gains. They also partner thoughtfully with a variety of vendors, ranging from hyperscalers to software-as-a-service (SaaS) firms to niche engineering organizations, for help in building or augmenting capabilities that are more challenging to develop or scale, with incentives to deliver business outcomes rather than output.
Vector 3: A future-proof foundation of core tech systems that support innovation, collaboration, and security. Renewing core systems so they support new digital functionalities, multiple daily production releases, and frequent upgrades can provide significant performance benefits. Such modern systems are arranged according to a flexible architecture built around platforms and products to serve the business. A modern technology core includes data and analytics systems that provide technology teams across the enterprise with the high-quality information and powerful tools they need to gain insights into customer and employee preferences, design innovative applications, and enrich user experiences. It also enables tech teams to integrate security and privacy protections as they develop solutions, rather than adding them after solutions development is complete.
Having an approach that is both this comprehensive and detailed was instrumental in aligning one large OEM’s tech-transformation goals. Previous efforts had stalled, often because of competing priorities across various business units, which frequently led to a narrow focus on each unit’s needs. One might want to push hard for cloud, for example, while another wanted to cut costs. Each unit would develop its own KPIs and system diagnostics, which made it virtually impossible to make thoughtful decisions across units, and technical dependencies between units would often grind progress to a halt.
The company was determined to avoid making that mistake again. So it invested the time to educate stakeholders on the Tech:Forward framework, detail the dependencies within each part of the framework, and review exactly how different sequencing models would impact outcomes. In this way, each function developed confidence that the approach was both comprehensive and responsive to its needs. Meetings with the CFO, for example, explained in detail how an integrated operating model that embedded IT with the business cut down on mistakes and accelerated delivery.
Comments