I was pleased to be interrogated – er, interviewed – by the talented Cassie Crossley on her new podcast, Tech Leaders Today.
Please take a listen to uncover:
- our recruiting and staffing approach
- IT’s biggest problem today
- stories of how we solved 2 different clients’ problems
Excerpts from our conversation are transcribed below.
Sorry to break it to you this way. It’s a fact of life: IT cannot complete its work faster than the business can think of it.
The dependence on IT is growing exponentially, priorities shift constantly, and new opportunities come up daily. The gap between expectations of IT and its capacity is often widened by those executives who claim they are not technologically well-versed, yet assume IT can waive a magic wand and technology will just work.
That IT cannot please everyone is not a problem – it is a reality. Frankly, a hypothetical IT department that satisfies everybody 100% would be so expensive it would defeat the purpose. The key is finding the balance between responsible spending and internal customer satisfaction.
Tweet: QC, #QA, and Cost of Quality | #Abraic blog
Quality Is What the Customer Says It Is
All customers, regardless of industry or market, internal or external to an organization, want quality. Quality is crucial to maintaining a competitive edge. But what is quality? The best definition of quality I have seen is “fitness for purpose.” This works everywhere from a business setting to a family meal.
No matter what definition you use, the quality of a product or service is ultimately defined by the customer.
Service Level Agreements (SLAs) are standard for measuring performance of an outsourced service.
But what happens when an IT service is managed internally? How are expectations set? How is performance measured?
When IT services are insourced, there should still be SLAs in place in order to sustain internal customer satisfaction and alignment with business priorities.
Without SLAs, the business resorts to a subjective assessment, often concluding that IT services are overpriced, slow, or inadequate, without the information needed to evaluate the real value of the team.
Ever since the Manifesto for Agile Software Development was introduced back in 2001, organizations have questioned whether the newer alternative methodologies would be a good fit for their business.
Meanwhile, as Agile’s popularity grows, there is increasing pressure on IT departments to adopt the approach.
While the benefits of Agile can be compelling, those benefits are contingent on a specific set of pre-existing organizational characteristics. The presence or absence of those characteristics will determine whether the Agile approach will result in success or failure.