Introduction
Information technology (IT) creates a long lasting challenge forfuture survival of systems. Nicholas Carr a journalist published acontroversial article in the Harvard Business Review, titled IT Doesn'tMatter (2003). The title alone captivates the readers attention to decipher whether Carr's opinions leads towards fact of fiction. Accordingto Carr, IT no longer intrigues companies, for a competitive advantage.Carr views IT, as a boring commodity, in which the future looks dim. This analysis will compare Carr's responses with favoring and opposing viewpoints. The results of Carr's response combined with the perspectivesof other authors to determine if IT matters or not. Moreover, to fulfill the overall need in the 21st century and beyond.
Detailed discussion
Carr's IT Problems
Issues. Carr presents several issues to explain his opinion for why IT does not matter. Carr argues companies remain successful by introducing new and fresh concepts into the market. IT lacks the ability to gain a competitive edge due to ordinary routine procedures (Carr, 2003). Becoming a common tool used by everyone inside and outside the business worldhinders a successful plan for the system. Instead, from a strategic viewpoint IT fails to influence competition. Further concerns within the technology field stem from a vanishing advantage, as the systems provide access affordable to everyone. Accessible IT systems fail to offer unique products to businesses. Moreover, once the procedures become obtainablefor all the strategic potential for the company deteriorates. Other disputes involved with IT include over investing and overspending. A breakdown in IT can demonstrate a crippling effect in a company's capacity to surmount.
Ideas to avoid. Carr (2003) suggests companies need to spend less toavoid the risk of over investing. By seeking trouble-free and cost efficient options, businesses will eliminate IT waste. Another problem with IT focuses on follow don't lead concerns. Smart IT investors will not venture to make hasty decisions when purchasing devices or applications. Preferably, companies will decide to choose wisely to avoid defective or dated materials. Next, Carr states companies need to focus on risk and notthe opportunities provided to them. These ideas suggest the need for IT todevelop proposals to protect against disruptions due to violations in security, service outages, and malfunctions in technology.
Thorough discussion of Disagreements
Disagreements. According to a business article in Information Week,by Bob Evans (2003), disputes Carr's claim about IT. Evans believes improvements in business processes provide important strategies and lead to competitive advantages. Further, stating IT optimization and successful businesses matters to companies in a real time corporation. This theory depletes Carr's notion of IT being just a commodity.
Further disputes. Journalist Dan Farber (2003) takes a different approach in an article titled What Matters more than IT. Farber places the focus on people and not just technology. By claiming, the biggest issue resides in the people, instead of technology. While other chief executiveofficers ( CEO's) from Microsoft and Sun Microsystems feel IT contributesto a tremendous role for advancement of business success and technology innovation. Business CEO Scott McNealy of Sun Microsystems determines without IT companies cannot gain a competitive advantage. In order toexcel above competitors, firms must concentrate on developing and enhancing the latest technology.
Farber (2003) presents several questions and tactics as to whether IT doesn't matter or if IT has become a commodity. Farber claims the presenceof IT remains as important as water to sun and living things. Next, if IT adopts as a commodity, several challenges must occur to prove Carr's opinion. The organization will need to change processes and replace old technology with user-friendly powerful tools. Farber does not recommend revamping the mainframes and mission critical systems. Rather, suggesting the entire infrastructure of IT review the basis of the system to combat competition in the future. Another approach results in preparing people with the proper training and supplying personnel with the necessary skill to achieve a competitive advantage (Farber, 2003). Farber believes the initial focus should be placed on people and leadership versus putting the responsibility on technology. In addition, by training people to deliver goals and finish the strategic plan will position the blame to where the need lies and not on technology.
Patricia Keefe (2003), a former editor with computer world, explains Carr's views of IT as an ordinary structure without a competitive orstrategic edge to triumph in the market. Keefe reasons technology will potentially succeed since everyone uses the products in their lives. Furthermore, positions in the IT field will reach far beyond supervisory roles and into technician advisory trades, while providing test sites forproducts. With much to offer Keefe claims, IT has not finished its course.Keefe further disagrees with Carr's opinion of IT dissolving into an entity sternly focused on items such as perpetuation, risk prevention, and financial prudence. Lastly, IT directors who can reason theoretically and find new inviting ideas to promote ambition in the business by use of technology can gain an advantage.
Thorough Discussions of Agreements
Agreements. Chad Dickerson (2003) published an article in Info world agreeing with Carr's outlook on IT. The article provides supporting statements for IT staff to take heed and a different approach to the future. The editorial further suggests studying the environment and surrounding around IT to grab a better grip on the process. In order toprovide the best solutions for success IT staff members must be properly trained and ready for tomorrow. By placing the right people in position toget the job done, will prove helpful in improving technology. Currently the market for IT jobs remains unsteady and finding the appropriate personnel to fulfill the requirement may require more aggressive job searches. In addition, Carr and Dickerson concur on companies focusing energy on the security vulnerabilities. Maintaining high availability systems will help to cut down theft and focus attention on other needed areas of IT.
An interesting statement from Ralph Szygenda, a chief informationofficer (CIO) of general motors approves of Carr's recommendation ofspending less on IT systems (Evans, 2003). Carr claims businesses will likely create a cost disadvantage due to struggles with achieving competitive advantages. Szygenda further reacts to the statement and holds the same opinion, minimal spending on IT will prove to reach rewarding and effective results. Mr. Szygenda feels meticulous investments on central infrastructures for IT systems results in more cost aware businesses and approaches. He also suggests business should spend the required amount on IT systems that provides the company with essential support.
Teo Chin Seng (2003) a CIO of Singapore technologies engineering examines the infrastructure requirement stated by Carr. Agreeing withCarr, one important fact IT has lost is its uniqueness. IT has become too typical and the core functions of the systems are accessible and affordable to everyone. Further, Seng predicts ordinary use of these systems will pose a problem down the road. If not carefully look into IT will suffer damage on its infrastructure and operations. Possible solutions include focusing on optimizing IT, doing more with less, extending use of the systems, and enriching the skills of IT workers. For instance, prolonged business projects may result in a reduction of 12 months to 6 months for completion. For IT to survive business, practices will need to change drastically over the years.
Supporting opinions and agruments expressed.
Views. Overall, the notion of Carr's editorial of IT doesn't matter proves senseless. IT still offers a strong voice in the 21st century. And one really cannot fathom the idea of living without such technology. Carr states that IT is nothing more than a commodity (Carr, 2003). Carr tends to find fault with the IT system based on overspending of the systems. Further stating for business to stay open, establishment of new budgets must be set. Although Carr may pose some good reasons for his argument, IT still matters. Agreeing with Dan Farber (2003), what matters more than IT,concludes the real need for the system. Using IT smartly presents businesses with the required tool for advancement in technology. Technology giants such as Amazon, Wal-Mart, and Dell, all learned thecorrect way of applying expertise to profits the company's success. In addition, Keefe (2003) suggests without IT a business cannot function.Today most companies run their business on some type of IT system. Although technology offers a common tool to the public, the infrastructure of the system can still survive through constant change.
Conclusion
Summary of evidence
Evidence. In the article by Carr, IT doesn't matter, poses aninteresting reflection about the future of the computer generate world. Although, companies need to bring new and innovating ideas into the market for success, we have not seen the last of IT. The system will improve in the future to gain a competitive advantage. Reflecting back over the past 20 years technology, certainly came a long way and continues to advance.Carr's opinion of IT doesn't matter seems prematurely expressed. Through addition of advanced technology, IT will continue to take us to places notseen before. Overall, the facts remain clear; IT does matter and will continue to matter in the future lives of citizens.
References
Carr, N. G. (2003, May). IT doesn't matter. Harvard Business Review,81(5), 41-50.
Dickerson, C. (2003, May 30). Fuhgedgabout IT. InfoWorld. RetrievedNovember 29, 2004,From http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/05/30/22OPconnection_1.html
Evans, B. (2003, May 19). Business technology: IT is a must, no matter howyou view it.Information Week. Retrieved November 29, 2004, from http://www.informationweek.com
Farber, D. (2003, September 30). What matters more than IT. Tech updateIT management.Retrieved November 29, 2004, from http://techupdate.zdnet.com
Keefe, P. (2003, May 12). IT does matter. Computerworld. RetrievedNovember 29, 2004,from http://www.computerworld.com
Seng, T. (2003, December). The evolution of IT. CIO. Retrieved December6, 2004, from http://cio-asia.com/pcio.nsf/
No comments:
Post a Comment