Harsh Realities
(http://www.expresscomputeronline.com/20030310/opinion2.shtml)
Different user organisations use different methods to select project leaders for their IT projects. Over a period of time I have studied a number of such organisations and the points they consider while selecting their IT project heads. A systematic study of these has led to identification of certain patterns. I am presenting these here without any favour/malice or recommendations. This is certainly not an exhaustive list. I found the whole exercise very interesting, satisfying and rewarding and I hope you do to. The names of most of these methods are self-explanatory and identification of the underlying logic on why organisations adopt them is a trivial exercise.
The keyboardist: This is a frequently used method. This method prescribes that you select a person who knows to use the keyboard—that is, someone who can type; and if she/he can check e-mail, all the better. The assumption is that a person who knows to use the keyboard would also know computers or quickly pick it up.
The sceptic: This time-hardened man/woman knows the past well and is nearly sure that IT does not offer any solution. The assumption is that if such people can successfully implement the project, all others would soon become ‘converts.’
The agnostic: Does not know either the ‘I’ or the ‘T’ of IT. The assumption is that you can write anything on a clean slate.
Most popular: Of course, if people like the leader they will also help him implement the project well. How can people let such a popular person down?
The conqueror: Has been successful with other types of projects in the past and will certainly succeed in this area too. The assumption is that since the person has tasted success, he would not give up. This group would strongly argue that the World Cup winning cricket team must be sent to represent India in athletics, weightlifting, etc, as well.
Crown prince/princess: This person has been tipped for higher responsibilities in future and surely the higher-ups would all work to ensure that he succeed, else they would also have to re-work the succession plan. The lesser mortals better fall in line if they want a secure future. This method derives logic from the old saying, ‘The King can do no wrong.’
-----
All of us must have used the interactive voice response system (IVRS) at some time or the other. Almost all ‘forward-looking,’ ‘customer-focused’ companies have installed IVRS to take care of their customers. This cutting-edge solution often bleeds the organisation and defeats the very purpose of installing it in the first place. The other day I rang up one of the customer care help lines only to be told that all the executives were busy and the expected hold-time was seven minutes. The voice further added that I could either hold the line or try later. The company had claimed that they had multiple lines on a single number. My need was urgent so I decided to hold the line. Suddenly it dawned on me that I was holding the phone and waiting because the number of executives deployed by the company in that shift was far lesser than the lines provided. I then recalled my experience of having interacted with the IVRS of other organisations and cross-compared those to find that there were a number of other common mistakes made by organisations implementing these solutions.
The other mistake frequently made is multiplicity of options and levels of options. I remember one system where I kept selecting options for over two minutes—seven layers—only to be finally told to wait for the customer-care executive to get free. I strongly advise that voice recognition technology must be used whenever the number of levels goes beyond two.
Once I got quite upset when, during one such conversation with the customer-care executive, I was asked my passport number. I questioned the relevance of the query, as what I had called for was in no way even remotely connected to my passport, my identity, foreign exchange, or anything like that. Unfortunately, all I was repeatedly told was “Yes sir, I understand you, but what is your passport number?” I guess the only people who realise that ‘cold politeness’ is extremely rude are the poor customers themselves.
The IVRS should be designed not only with technology in mind but with a greater degree of human understanding and compassion, so that it serves the purpose for which it is installed and does not instead become the Impossible Voice Response System.
-----
The Information Technology industry is on a very fast track to give shape to a reality far greater than the dream of Lord Macaulay. The projections of different associations and organisations on ITES (IT-enabled services) and BPO (Business Process Outsourcing) revenues have led most state governments to institute special task forces to ensure that they get a fair share of this opportunity. They are implementing schemes for e-educating (English educating) people of their states so as not to let the e-business (Electronic business) slip away. In response, those in love with Indian languages have proposed the opening of an e-crying site so that no one need shed crocodile tears, but can get rid of any guilt by shedding only e-tears.
(http://www.expresscomputeronline.com/20030310/opinion2.shtml)
Different user organisations use different methods to select project leaders for their IT projects. Over a period of time I have studied a number of such organisations and the points they consider while selecting their IT project heads. A systematic study of these has led to identification of certain patterns. I am presenting these here without any favour/malice or recommendations. This is certainly not an exhaustive list. I found the whole exercise very interesting, satisfying and rewarding and I hope you do to. The names of most of these methods are self-explanatory and identification of the underlying logic on why organisations adopt them is a trivial exercise.
The keyboardist: This is a frequently used method. This method prescribes that you select a person who knows to use the keyboard—that is, someone who can type; and if she/he can check e-mail, all the better. The assumption is that a person who knows to use the keyboard would also know computers or quickly pick it up.
The sceptic: This time-hardened man/woman knows the past well and is nearly sure that IT does not offer any solution. The assumption is that if such people can successfully implement the project, all others would soon become ‘converts.’
The agnostic: Does not know either the ‘I’ or the ‘T’ of IT. The assumption is that you can write anything on a clean slate.
Most popular: Of course, if people like the leader they will also help him implement the project well. How can people let such a popular person down?
The conqueror: Has been successful with other types of projects in the past and will certainly succeed in this area too. The assumption is that since the person has tasted success, he would not give up. This group would strongly argue that the World Cup winning cricket team must be sent to represent India in athletics, weightlifting, etc, as well.
Crown prince/princess: This person has been tipped for higher responsibilities in future and surely the higher-ups would all work to ensure that he succeed, else they would also have to re-work the succession plan. The lesser mortals better fall in line if they want a secure future. This method derives logic from the old saying, ‘The King can do no wrong.’
-----
All of us must have used the interactive voice response system (IVRS) at some time or the other. Almost all ‘forward-looking,’ ‘customer-focused’ companies have installed IVRS to take care of their customers. This cutting-edge solution often bleeds the organisation and defeats the very purpose of installing it in the first place. The other day I rang up one of the customer care help lines only to be told that all the executives were busy and the expected hold-time was seven minutes. The voice further added that I could either hold the line or try later. The company had claimed that they had multiple lines on a single number. My need was urgent so I decided to hold the line. Suddenly it dawned on me that I was holding the phone and waiting because the number of executives deployed by the company in that shift was far lesser than the lines provided. I then recalled my experience of having interacted with the IVRS of other organisations and cross-compared those to find that there were a number of other common mistakes made by organisations implementing these solutions.
The other mistake frequently made is multiplicity of options and levels of options. I remember one system where I kept selecting options for over two minutes—seven layers—only to be finally told to wait for the customer-care executive to get free. I strongly advise that voice recognition technology must be used whenever the number of levels goes beyond two.
Once I got quite upset when, during one such conversation with the customer-care executive, I was asked my passport number. I questioned the relevance of the query, as what I had called for was in no way even remotely connected to my passport, my identity, foreign exchange, or anything like that. Unfortunately, all I was repeatedly told was “Yes sir, I understand you, but what is your passport number?” I guess the only people who realise that ‘cold politeness’ is extremely rude are the poor customers themselves.
The IVRS should be designed not only with technology in mind but with a greater degree of human understanding and compassion, so that it serves the purpose for which it is installed and does not instead become the Impossible Voice Response System.
-----
The Information Technology industry is on a very fast track to give shape to a reality far greater than the dream of Lord Macaulay. The projections of different associations and organisations on ITES (IT-enabled services) and BPO (Business Process Outsourcing) revenues have led most state governments to institute special task forces to ensure that they get a fair share of this opportunity. They are implementing schemes for e-educating (English educating) people of their states so as not to let the e-business (Electronic business) slip away. In response, those in love with Indian languages have proposed the opening of an e-crying site so that no one need shed crocodile tears, but can get rid of any guilt by shedding only e-tears.
