Offering regional and national programs, CIO (and CSO) events bring together some of the most respected names and thought leaders in information technology and security. Presented by CIOs and other senior level executives, these invitation-only programs offer timely topics and strong networking. Learn More »
Portfolio Management Maturity Model at Chevron - Presentation & Discussion
November 13, 11:30 AM - 12:30 PM ET (GMT-4)
The fundamental goal of the model is to help IT become a business partner and earn a seat at the table. Core to the model is to establish a five year IT strategic road map that is owned by the business. Presenter Janinne Franke is manager of strategy, planning & optimization at Chevron's corporate department & services. She will share processes and lessons learned from developing and implementing the model.
Learn more about the CIO Executive Council »Apply today for a FREE subscription to CIO Magazine!
July 27, 2007 — CIO — I received an anti-Semitic email the other day.
The email was commenting on my July 1 editor’s letter about whether Google was guilty of nepotism (I thought it was) by investing in its co-founder Sergey Brin’s wife’s company, 23andMe.
The email (which was signed) said that I shouldn’t be talking about nepotism because “Jews are one of the most guilty groups who favor their children and families by bringing them into their business empires, often at the expense of better educated and prepared Gentiles.”
There was more, and worse, but it doesn’t bear repeating.
I was surprised, I guess, by the nakedness of the prejudice (would it have been sent to me if my name weren’t Rosenbaum? Not likely) and the fact that the e-mailer felt secure enough to sign the letter. A little digging revealed that the writer is an IT consultant who operates his own business. At my request, he confirmed that it was indeed he who wrote the letter and added (not surprisingly) that he did not want his comments printed.
Now I’m torn about whether to expose him.
On the one hand, receiving ugly letters is part of the price one pays when one writes about public issues. I’ve gotten them before; I’m sure I’ll get them again.
On the other hand, remaining silent in the face of blatant prejudice, shrugging it off as a lunatic’s ravings, letting it go because I don’t want to engage with this brand of vileness (and believe me, I don’t), rising above it because I don’t want to sully myself—well, these strategies have backfired in the past with disastrous consequences.
I assume that this man does business with Jewish people. Don’t the people he does business with have a right to know what he thinks about them? And isn’t it possible, even likely, that if he holds these views about Jews, he may be equally prejudiced against other groups, other minorities? African-Americans or Asians or Latinos or Catholics?
Outing this bigot, however, could have a substantial impact on his life and business and who knows what the fall-out might be? Say he has a family? Should they be humiliated and punished because their husband/son/father is an anti-Semite? Should his e-mail to me cost him his livelihood, his place in the community?
Part of me says yes. Part of me says bigots should not feel safe in engaging in hate speech. Part of me says the hell with him. He brought it upon himself; let the chips fall where they may.
Just the basics, please. Sometimes we all need a refresher or we need to make sure our team and our colleagues are all on the same page.
Over 25 tutorials on everything from business intelligence to virtualization.