by CIO Staff

Reader Feedback on December 2002, January 2003 Issues of CIO Magazine: Integration, Personality Analysis

Mar 15, 20034 mins
Enterprise Architecture

Finding The Message In The Noise

Your CIO Observer column “Zero Visibility” in the Dec. 1, 2002, issue resonated with me. I’ve spent the past several years heavily engaged in a project to roll out both ERP and shop-floor systems across our company’s 45 plants. I’ve witnessed behaviors like those you described in both our users and my colleagues. Although we frequently acknowledged the importance of change management to our effort, our attempts at it were somewhat amateurish.

I’m intrigued by your reference to spatial disorientation and particularly field independence. I wonder if you could suggest any resources that might help me sort out the field-dependent people from the field-independent people. I should add that I’m not interested in selecting people for one task or another with this approach. Rather, I’m interested in “knowing my audience.” It seems that a serious change-management effort would be well served by knowing which people are more likely to be overwhelmed by the sensory input and which ones will be able to focus.

Your article has helped me realize that it’s not really enough to tell people what they need to hear. You have to tell them in such a way that they can pick out the significant message from the noise.

Bill Wight

Voridian?a Division of Eastman Chemical

To Integrate, Just Follow The Plan

Your article “Integrating America” in the Dec. 1, 2002, issue was both informative and enjoyable. I would like to comment on the “makeability” of the goals set forth in your article.

The need to determine the enterprise architecture starting at the business process level is the correct answer. Understanding the new mission?which is more than the aggregate of the existing missions?will allow the effort to succeed.

The 18 months needed to build the architecture is probably a safe but not extremely aggressive time frame. The overall estimate of effort from design through implementation for a system this size must be at the far end of the three to five years. More realistically though, a system the size of the DHS system, with all of its tentacles, would normally require a five- to seven-year time frame.

Finally, the legacy systems will represent a major challenge. Targeting the functions based on priorities from one to five is a step in the right direction, but also, the effort must include the forceful effort to ensure a common set of processes against these functions.

I believe the agenda is makeable, but only with a strong will to follow the original time line. It reminds me of the creation of the Department of Defense, which was done only when the focus was on accomplishing the task.

Don Belles

Boeing Commercial Airplane Information Systems

How To Properly Analyze Personality Types

I am writing in reference to the Total Leadership column (“The Ins and Outs of Personality”) in the Jan. 15, 2003, issue. I had difficulty buying into many of the stereotypical points Patricia Wallington made. More specifically, the author’s perception of extroverts and introverts is false in many cases.

The main difference between extroverted and introverted individuals is the method by which they process information, not whether or not they “have a great personality” or need to find an avenue to “bring out what’s on the inside.” Extroverts are more vocal with their thought processes, not necessarily more “sociable and unreserved” than introverts. Introverts, on the other hand, tend to internalize their thought processes, which gives them the appearance of being shy, at least in the author’s eyes.

It seems to me the author could have researched the topic a little more thoroughly before deciding to publish her expert opinion on personality typing.

Michael Honza

Foxworth Galbraith Lumber