Catch Me If You Can. Director's version

"Catch Me If You Can". That's the name of the Steven Spielberg film. I watched, interesting. But not true, although based on real events.

In fact, “catch me if you can” is such a game. I see this game every day, and even participate in it. And I feel about the same as the hero of the Spielberg film - the one Tom Hanks plays. I feel like an idiot. A helpless idiot who is deceived, looking into the eyes, every day. I have power, but all I can do with it is to dismiss. Although this does not help, a new employee comes, and the game begins again.

You heard, probably, such a beautiful statement: if you invited a qualified specialist to work, then you have to do what he says, and not tell him what to do. Have you tried to do what these qualified specialists say? I tried. And I will say it bluntly: this is complete nonsense.
')
The other day I kicked out another CIO. Following him, for some unknown reason, my only programmer broke down and went to Moscow, although I recently raised his salary. Well, to hell with him, with the programmer. He used to be good, valuable, useful, interesting, inspired - by that very qualified employee that I wanted to listen to and do as he says. And then, like everyone, he began to play the game "catch me if you can."

What kind of game is this? You call it “work”, “fulfilling your duties”, “maintaining the IT infrastructure,” “enterprise automation”, “developing a web application”, etc. Your only goal in this game is not to be caught.

Depending on your position in the hierarchy, either your boss, or the director, or colleagues, or internal customers, or external clients, or the devil knows who else should catch you. At a decent factory there is always someone to run from.

Sometimes you join teams and run all together, including the boss with his subordinates can run, for example, from the director. In the books, they call this “grassroots solidarity”, and refer to one of the important features of the Russian people, in the context of managing them. If managers have joined the team, then it turns out, rather, “mutual responsibility”. The essence is the same.

So, here came the CIO to me - the one I kicked out the other day. Resume - download. The experience is incredible. The level of understanding of business is not worse than mine. Putting a business development strategy into an IT strategy for him is like two fingers. So, what is next?

Then I, like a decent idiot, follow the recommendations of smart people who say that you need to listen to a qualified specialist. I listened. That's right it was - he came to work, I called him to me, he came, sat down and ... Silent. Minute, two, five, ten. And I sit and listen. At the interview, he seems to have mentioned such a feature as “proactive”.

Okay, maybe I didn’t understand what pro-activity is when I read books. Could not stand, I say - well, come on, man! Finally, we have a company in our company who knows how to solve business problems using IT (when I said this, for some reason, he was a little hunched over). And silence again. And I sit and listen. Silence

And then the game began. What do you think, with which phrase? Of course, with "I first need to deal with the situation, delve into the problem." Great move, it always begins. No, you do not think, I'm not an idiot, who believes that he could issue proposals on the first day. I just know exactly what will happen next.

Then he went to understand. Day, week, month. I think - well, everything penetrated. Call again. I am silent. And he is silent. I can not stand it - I ask again: what can be improved? What business problems can be solved with the help of IT? Come on, I'm ready, I want, I will support you!

Do you know what he said? It is necessary, says the task management system to implement. No, maybe I don’t understand what, but why does every new CIO start with the introduction of some kind of new system for managing tasks, projects, incidents or something like that?

I am an old, sick man living in a small town, working as a hired factory director. I am very far from IT. But over the years I have memorized a few strange words for me. Look here: Waterfall, Spiral, Kanban, Scrum, Jira, Trello, 1C: Document Management, Aytil and Itilium (brothers?), Microsoft Project, Tasks in Outluke, Directum, Bitriks24, Corporate Portal, Yandex Tracker, metrics, SLA, time to market I did not just remember these words - I used these systems, I delved into these techniques as best I could. All this nonsense was dragged to me by CIOs.

Remember the movie "Office Romance"? Each new boss starts with repairing his own office. And each new CIO begins with the introduction of a new task, project and interaction management system. I have a suspicion that they do not know how to do anything else. And, yes, they can - most of them are former system administrators, they know how to buy new servers (receiving kickbacks from vendors), update the network map and shake the cartridge when bands appear.

I was also lucky - it is not necessary to implement the corporate information system, my programmer has long been able to cope with this. Otherwise, each new IT director would offer automation to start, call an integrator, they would ruin everything for my money, and in the end you would still have to hire a programmer, and CIO to drive him out to look for another terpil, get his salary , and rollbacks from integrators, server providers and everything.

Okay, distracted. I know (now) that the introduction of any task management system does not help the business. The one I manage didn't help. Just the tasks that need to be done periodically migrate from one system to another. When transferring tasks get indulgence - overdue, by magic, cease to be. As explained to me, you cannot add a task with a deadline that has already been released.

Along with the tasks, the IT director receives the indulgence. Firstly, during the introduction of the new system it can not be touched - he, damn it, is busy. Secondly, he has old tasks, but with new deadlines. Thirdly, "they all need to be updated." And we are starting a rapid survey, interviewing business users, prioritizing projects, finding resources, coordinating budgets, etc. All that we have been through many times.

So a CIO can last a whole year. And you won't catch him, he's busy. He has a task.

Then begins operation. And everything returns to normal. Some projects are being carried out. Some problems are solved. Appears some kind of functional. And from a business point of view, nothing changes. No, I lie - IT costs are rising.

Overdue tasks as there were, so many left. No one needs automation, which automates nothing, it becomes more and more. Then it still needs to be updated, and some kind of refactoring should be done, sometimes - reengineering. Well, they say that when I lose my temper, and ask when business problems start to be solved.

Can you explain to me, you fool? Why, for example, automate the work of an accountant? Here are five accountants. Long been sitting. Even when the system was self-written, sat. And coped with all their work. They did all the necessary operations, closed, submitted reports, helped to optimize taxation. Worked from 8 to 17.

But we have automated their work. We bought a modern information system, moved it, trained accountants, and started working. They do their job again. They do all the necessary operations, close, submit reports, help optimize taxation. Work from 8 to 17.

Suddenly, out of nowhere, there are tasks to automate accounting. Here they need to finish something, there is some piece of paper, here somewhere something is not filled. All right, IT does - either themselves or external integrators are called. What is the result? You understand. Accountants are still doing their job. They do all the necessary operations, close, submit reports, help optimize taxation. Work from 8 to 17. Yes, and there are still five accountants.

What is the point then? Can you explain? From a business perspective, the only thing that happened is that I spent the money on automation. Anything more. There are no fewer people, which means that costs have not decreased. They did not undertake any additional work. The speed of input and processing operations has not changed. Nothing has changed, only the picture on the screen. And the money, as they say, is paid.

When the last CIO also proposed a new task management system to implement, I sighed heavily, and, as I could, politely explained to him my attitude towards such projects. But he managed to surprise me - he said that all previous CIOs were deceiving me. I was surprised not by this - everyone before him poured shit on his predecessors, solemnly throwing out their systems and introducing his own.

This proposed to create a system of its own. Like, the main problem of purchased systems and services is poor customization (here's another word in my vocabulary). We must adapt to these systems, change our processes, sacrifice something, put up with drawbacks. And we will make the system ourselves, according to our requirements, and everything will soar. I thought and agreed.

What is the result? In general, I suspect that he did not develop the system, but somewhere he stole it - it appeared painfully quickly. He presented me and showed a key advantage - we, he says, will rank the tasks in terms of usefulness to business. I, damn it, came to delight! Finally, there was a man who understands what I need!

But the joy was short-lived - about five minutes. Until we sat down with him this very utility to determine. Do you know what it looks like? To be honest, I thought that there would be some kind of score-factor score, we will enter a bunch of parameters, including the cost of implementation, and the system will count us something. I heard about this at one of the conferences. And what about us?

And we, damn, in every task there is a field - “Utility for business”. And it is possible to choose a value from the list: “very useful”, “useful”, “in any way”, “harmful”, “very harmful”. Everything! This is the “ranking of tasks in terms of utility for business”! Just choose the utility of the five options, and that's it, Carl!

I, of course, restrained myself not to laugh. Well, I say, who will determine the usefulness of the task for the business? You says! The director will determine! Yes, your well for the leg ... Remember, yes? Do what they say qualified professionals.

Okay, I'll try. We look at the first task - to automate the work of the Quality Control Department, a list of requirements is attached. Hmm ... How to evaluate the usefulness of this task for business? I asked myself this question. I thought a little - I do not know.

I ask the IT director - maybe you know how the solution to this problem will affect the business? But he plays the game well, you can't catch him. Begins to play up, talk about speeding up the execution of operations, transparency of accounting, traceability of parties ... Stop, I say. Business that from speeding up transactions? Will it be possible to transfer the Quality Control Department to a shortened working day? Dismiss one of them? Additional responsibilities?

No, did not catch. He says let's call a business user. Head of Quality Department, Kohl. He, interestingly, knows what is a business user? And I was already interested, although the CIO probably thought that I would jump, postpone, and forget. No, he called Kolya, he came running.

I ask Kohl - your task? Looks, turnip scratches, says - probably. I did not write it myself, one of his people. How, I ask, dear business user, will the solution of this problem affect business? And Kohl has long been in the game, you can't catch him on the chaff. I don’t know, he says, this is your business, IT and business, my business is small.

I do not stop - you see, I say, it is necessary to assign the utility to the task. Kohl is not lost - cancel it to hell, he says, and so we will live. Kohl such - where you will sit down, there and you get down. Well, he adds that he has urgent business there, he has to run. I do not let go - it's interesting.

Once the task is canceled, it means no automation is needed. Well, who against. And how, I ask, Nick, can you help our business? Kohl done - I said, Che, do not work well, or what? Why do you claim me?

God forbid, Kohl, what claims! But we have a business here, and the task ahead is to increase profits. There is always such a task. Sometimes, I will not hide, the profit should be increased to zero. I see that Nick is nervous. Okay, I decided to smooth the situation.

I immediately turned to both of them - guys, I say, you are representatives of different worlds, qualified specialists in your business. One checks the pieces of iron, the other conquers virtual worlds. Both are managers. So, not naive college girls, you understand everything. Business needs to increase profits. Such a task. Solve it can only employees - such as you.

And here I put you a business problem - to increase profits. Well, give us your suggestions!
The guys frowned, became thoughtful, but soon they blurted out, almost simultaneously - you have to force the sellers to sell more! Then profits will grow! Ah well done ...

No, I say, so any fool will say. You think of how to increase your profit by the strength of your units, your knowledge and skills, your experience. What can be done at the TCI, so that profits grow. Well and, accordingly, in IT.

They are silent. Kohl is frowning more and more. Does not stand up, says - this, you put me a task, I will fulfill. Well, so that I understand what to do. And it turns out, like in a fairy tale - go there, I do not know where ...

And then it dawned on me! I understand the essence of this game! That's why I can never catch anyone! I was so happy that I let the gentlemen of managers go - he said that I would think about the tasks for them.
Task! Task! Task! The most important thing in this game is the challenge! This is a totem, immunity, booking from any troubles! The main thing is that you have a task!

As long as you have a task, nothing can be done with you. When you do not have a task, you are almost on the scaffold - because you get paid just like that. Nothing puts more pressure on the psyche than the lack of a task at work. Especially if the absence of a task is obvious.

If there is no task, it must be obtained, at any cost. To find among colleagues, in other divisions, to come up with it yourself, after all. Especially IT shniki sin with this.

And there is no difference whether a task is useful to a business or not. And if someone vozbuhat on this topic (like me, for example) - add him the field "Usefulness for Business", let him rank. After all, it makes no difference to a person what task to perform first, and which one - the second. The main thing is that there are tasks, and there are a lot of them.

Because of tasks, I sometimes feel odd in a company. Literally, as a visitor, any student on an excursion. You go to any office, especially in the office, ask anyone - are you busy? Oh yeah! - he will say. Incredibly busy!

With what? Then he begins to list, and you stand and feel how your ears wither. What only nonsense will not tell! Provision of information, approval of the information provided, verification of the agreement of the information provided, analysis of the information provided, agreement of the analysis of the information provided, verification of the analysis of the analysis of the information provided.

Sometimes it seems that you opened your intestines, I apologize, and was horrified. You thought it worked like a clock, and there the worms fumbled. You ask them - hey guys, what are you doing here? Here they are about the same tell.

The company lives some kind of life, the devil knows where all these connections, processes, tasks come from. In most cases, it is impossible even to find out who invented these tasks, why they should be done, and why.

And the most rotten thing - you can't catch anyone. Well, I will find some stupid task. I will tell the person that he no longer does this nonsense. What happens as you think? Nothing. Canceled the task? I will do another!

Few people have enough patience for a long time to dig into this mess of tasks. And the staff knows it. The director will come, the director will rummage, the director will leave. But the tasks will remain, and always will be. Dull, meaningless, useless tasks. And the game.

I do not know what to do, to be honest. Any idiot, as well as Kohl with a CIO, will say that in order to increase profits, it is necessary to increase sales and reduce costs. Someone, maybe, will still increase production. And that's all. These are all the levers that we have.

Attempts to decompose these levers will lead nowhere. Well, yes, someone will again suggest to print on draft copies to reduce costs. And turn off the monitors at night to save electricity. Everything. Scrap ideas for a hundred thousand a month of savings, and run to execute - after all, they have tasks.

And all do not care, all tasks. And to raise profits - the task of the director. And the director does not know IT. The director does not really know finances. In the intricacies of accounting does not understand. Production understands worse than the foreman. But the director has to set a task for each of them.

In the wording of the director ("increase profits"), the task is no good. Everyone needs an explanation of how they can increase profits. Well, at least no one except IT is asking for technical specifications.

What am I supposed to do? How can I write a task in terms that I don’t understand? Try, on occasion, to tell the surgeon where you need to make the incision, what kind of scalpel to use, what to do if the blood rushes, and what threads you need to sew. It’s about as difficult for me to set a task in IT.

I can't do that. And I continue to set the task as I understand it. And I can not catch anyone. All tasks. And mine is no good. And the setting is bad, and there is no time for it, and in general it is not a task. , .

. , . – . – , . , , . – , – , – Lean, – . , , . , .

, . . . . . - . .

, , -. , . . – , . , , , .

. - . – -? . .

, … , . . , , . , – . , .

, . .