Your Organization
Happiness is equilibrium. Shift your weight. Equilibrium is pragmatic. You have to get everything in proportion. You compensate, rebalance yourself so that you maintain your angle to the world. When the world shifts, you shift. — Tom Stoppard
So far we have looked at three ways to examine the mass of an IT organization.
First, we looked at the traditional way of looking at the size (or mass) of an organization – people. This provided a look at the many ways in which mass can be assessed by internal and external people, and how it correlates to value add.
Another way we looked at assessing mass is through the assets of an organization. This can be termed a book-keepers view as it is aligned tightly with balance sheet assets and the management of these assets.
A third way to look at mass was through capabilities. This lens provides a perspective from the business (and IT customer). The depth and breadth of the IT capabilities provides a look into the mass of the IT organization.
Each of these ways provides a different look mass. Each way also has implications to the attributes of mass as it relates to time (current state vs. future sate). It begs the question, is mass good – and if so, is one type of mass better than the others?
Is Mass Good?
At one point in time mass was considered critical to success, the greater the headcount, the greater the number of assets at your disposal, the greater the economies of scale, and greater the profit potential. It allowed organizations to use their mass as a force in the marketplace and could be directed to address any number of problems. While the capabilities and offerings which were brought to the market were of utmost importance. The path to these greater capabilities was through greater headcount and assets.
As we have moved from an industrial to informational mindset, the pendulum has swung somewhat. While capabilities are still paramount, the bulk associated with what is required to provide these capabilities (assets and headcount) is no longer seen as necessarily being required. Over the last several years being nimble has been a mandate (spoken or unspoken). Use of external labor and business process outsourcing is seen as a way of providing capability while shedding mass (becoming more nimble). Cloud computing, similarly, is seen as a way to provide assets to an organization without directly adding mass to the organization.
Different Strokes for Different Folks.
Going back to our original equation, [Force = mass x acceleration], in the context of the IT organization, it is desirable from the CEO perspective to consider the mass associated with capabilities to be of highest order. In order to be nimble, a smaller number of assets and people within an IT organization provide, in theory, a more nimble workforce.
From an organizational change perspective however, the people / headcount view of mass is significant. When your goal is to influence the hearts and minds and ultimately modify behaviors it is important to gain an appreciation of the magnitude of the challenge and the effort required to resolve the challenge.
From an operational (and financial) aspect, it is important to know the mass of the organization as it relates to the assets of the organization – since assets do not manage themselves and do require regular care and feeding.
Putting the Numbers Together.
For quant jockeys, what is most significant is not the absolute numbers, but the ratios and relationship between the numbers. For example, if we determine that we have a competency of provisioning and supporting laboratory systems for a hospital, it is interesting to consider mass1 (number of people required to support) the systems, and mass2 (number of assets in the form of servers, client computers, devices, interfaces, etc) which are required to provide this capability, in relation to the ratio of the number of people who this capability is provided to. In this case we may determine that the laboratory systems support 12 lab people, and require 6 full time people to manage 40 point solution applications, 95 application interfaces, 55 Windows servers, and 25 discrete lab test devices. Important information to know – and a good sense of mass of the IT organization (or at least the provisioning and supporting of laboratory systems capability).
