Comments on: IT transparency is good. But how transparent should you be?

By: WUPM #8 – Linear Thinking and Transparency | What's up in Project Management

Thu, 28 Jan 2010 00:21:28 +0000

[...] IT transparency is good. But how transparent should you be? No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post) [...]

By: Peter Kretzman

Peter Kretzman — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:37:41 +0000

Thanks for commenting, Mark, and you’re certainly right about how some people want “absolutes”.

I guess I didn’t view what I was advocating as really all that difficult: it’s asking people not to spew bad news unless/until there’s been an opportunity to talk through the implications of the news with the team at large. Lots of times, the bad news turns out to be nowhere nearly as catastrophic as it seems at first glance, so it’s important not to go off half-cocked, in some well-meaning push for alleged transparency. Otherwise, I’m actually a huge advocate of transparency; see the post I linked to on why the CIO needs to air the dirty laundry, for example.

By: Mark W Schumann

Mark W Schumann — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 16:55:47 +0000

As is often the case, Peter, the thing that makes what you’re advocating difficult is that it requires judgement and a relatively fine touch. A lot of people want absolutes; but “tell all and let the chips fall where they may” is not much better than “control for favorable impressions at any cost.”

Yeah. Being a manager is hard. Any formula that purports to make all decisions for you is a poor formula.

Complicating this is the fact that many IT directors work in adversarial environments where honest transparency exposes you to an unacceptable level of vulnerability.

By: Links for November 29 2009 | Eric D. Brown

Links for November 29 2009 | Eric D. Brown — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 16:41:43 +0000

[...] IT transparency is good. But how transparent should you be? by Peter Kretzman on CTO/CIO perspectives [...]

By: Russ Aebig

Russ Aebig — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 20:25:25 +0000

Great article. Having been through these situations myself I can echo your guidance. Everyone NEEDS you to demonstrate a steady hand and be the North Star they can set their internal compass by. The alternative as you aptly describe is a contagious panic.
The flip side is equally bad. All items on all status report being green with no own issues is lighting the fuse on the bomb which will inevitably go off as implementation date draws near. Usually very avoidable with a modicum of awareness and comfort with the measured assessment and response to issues as they arise.
… Great post. I look forward to reading what you write.

By: Steve Romero, IT Governance Evangelist

Steve Romero, IT Governance Evangelist — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 19:07:59 +0000

Nice post Peter. It does a great job of showing the downside of transparency.

I follow a short list of rules when it comes to transparency:
- Information is used for one thing – to make decisions
- Information should be fact-based
- Information not based on fact should be clearly labeled (conjecture, assumption, estimation, gut-feeling, etc.)
- Information must be provided to the folks accountable for making decisions associated with the information

As if you couldn’t guess, this is the essence of governance (the processes and relationships that lead to reasoned decision-making). It all starts with understanding what decisions need to be made, knowing who is accountable for making given decisions, and collecting, integrating, analyzing and disseminating the information required to make those decisions.

Sounds simple, but it requires a level of governance and process sophistication few companies possess. This leaves the door open to either no transparency, or the transparency-gone-wild that you describe.

Steve Romero, IT Governance Evangelist
http://community.ca.com/blogs/theitgovernanceevangelist/

By: jfbauer

jfbauer — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 13:30:06 +0000

I think “judicious and organized transparency” nails it. The Chicken Little approach is counter productive to the organization as well as creates unneeded stress on you (as Director in this case) to have to quiet the masses at the same time address the crisis. “The sky is falling” doesn’t help anyone. “We just got word that the sky might be falling. Before anyone panics, we are going to dig in, understand the scope of the falling sky and present some options to keep the sky up where it is supposed to be. We’ll report back by close of business on the status of the possible falling sky.” Or some other permutation that conveys the notion that “stuff” will happen, but there is a plan and options on the table to address the “stuff” … as Peter says: “show you are in control”

Great post!