CIO Tenure: What is Wrong (if Anything)?

CIO Tenure ChallengesAlong with IT project failure rates, the average time a CIO stays with a company is one of the most often quoted metrics in our trade. Recent studies cite that 1 in 4 CIOs are fired for poor performance and CIO’s have an average tenure of 4.4 years. These don’t seem to bode well for the CIO. Why is the tenure so short?  And, is this seemingly short tenure really a bad thing?

While certainly not scientific, I’ve been trying to find similarities and differences in the CIOs I work with as they enter a new job and navigate the waters of the enterprise. By personally observing 30+ CIOs over the last 10 years or so and adding to this the observations of my Diamond partners, I have developed a perspective that tries to match the core skill set of a CIO with the point in a company’s developmental lifecycle. I believe that these matches (or mismatches) can lend some insight into the reasons that CIOs do or don’t last in their role.

There are several views of the types of CIOs and I have my own version:

  1. Strategist – very strong CxO collaborator who brings innovative, often disruptive thinking to an enterprise, visual communicator, conceptual and is frustrated with detailed planning
  2. Transformer – comfortable directing large portfolios of projects, both strategic and tactical; great team builder and communicator; develops and understand business cases
  3. Value Manager – comfortable optimizing IT’s processes and platforms, very good sense for IT efficiency and effectiveness; effectively understands and applies benchmarks and frameworks such as CMMi and ITIL

When a new CIO enters, it is interesting to look at where the enterprise is in its developmental lifecycle. I define the developmental lifecycle as having three simple stages:

  1. Evaluation -assessing its business design in light of competitive pressures, cost challenges, or M&A opportunities
  2. Change – planning and implementation of a new business design
  3. Stabilization – operating the new business design and measuring its actual versus desired impact

Obviously, there is a strong correlation between the CIO types and enterprise lifecycle stages (funny how that works). So, my proposal is this:

A CIO will be most successful when his or her skill “type” matches the developmental stage of the enterprise.

CIO Skill Match

Assuming you have a good skill match as a new CIO, the next question is what happens when the enterprise shifts into the next stage. One of three cases exists:

  1. The CIO combines good relationships and a strong IT leadership team to handle the different IT leadership needs
  2. The CIO doesn’t have what it takes to manage the transformation and leaves/asked to leave as the effort stalls
  3. The CIO is “bored” with the changing role and eventually leaves

Before you dismiss the “bored CIO” as a ridiculous scenario because it doesn’t fit you or your colleagues, take my word that they do exist. In fact, they are some of the most effective and creative CIOs out there.

Consider one CIO I am working with now who is a “strategist” (my term not hers). Over the last five years, she has had three CIO positions in different companies. Her style is intense and creative. She sees her role as a disruptor and seeks to turn the enterprise on its head to get real transformational value from IT. Along the way, unfortunately, her style can create relationship challenges and she tends to leave. I would say that in the end, she puts firms on a better path then when she got there. In fact, she is to the point where she considers herself more of a contractor than an employee. This model may not fit you but it does exist.

From a career management perspective, it may be eye opening for you to think about what kind of core skill you have – strategist, transformer or value manager. I’m not saying that you don’t have or can’t have some of the other two, but one is likely dominant.

Now, consider what your firm is trying to do.  Is there a match?

If not, what can you do about it?

  • http://www.lifetimefitness.com Brent Zempel

    I liked the article. Combining the complexities of CIO personalities and stages of organizations…..solid. Your site is now in my favorites list.

    Hope your day is well,
    Brent

  • http://www.lifetimefitness.com Brent Zempel

    I liked the article. Combining the complexities of CIO personalities and stages of organizations…..solid. Your site is now in my favorites list.

    Hope your day is well,
    Brent

  • Steve Romero, IT Governance Ev

    Hi Chris,

    As usual, an insightful post. I like your CIO “types” and organizational “stages.” I also think you are spot-on in matching the two and explaining conditions and tenures.

    I have participated in similar conversations, albeit with differing CIO types and organizational stages. In those cases, as in yours, I have always suggested I want a CIO with capabilities to perform any of the types. Regardless of the stage, I suggest each of the type’s skills are required. Granted, some more and some less, based on the given stage.

    I ask you, am I expecting too much? Do my CIOs have to be so “specialized” that the type of person assuming the position will always be dictated by the current state of my organization? If so, we can expect CIO tenures to stay short, and likely become even shorter.

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

  • Steve Romero, IT Governance Evangelist

    Hi Chris,

    As usual, an insightful post. I like your CIO “types” and organizational “stages.” I also think you are spot-on in matching the two and explaining conditions and tenures.

    I have participated in similar conversations, albeit with differing CIO types and organizational stages. In those cases, as in yours, I have always suggested I want a CIO with capabilities to perform any of the types. Regardless of the stage, I suggest each of the type’s skills are required. Granted, some more and some less, based on the given stage.

    I ask you, am I expecting too much? Do my CIOs have to be so “specialized” that the type of person assuming the position will always be dictated by the current state of my organization? If so, we can expect CIO tenures to stay short, and likely become even shorter.

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

  • Chris Curran

    Hi Steve – Thanks for pushing the discussion here. I think that there are two successful models:

    1> specialist, who spends 2-3 years in the phase in which she specializes then transitions out
    2> generalist, who is a broad business/IT leader and great team builder and understands the types and cycles and builds the leadership team accordingly

    Some Specialists unfortunately come into a job in the wrong phase – a Value Manager coming in during Evaluation, for example – and end up leaving prematurely. This is why its so important that a CIO is clear on what type and role in which she is strongest AND most passionate.

    -Chris

  • Rajbir

    Very powerful article and it applies to all senioro positions, CIO or CXOs. Another way to handle this could be to augment skills you dont have in your team. However biggest challenge is knowing what you dont have and what is needed? This kind of guy can stay long term.

  • Rajbir

    Very powerful article and it applies to all senioro positions, CIO or CXOs. Another way to handle this could be to augment skills you dont have in your team. However biggest challenge is knowing what you dont have and what is needed? This kind of guy can stay long term.

  • Pingback: Permanencia del CIO: ¿Qué está mal (si algo lo está)? – Por Chris Curran « Gestión de Valor Inversiones IT()

  • Pingback: IT Czar – A New IT Leadership Role? — CIO Dashboard()

  • http://twitter.com/InvisiTech Kevin Pashuk

    Great observations. While there is a high transition rate among CIOs, is there not another option? One where the CIO adapts to the enterprise life cycle and helps create a continuous cycle of innovation rather than a single cycle of change?  

    A CIO’s personal leadership styles won’t change, but I propose that today’s CIO needs to change and adapt and extend the average tenure.  If you are a change leader and get bored when the most things become operational, then you are missing out on the opportunity to really be strategic, and be working on the next change, then the next.  We have to be continuously looking several years out and look for opportunities where technology can help our organizations differentiate themselves in an everchanging competitive global market. 

    We can’t have only one change model in our arsenal. Otherwise, once it’s implemented we have to move to another organization in order to start the process anew.

    I’ve been blogging about this concept at turningtechinvisible.blogspot.com.

  • http://twitter.com/FailedCIO Failed CIO

    Is tenure somehow coupled to the background of the CIO? For example, a CIO who has worked their way up the internal ladder tends to have a longer tenure than say a CIO who previously worked for Accenture or other consultancy.