4) and 1) make essentially related points. And again, in the end it’s the CEO who needs to have the epiphany about the core role of the CIO in the organization’s success.

5) Countless times, I’ve seen key projects initiated from the top level, absent a business case being even mentioned: i.e., a gut-level strategic decision based on market conditions, competition, etc. That’s certainly their prerogative, and it’ll never stop entirely. That said, it’s still important for the organization overall to instill an ethic of SOME form of business case being completed for every endeavor, and none of us should stop pushing for that. It should never be viewed as slowing down an organization’s agility, except in a good sense: looking before leaping.

3) I’m of two minds here: yes, business-driven metrics are key, but are also dependent on many external variables, market conditions, marketing drives, new product releases, etc. IT, for all its key strategic value, also functions as a service provider to the rest of the organization, and this shouldn’t be denied in our zeal to be recognized as core corporate strategic contributors. On the services we provide, we need to “show that we’re in control” by monitoring and publishing useful, “full disclosure” metrics. My point in the original tweet was that these metrics should be (as much as possible) in terms that non-technical users can readily absorb and relate to: minutes of downtime in a week are MUCH more “in your face” and obvious than the more abstract representation of “99.45% uptime” etc.

4) and 1) make essentially related points. And again, in the end it’s the CEO who needs to have the epiphany about the core role of the CIO in the organization’s success.

5) Countless times, I’ve seen key projects initiated from the top level, absent a business case being even mentioned: i.e., a gut-level strategic decision based on market conditions, competition, etc. That’s certainly their prerogative, and it’ll never stop entirely. That said, it’s still important for the organization overall to instill an ethic of SOME form of business case being completed for every endeavor, and none of us should stop pushing for that. It should never be viewed as slowing down an organization’s agility, except in a good sense: looking before leaping.

3) I’m of two minds here: yes, business-driven metrics are key, but are also dependent on many external variables, market conditions, marketing drives, new product releases, etc. IT, for all its key strategic value, also functions as a service provider to the rest of the organization, and this shouldn’t be denied in our zeal to be recognized as core corporate strategic contributors. On the services we provide, we need to “show that we’re in control” by monitoring and publishing useful, “full disclosure” metrics. My point in the original tweet was that these metrics should be (as much as possible) in terms that non-technical users can readily absorb and relate to: minutes of downtime in a week are MUCH more “in your face” and obvious than the more abstract representation of “99.45% uptime” etc.