SHOULD I.T. CONTROL EVERYTHING?

I recently came across the latest Nostradamus-like, shocking forecast from Citrix CEO Mark Templeton @ computing.co.uk. It talks about choice, and how I.T. leaders should start to open their minds into allowing end-users to select their own applications, services, etc. In Mark’s own words: "IT wants to control everything, but to hold down costs you need to get rid of that and only control what you need to". If I would’ve been present on this dialogue, I imagine myself pointing a gigantic interrogation light at him and asking “IS THE WORLD READY FOR THIS REBELLION? ”. Don’t get me wrong. I’m all for striking a balance between I.T. –rest of the world by providing a rational choice model, BUT allowing end-users to make vital I.T. decisions “on-demand” is far away from my immediate agenda (try again in 20 years). I stop for a second to really think about the connotation of all this. If I was the CEO of a 1.5 billion/revenue company and my value-proposition was providing those choices to consumers, I would be asking for the same radical shift in I.T. culture, because at the end of the day, my Company would be the only beneficiary. Then I started visualizing the aftermath. My brain went in overload and needed to reboot twice. The main questions that came to me: Who controls the authoritative switch?...Who gearshifts the grey area between what’s self-service/on-demand and what’s central authority?...Will I need to create a special board or internal group to dictate the rules of engagement and to cost-effectively handle this differentiation?...most likely YES…but then…where would the savings (if any) go to?. The last reflection was the face of our Risk Management Chief while I was pitching this initiative. Not a pretty picture. Going back to the interview, the part that did it for me was the correlation story about Banks not forcing their customer to use certain web browsers, devices, etc…and why we corporate I.T. try to lock those choices for our users. As a former CIO with a large international bank, I was tempted in writing a private email to Mr. Templeton. The subject line would read something like “Are you kidding me????”…I went again in brain-safe-mode and imagined a welcome screen for my end-users like this: “HOW DO YOU FEEL TODAY?. IF YOU WANT TO CONNECT USING CITIRX TECHNOLOGIES, PRESS 1” – “FOR MICROSOFT ALTERNATIVES, PRESS 2 – IF YOU WANT US TO CREATE A NEW APPLICATION FOR YOU BECAUSE YOU DON’T LIKE THE PINK FLOWERS ON YOUR SCREENSAVER PRESS 3” – or better yet, a disclaimer that reads “DUE TO I.T. PROJECT RELOCATION, YOU ARE NOW ALLOWED TO USE ANY BROWSER YOU WANT, WITH OR WITHOUT PATCH OR UPGRADES AND WITH NO OTHER SECURITY MEASURES, BUT IF THE COMPANY GETS IN TROUBLE THEN…YOU ARE FIRED!”. Folks, I’m not trying to be silly, but my two cents on this far-reaching call for a huge change in I.T. culture is that , in the short run, it might offer some benefits on load-balancing internal vs. external issues/projects, but if not properly managed, it could be a complete disaster. A suggestion would be to star using small low-risk tryout projects with technologies that do not directly affect mission-critical systems and processes (and to make sure that associated governance costs stay the same). Remember, life is all about balance. Reinventing the wheel is good, but only if it’s faster, more reliable, and it doesn’t run you over. Let me emphasize that I truly respect Mark and his Company and he knows I’m a big supporter, but please, next time that an industry leader wants to change my I.T. world, let me know in advance so I can have my cardiologist on stand-by.