New CIOs at Best Buy, Borders Likely To Mean Few Changes

Written by Evan Schuman
May 27th, 2009

Two of the most powerful retail chains—at least the most powerful beginning with “B”—each introduced new CIOs Tuesday (May 26), with Borders naming Scott Laverty (a veteran consultative executive, hailing from IBM, Deloitte Consulting, PricewaterhouseCoopers and Ernst & Young) and Best Buy crowning Neville Roberts, a promotion from within.

Although it’s always difficult to accurately project what new IT leaders will do with their new gigs, there are indications that neither exec is likely to create major ripples, at least not in the nearterm.

At Best Buy, the 41-year-old Roberts technically replaces Bob Willett, who has held the CIO title for years and has been a senior IT leader at Best Buy since April 2004. But Willett has been holding dual titles, serving as both the full chain’s CIO and CEO of Best Buy International. Willett will continue as CEO of Best Buy International and, most critically, Roberts will continue to report directly to Willett. When a new executive is reporting into the executive being replaced, that’s rarely followed by a radical shift in strategy. If Willett opposed an approach as CIO, he’s unlikely to endorse it as the boss of the CIO.

Another sign that little radical change in IT strategy is likely at Best Buy any time soon: Roberts only joined Best Buy last year (he was hired in January 2008 as CIO of Best Buy International, reporting into Willett) and he’s been working with Willett the entire time. If they had key differences in IT strategy, it’s unlikely that he’d be given the nod as permanent CIO.

Before joining Best Buy, Roberts worked some 18 years at Accenture, “most recently as senior partner in their Global Retail Practice where he was responsible for clients such as Wal-Mart International (including ASDA), WHSmith, Argos and Tesco,” according to a Best Buy statement.

The situation is quite different at Borders. The 1,000-store bookseller chain’s naming of Laverty as its new CIO is likely to continue the chain’s current CEO-lead strategy of focusing almost all efforts on boosting in-store sales.

But equally interesting is that Borders also announced a new director of E-Commerce Systems, namely Paul Devitt. The closest thing to a predecessor for Devitt was Kevin Ertell, who ran the chain’s E-Commerce operations until leaving Feb. 3 during a reorganization. But Devitt’s last thing was at Circuit City, where he toiled for three years as senior manager of E-Commerce Technologies. One could say that while Ertell left Borders, Devitt’s last employer left the planet. Although it certainly weakens one’s compensation negotiating position, there’s one good thing about leaving a chain that shuts its doors in a very public way: no one can suspiciously ask why you left.

What’s initially unknown is whether Devitt will be allowed to innovate or will simply be asked to initially serve as a caretaker.


Comments are closed.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.