advertisement
advertisement

This is page 2 of:

Technical Debt Is Destroying IT

June 2nd, 2010

The Technical Debt Red Virus, or under-purchasing technology, has been known to run rampant in franchise organizations. The Red Virus manifests itself through the notion that, once purchased, technology should last forever and be instantly and freely upgradeable. Organizations suffering from the Red Virus are constantly negotiating with their vendors on “sunset dates” for longer support of software or hardware.

Additional symptoms of the Technical Debt Red Virus include:

  • Your organization is forced to purchase replacement hardware on eBay because that is the only place it is available
  • Recent college graduates are unfamiliar with the technology
  • Conversations with vendors start with, “What does the cheapest thing do…”
  • Purchasing two systems to solve “some” of your requirements when for an additional 10 percent you can address “most” of your requirements

Organizations suffering from the Red Virus generally feel that technology provides no competitive advantage and is merely a cost center that drains profits. Most organizations suffering from this strain of Technical Debt will have “IT Cost Cutting” programs formally or informally in place.

Each strain of the Technical Debt virus feeds off each of the other strains. Organizations infected with the Green Virus (over-buying) can often overreact to the situation and find themselves knee-deep in a strain of the Red Virus (under-buying). Without clear alignment to long-term goals, the Orange Virus (non-strategically aligned purchases) can easily mutate to either Red or Green.

So what is a company to do? Is every firm doomed to suffer the fate of being eaten alive by Technical Debt? The key is not to try and remove Technical Debt but to effectively manage it. Very rarely does a technology package exactly meet the business’ need. One version of Technical Debt must be assumed as a result. The key is to manage that debt and understand the long-term impact of acquiring it.

Here are some additional things you can do to manage your Technical Debt:

  • Create a long-term IT strategy and vision. Align every project with that strategy. If a project does not align with the strategy, dump it.
  • Project the five-year maintenance cost of any technology approach. Do not allow these costs to be “just part of what Fred does every day.” Fred might take another job tomorrow; then what will you do?
  • Define your requirements to a detailed level before you make your purchasing decision. Don’t base your requirements on the first proposal you get. Know what you want/need ahead of time.
  • Challenge your business partners on the criticality of each requirement. If one requirement can be dropped and, in turn, save 25 percent of the long-term costs, is it worth it? (If done regularly, this one tip alone could probably reduce IT budgets by as much as 15 percent).
  • Knowing it’s cheaper to have a human do something doesn’t make it a better option. Understand the cost of data integrity issues and the timeliness of data.
  • Ask the question: How many other systems or departments will need the data that is captured or created by this system? If the answer is greater than zero, then understand the costs to extend that data before you implement (because trust me, someone will want it).
  • A saying in restaurant IT states that if a new system can’t add at least one percent to the bottom line, quit wasting time on it. Plenty of others can. Just because it’s a good idea, doesn’t mean you should do it.

In general, businesses should make sure they understand the Technical Debt impact of each and every technology decision they make. Technical Debt is completely justifiable in many instances. Just make sure that it is carried throughout the life of the system.

What are your thoughts? I’d love to gain some additional perspectives. Leave a comment, or E-mail me at Todd.Michaud@FranchiseIT.org. You can also follow me on Twitter: @todd_michaud.

And don’t forget to follow my Ironman training progress at www.IronGeek.me.


advertisement

Comments are closed.

Newsletters

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!
advertisement

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...

StorefrontBacktalk
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.