Computer Weekly readers have their say
Accountants have had their outsourcing day
Sandy Lloyd, Lecturer, global & corporate finance, The
City College
Mark Sukiennik states, "The fundamental reasons for outsourcing
still hold - such as wanting to drive through efficiency,
effectiveness and transformational changes." (Computer Weekly, 22
November). This is management speak for "financial savings".
Outsourcing is always done for financial savings and always with
a resultant loss in quality of service, though not necessarily
accountable efficiency. The "accountant" always had the last
word.
However, others are beginning to realise that outsourcing may
have been the buzzword for the 1990s but not for the 21st century.
"Insourcing" is on the increase because we are becoming wiser. I do
not agree that it is problematic - Cable & Wireless managed the
switch painlessly.
Accountants have had their day and have not hung around to
listen to complaints from "customers". For the past few years they
have been waving business plans showing financial savings and then
returning to their offices and hiding behind account books.
Whatever business we manage we have to consider the customer in
a more beneficial manner.
Consider IT at the start of the merger road
Thorgeir Einarsson, Sendmail
Chris Digby highlights the need for IT to be higher up the
agenda in company mergers (Computer Weekly, 22 November). But what
is the good in being on the agenda if you are the final point?
If mergers and acquisitions are to be a success, the IT director
must be on the executive committee and involved in every decision
made throughout the process. The services and applications that
come under the IT umbrella are an integral part of any company, and
anyone thinking that two, potentially opposing, systems can operate
in unison needs to reconsider their career. Merging two companies'
e-mail systems is challenging, in particular, as this is now the
most common and effective way to communicate.
IT has quickly become the lynchpin of merger and acquisition
activity. Until executives realise this, businesses will continue
to shoulder the burden of poor performance caused by failed
mergers.
Post-merger IT revamps can lead to cost
savings
Andrew McFadzen, Equant
It is true that IT staff should be more involved in merger and
acquisition activity (Computer Weekly, 22 November), but most, from
network managers to IT directors, still go in to the process with
their eyes firmly closed and hoping for the best. In fact, mergers
are an opportunity for IT departments to demonstrate their worth by
revamping systems and increasing cost savings, rather than cobbling
together old networks.
Instead of seeing IT as a problem to be dealt with on the
checklist, IT directors should use the technology at their disposal
to shed light on their chosen path. Despite the increasingly
mission-critical nature of many business applications, most are
unaware of the impact a merger could have on the applications
running over their networks.
IT directors must treat transitions like mergers as an
opportunity to show how technology can ease the path of decision
makers.
Test teams add value to developments
Kapur Birdy
Nick Langley's piece "Software tests may be automated, but the
human element is crucial" (Computer Weekly, 22 November) does not
recognise or give credit to organisations that already have a good
quality approach to system development.
In fact, these companies carry out an integration verification
validation and testing process which forms part of the product
lifecycle, not just the development lifecycle.
Integration verification validation and testing covers more than
testing - it identifies issues prior to test stage. You make it
sound as if this is a new area. The companies that follow
integration verification validation and testing are proof in
themselves that this is not the case.
I do, however, agree that there are a lot of new, and some old,
companies that have yet to accept the value added by a test team.
They consider it to be an unnecessary, expensive activity that can
be avoided.
Tools alone cannot solve app knowledge
problems
Graham Perry, Amsphere
I wholeheartedly agree with Phil Murphy's point that
applications developed just three years ago are beginning to look
like legacy systems (Computer Weekly, 29 November). However, I
disagree with his conclusion that newly available application
portfolio management (APM) tools are the answer: they are only part
of the answer.
Although the idea that an APM tool can provide a quick fix to
the loss of application knowledge is appealing, it ignores the fact
that process and business knowledge are equally important. The
non-technical knowledge built up in a project team is equally as
important as the knowledge of the application itself.
Organisations are beginning to appreciate that loss of
application knowledge presents a risk to the business, but a
thorough analysis of the scope of knowledge is required before
mitigating the risk.
Obituary:
David Austin
David Austin, whose cartoons graced our Letters page, has died
at the age of 70.
From 1992, Computer Weekly readers enjoyed Austin's sharp wit
and deft pen as he poked fun at the foibles of the IT industry. He
also produced a daily front-page cartoon for The Guardian for 15
years, as well as bringing a laugh to readers of the Spectator, New
Scientist and Daily Telegraph.
In what must be a record, Austin's Hom Sap strip, set in Ancient
Rome, ran in Private Eye for 35 years.
Austin was a chemical analyst and a school teacher before
turning to drawing full-time.