Government is beginning to address the skills
gap
Karl Parkinson, chairman, Computeach International
I read with great interest the article by Rebecca Thomson
entitled "European
Commission plans blue card to ease IT skills shortage". The
fact that Britain is likely to opt out of the scheme comes as a
relief to me. Although encouraging skilled foreign workers to help
plug the UK skills gap is an option, it should, in my opinion, be
secondary to exploiting existing capabilities here in the UK.
I am pleased that the government openly recognises the skills
gap and is considering a variety of solutions. But what it is only
beginning to acknowledge is that the missing link is training.
People need to be encouraged and supported by the government to
retrain for a career in sectors threatened by skills shortages,
such as IT and engineering. The current system falls short, as
funding for government training schemes is channelled through
employers, so training for a new career while working is
inaccessible for thousands of people.
But there is hope on the horizon. The government's development
of Skills Accounts that would release funds directly to individuals
will provide a practical starting point. Giving individuals a
choice and a financial incentive to retrain offers a positive
outlook, and should be a reassurance to industry that there is a
solution to the skills crisis.
Finance firms awaiting assurance on Mifid
Alec D Bruce, Global Solutions Services, Hitachi Data
Systems
I was interested to read Karl Flinders' article
"Finance firms
wait and see on Mifid".
It is not surprising that many firms are deferring spending
money to upgrade their IT infrastructures, as data from the Mifid
Joint Working Group for IT indicates that the average Mifid
programme costs a UK bank between £8m and £12m.
However, I think that the hesitation to spend on Mifid
compliance stems from issues regarding the functionality of Mifid.
Most firms are implementing the durable storage mediums to keep
information on dealings and customer interactions.
However, we see that firms are awaiting guidance from the
regulators on the search, recover and presentation of information
to give evidence of best execution and product sales. It is
inevitable that compliance will be a gradual and phased process, as
Mifid will change and improve both front, middle and back office
processes and cannot be taken lightly.
People are key to making shared services
work
Shub Naha, IDOX
As highlighted in your
round-up of the Socitm
conference, the shared services debate continues to rage across
local government. The technology aspect remains a sticking point,
but in our experience of being involved in such projects, people
are the major barrier to shared services.
The main challenge is a cultural one of getting buy-in from
senior management who may feel it poses a threat to their autonomy.
The key to making shared services work is to understand that even
though the people, processes and technology within organisations
may be shared, policy formulation and decisions can still take
place at the appropriate authority level.
Sharing services for the benefit of the community should be seen
as an opportunity to deliver excellent services, valued by all
stakeholders.
Look to staff to unlock the value of IT
processes
Nolon Owen, risk governance and assurance (Framework
Assurance), NU UK IT Services
Regarding "Understand your
department's DNA", Hugo Trepant's statement, "The concept
originated from a desire to distil years of experience about the
factors that differentiate successful companies from their
competitors," has been considered many times over the years and
resulted in the documentation of numerous IT best practice
models.
The areas of concern Trepant highlights, such as decision
rights, availability of information, allocation of responsibility
(and importantly, authority) and poor management of the IT
organisation impacting performance and morale, to name a few, have
all been considered and addressed in an existing best practice
model. This model sets out to consider Trepant's original statement
in terms of workforce management practices in the 1990s.
The People Capability Maturity Model (PCMM) was published in
1995, with version 2 released in 2001. It uses the maturity model
concept developed by Watts Humphrey at the Software Engineering
Institute of Carnegie Mellon University to describe an evolutionary
journey in relation to an organisation's workforce management
practices.
One of the main drivers for its creation was that the
overemphasis on processes, from the triangle of people, processes
and technology, was creating an imbalance. Also, there was a
recognition that staff are the lever that extracts value through
the use of effective processes, and that good processes are
essentially shelfware without appropriate application.
As a result, there grew a demand from firms wanting to know how
to organise themselves to ensure they had the right people, with
the right skills, in the right place, at the right time, backed-up
with the resources they needed (such as information) to allow the
desired leverage of value. At the same time they also wanted to
ensure they could attract, develop and retain the top talent, and
it was these issues that Trepant is now re-examining, which the
PCMM sought to address.
Often used in combination with models specifically focused on
"process", the PCMM can just as easily be applied to both people
and processes and has also proven itself in areas outside of IT
over the years.