Has Y2K steamrolled your pet project? - includes related articles on Year 2000 impact on supply chain, need for better project managers, networking issues - Industry Trend or Event

Software Magazine, Dec, 1997 by John Berry

As the millennium bears down and you race to meet the irrevocable deadline, some application development projects are going to be forced to the back burner. As an IT manager, how do you keep your credibility and avoid pissing off your business units?

Forget about business as usual at DHL Worldwide Express. With the millennium bearing down all focus is now on the company's Year 2001 remediation efforts.

"No matter what people say, the Year 2000 problem is definitely going to drag strategic development," says Les Fondy, senior manager of information technology process solutions for the Redwood City, Calif.-based firm. "We'll end up spending more and still delaying some of our strategic programs because our number one priority is the Year 2000 and we want to be finished with our critical applications by the end of QI/99."

But DHL is an aberration, say analysts and consultants. Most companies, already late getting started on Y2K, haven't a clue how it will impact ongoing strategic IT programs. "One of the things most companies aren't doing is effective resource balancing," observes William Ulrich, president of strategic consulting firm Tactical Strategy Group Inc.

Who's to blame? Ulrich places the culpability squarely on antiquated IT organizational structures. "There are little fiefdoms all over the place and everyone runs their own area and then goes upstairs to fight for more resources."

Yet few IT departments can afford to frustrate their internal customers these days. Surveys reveal that most business units in large organizations characterize IT as continually tardy in starting, projects and not delivering what they promised. "IT's credibility is really on the ropes right now," says Ulrich. "Year 2000 is an opportunity to fix that and build it back up. But to do that they have to get the business people on their side and manage this effectively. If they don't it's highly likely the business units will vote with the CEO to outsource the whole IT function."

The key to gaining such cooperation and still delivering the Y2K goods is a careful and disciplined allocation of resources. But how does upper management decide where to dedicate valuable resources over the next few years?

The first step is to establish clear priorities. Ulrich recommends prioritizing Y2Kprojects by two criteria: the date the systems will fail and their impact on the business. "Projects with close failure dates and high business impact will be near the top of the list and those with late failure dates and low business impact will fall to the bottom of the list," he explains.

He suggests IT managers take a similar tack with planned non-Y2K projects, and rank them by projected start date and business importance. Then they should compare the Y2K projects against these other projects and see which have overriding importance.

And that, friends, is where the real work begins. Defining ways to classify projects is one thing. Actually withholding resources from someone's pet project is quite another.

The key to avoiding the turf wars an IT organization is bound to encounter is to get senior management involved early in the planning stages of the Y2K project, say those experienced in such negotiations. "You have to make sure the decision makers understand the costs involved and that it is the number one priority," says Fondy. No one, he believes, has the luxury of making a Y2K project anything less than a top priority. "If they don't, they won't finish it in time and that's worse than not completing any business functionality you might be trying to build right now."

Who's Steering?

Successful firms typically opt to create a steering committee or Y2K project office that can oversee Y2K work and help resolve resource allocation conflicts between millennium projects and ongoing strategic programs. "If you don't have a Y2K project office and just use a general project office, the likelihood of misallocating resources and not having available resources for various projects is going to be very high," warns Ulrich.

A typical Y2K steering committee for a large organization might include the head of internal audit, chief legal counsel, chief financial officer, and a senior representative from each business unit. "Given the sheer size of the problem, it's essential you have some very senior management involved that are very much in tune to what is happening so you can commit the resources you need," says Peter Szirmak, senior partner with Information Balance Inc., a Year 2000 training and consulting firm based in Toronto. "That's especially important at the testing stage because the final test must be performed on the machine the application is going to run on, so many departments will have to get involved."

Following this model is TIAACREF, a New York City-based retirement and financial services firm for employees of nonprofit education and research institutions. TIAA-CREF is attacking the Y2K problem with a company-wide initiative headed up by a team of senior management. Coordinating the effort is Dave Grunbaum, vice president of general accounting and payment services. He meets monthly with representatives from each of the company's business units and then provides quarterly updates to top management. "We're trying to evaluate our systems and set appropriate priorities," he explains. "But we're not stopping everything we're doing. I don't think any organization can afford to do that."