Don’t lead tech on your own

If you want to implement a successful technology-driven transformation, don’t do it without an IT-focused colleague or partner.

Why not? There’s lots of stories that I’ve heard about IT projects that have been implemented without the business. But what happens when an IT project is implemented without IT? It’s been my experience that this can lead to significant mis-steps in the planning and execution of the project.

It you study IT project planning, you’ll notice that they have very specific steps that they consider when implementing an IT project. And that’s for good reason…they work. But they are different than what you would expect in a non-IT focused project. What are they?

• Planning
• Design
• Build
• Testing
• Implementation

I’d like to explain to you what can go wrong in getting to a successful implementation of your project if you skip any one of these stages in typical software development.

Skipping any of the steps in a typical software development lifecycle can lead to significant issues, impacting the quality, efficiency, and success of the final product:

Skipping Planning

• Undefined Objectives: Without proper planning, the project may lack clear goals and objectives, leading to misaligned team efforts and wasted resources.
• Scope Creep: Without a plan, the project can easily suffer from scope creep, where features and requirements continuously change or expand, leading to delays and budget overruns.
• Resource Misallocation: Without a clear plan, it's difficult to allocate the right resources at the right time, potentially causing bottlenecks and inefficiencies.

Skipping Design

• Technical Issues: Skipping the design phase can lead to technical problems later in development, as the architecture may not be robust enough to support the application's requirements or future scalability.
• Poor User Experience: Without focusing on design, the final product might not meet user needs effectively, leading to poor user adoption and satisfaction.
• Increased Development Time: Lacking a design blueprint, developers may need to make frequent changes during the build phase, increasing development time and costs.

Skipping Build

• Incomplete Software: Obviously, without the build phase, there will be no actual software to deploy or test. However, rushing through the build phase or not dedicating adequate time can result in incomplete features or poor code quality.
• Higher Defect Rates: Insufficient attention to the build phase typically results in higher defect rates, which are more costly to fix later in the development cycle.

Skipping Testing

• Bugs and Instability: Skipping testing can lead to software that is buggy, unstable, or insecure, which can damage the user’s trust and the company's reputation.
• Poor Quality Assurance: Without testing, there's no formal process to verify that the software meets the required standards or functional specifications, leading to a product that might not perform as intended.

Skipping Implementation

• Deployment Issues: Improper or rushed implementation can lead to issues during deployment, such as downtime, data loss, or system outages.
• User Resistance: Skipping over proper implementation, including user training and support, can lead to resistance from end users, as they might not understand how to use the new system effectively.

Those are the things that might happen related to each of the individual stages should they be skipped. But what does it do overall if you make these mistakes?

• Increased Operational Risks:
  • Critical system failures due to untested or poorly integrated components.
  • Loss of data integrity and potential data breaches if security is not adequately designed and tested.
• Financial Impacts:
  • Higher maintenance costs to fix issues that could have been addressed earlier in the lifecycle.
  • Potential loss of revenue due to delayed releases or unsatisfactory product performance.
• Brand and Reputation Damage:
  • Negative customer feedback and reviews due to poor user experience or product performance.
  • Damage to brand reputation from releasing a low-quality product, potentially leading to lost future business.
• Legal and Compliance Issues:
  • Non-compliance with regulatory standards due to inadequate attention to legal requirements during planning and design.
  • Legal consequences from failing to secure user data or from software failures that impact customer operations.
• Team Morale and Productivity:
  • Lower morale and increased frustration among team members due to having to constantly fix problems that could have been prevented.
  • Burnout and higher turnover as team members struggle with the chaotic development process and constant firefighting.
• Customer Impact:
  • Loss of trust from users and clients due to unreliability and poor performance of the software.
  • Clients may switch to competitor products due to dissatisfaction, affecting long-term customer relationships.

Skipping steps in the software development lifecycle not only affects the technical quality of a project but also has far-reaching consequences on business operations, financial health, and company reputation.

I’ve made all of these mistakes by trying to lead alone.

It wasn’t too long ago that I had never led a project with a heavy technology component of it. Sure, I’ve led the development of financial models but nothing that was being implemented within an organization at scale. When I initially tried to lead this, I got peppered with questions that I never really considered. Questions like,

• Is your project planning method a waterfall or agile method?
• Why don’t you have any resources helping during design and development?
• What is your role in testing?

I just thought that I would do the strategy and the IT team would do IT focused things. I would be so clear that it would be a clean handoff. As my leaders and executives reviewed the project plan, they identified these huge risks right from the get go. As they explained, these steps aren’t just IT steps, but they are steps that are required for the entire team. Projecting those risks forward, now I can see the mistakes that I was making in my logic and thinking.

That’s why I want to share this lesson with you.

A technology-focused project should have dual leadership between the business and IT.

If I could go back in time, I should have developed a co-leadership structure with one of my IT colleagues. That simple change would have saved me a bunch of time, risk, and rework. As I learned this lesson and changed my approach, here’s what happened.Tell the reader, if you could go back in time, what you would do differently. What should the reader do instead? You've established all that can go wrong when you make this previous decision, now show the reader what life can look like on the other side—when you make the right decision.

Implementing a co-leadership structure with both business and IT leads on technology-focused projects can create numerous positive outcomes. Here are some of the key possibilities:

• Enhanced Communication: Having leaders from both business and IT ensures continuous dialogue between the two domains, reducing miscommunications and aligning project goals with business needs and technical capabilities.
• Balanced Decision Making: Co-leadership allows for decisions to be made with both business impact and technical feasibility in mind, leading to more effective and sustainable solutions.
• Faster Problem Resolution: With leaders from both sides involved, issues can be identified and addressed more quickly, leveraging the expertise of both the business and IT.
• Increased Project Buy-In: When leadership involves both business and IT, it’s easier to secure buy-in from all stakeholders, as each group feels represented and valued in the project development process.
• Better Risk Management: Co-leaders can jointly assess potential risks from both business and technical perspectives, leading to more robust risk management strategies.
• Improved Innovation: Collaboration between business and IT can foster a more innovative approach to technology solutions, as business needs drive technological innovations and IT expertise realizes these ideas effectively.
• Enhanced User Adoption: With business leaders involved, the project is more likely to meet the real needs of end-users, thus improving the likelihood of successful adoption and satisfaction.
• Streamlined Resource Allocation: Co-leaders can more effectively negotiate and manage resources, ensuring that the project is adequately staffed and funded from both the technical and business sides.
• Strategic Alignment: Ensures that technological developments are directly aligned with business strategies and objectives, maximizing the impact and relevance of tech initiatives.

I deeply care about sharing my experiences and the lessons learned from my mistakes because I want to help you avoid the pitfalls and challenges that I've faced. My goal for you, the reader, is not just to succeed in your endeavors but to do so more efficiently and effectively than I did. Learning from someone else's mistakes can accelerate your own path to success, reducing unnecessary struggles and fostering a smoother journey towards achieving your goals.

This is important to me because I believe in the power of shared knowledge and collective growth. By offering insights into what went wrong and how different decisions could have led to better outcomes, I hope to empower you to make informed choices. It’s about lifting each other up and building on the lessons of the past to create a more successful future. Ultimately, I want you to not only reach your goals but to surpass them, armed with the wisdom gained from both successes and failures.