I’m not convinced by this… though I agree with all you’ve said about CIOs and CTOs and the urgent need for a more integrated, joined-up approach.

But surely, the role you’ve described is one that is inherent in the role of CEO or Managing Director?

It is the chief executive’s job to make sure that there is a clear vision, a strategy to achieve that vision, and to ensure that all activities align to implement those strategies. Delegating this role of integration to someone else is an abnegation of responsibility. What is the CEO for if not for this?

A better solution is for the CEO to appoint Chief Engineers (or some equivalent title – Value Stream Manager is a good one), one per product or service line, to report directly to him/her. The role of the Chief Engineer is to provide entrepreneurial leadership and to be responsible for the success (commercial & technical) of ‘their’ value stream, in sustainably delivering value to customers at a profit.

In turn, the Chief Engineers (who have virtually no line-management authority) are the ‘internal customers’ of the functional departments, their workforce and leaders. Departments (a.k.s. Functions) are where specialists are grouped together, to benefit from mutual collaboration, learning, and continuous improvement. Improving the effectiveness and efficiency of their function is the Head of Functions main responsibility.

The demands of the Chief Engineers require the Departments to work together, cross-functionally, ensuring the flow of value along the value stream pulled by customer demand.

External vendors can be considered to be Departments/Functions that just happen to reside outwith the organisation. They are subject to the same demands and constraints as the internal departments, in that they are required to ensure value flows with hiccup, to maximise the effective flow of value to the end customer.

The CEO’s role is to balance any conflicting demands from the Chief Engineers and the Departments/Function Heads.

Where’s IT/IS in all this? It’s just another enabler… whether it should be a distinct Department/Function is moot. Big IT is usually the wrong answer to the wrong question… a way to deal with failure demand generated internally. Usually, its better to address and remove the origins of the failure than to implement ever-larger IT systems to handle the symptoms.

Best regards,
Grant (PG) Rule

This job description sounds quite like a COO to me, though maybe more like a Foreign Secretary – dealing with external partners – compared to the Home Secretary / Interior Minister remit of a COO.

Would it be more helpful to think of a Chief Systems Officer? The CSO designs and maintains all the (manual, technical; internal/inter-company) systems and processes that enable operations to be successful.

Good luck in the BCS election…

Regards Nigel