3 ms·

You don't need to fix the whole org. Just the pieces that are currently bottlenecking the org's mission. Part of working with large systems is accepting that i

You don't need to fix the whole org. Just the pieces that are currently bottlenecking the org's mission. Part of working with large systems is accepting that it's okay if some of the components suck as long as the objective is still being achieved.

Aeolun 7y ago
> Just the pieces that are currently bottlenecking the org's mission. The problem is that all pieces are interdependent. So you cannot just replace only a single part (of course that’s not always true, but often enough that it might as well be the rule).
SamuelAdams 7y ago
You're right. But then everyone who wants their systems worked on starts attributing "business value" to each change request. So now you have a huge backlog of changes with made-up points, and each manager says their change is more important than the other's. The only way to get any traction is to get VP level people involved to prioritize which systems to work on. But some VP level people might see you reaching out to them as incompetence - "you can't prioritize your own work?! What did I hire you for!", etc. At the end of the day it's really about the people in the org and how altruistic they are when considering the constraints of the IT dept.