A Different View of Technology Cycles

There are at least two types of technology cycles--those that describe the evolving capabilities of technology (for example memory capacity and compute power doubling every 18 to 24 months) and those that describe how technology is acquired, managed, and controlled. This post seeks to inform the latter management and control cycles.

A whole science (or perhaps art) has been made out of tracking and predicting various technology and product lifecycles. Indeed, consulting organizations have based practices around this subject and companies have attempted to differentiate themselves from the competition based on their expertise in "thought leadership" and ability to keep customers current through technology refresh capabilities.

However, what these various entities seem to overlook are the larger (and from my perspective more important) organizational and cultural implications of these cycles.

Specifically, the cycles I am referring to are those that define the relative relationships between technology managers (CIOs, systems managers, IT directors, and the like) and technology users (business end-users and consumer end-users).

Looking at the history of information technology, it can be seen that the 1950s, 1960s, and much of the 1970s were controlled by the corporate computer services, data processing, information services, information technology, or whatever the corporate department was called. This control took the form of allocating who would have access to scarce and expensive computing resources, standardizing technology to gain economies of scale, and driving down corporate costs by automating repetitive tasks. In doing so, pent-up demand was often unmet.

In response, departments and individual users began to look for alternative access to compute resources. To improve responsiveness to IT needs users resorted to contracting for services (indeed the whole IT services market developed from fulfilling this need), "borrowing" or sharing compute time among end-users through time-sharing, and purchasing packaged software to reduce development time.

A second technology cycle began when IT departments rapidly regained control by declaring time-sharing systems to be the responsibility of IT, not a department. Once the compute resource was under IT control, the software that could run on it was also controlled.

Again, whenever compute resources become constrained (as they always will when they come under the control of a department whose sole purpose is improving cost and gaining economy of scale), users seek alternatives that will address the users' unmet needs. During the mid- to-late 1970s, departments and end-users sought out mini-computers that could be used for departmental tasks outside the purview of the IT department.

The third cycle began when IT attempted to reassert control over computing resources by gaining control over these departmental computers. Under the guise of maximizing the capability of distributed computing, the IT department argued that data redundancy and duplicate development on mini- computers was actually driving up IT and total administrative costs. However, the IT department was never totally successful in regaining control.

The reason was the invention of the personal computer (PC). As IT departments took control of mini-computers, departments (mainly technically savvy end-users) began to adopt emerging PCs such as the Apple II and the Adam to perform repetitive tasks. This time it occurred during the early 1980s. The PC--soon evolving into the predominant IBM Compatible PC--along with versatile applications such as the spreadsheet, greatly expanded the end-user's reach. The combination required minimal expertise to operate. The applications were suitably flexible to enable the end-user to quickly re-purpose and adapt the combination. It was also during this time that the PC and applications moved into the consumer space for the first time thereby multiplying productivity because the end-user could continue work at home (and with the development of the "luggable," "portable," "laptop," and finally the "notebook" computer, information technology could be taken on the road).

The fourth technology cycle took almost a decade before the corporate IT department could regain any real control. The process that emerged to enable control represented the very capabilities that enabled the end-user (and now that end-user was more often coming into contact with technology as an individual consumer) to regain control of much of that technology. First, business became accustomed to the increased productivity that resulted from working at home and on the road.
Therefore, the IT controls that emerged were required to have the flexibility to allow access from outside the enterprise. Second, since the compute resource had also become a consumer device, there were some areas where the IT department did not have the opportunity to gain control.

Just as the IT department was reasserting a limited level of control over the exploding PC population through security and access controls, and through technology standardization, the end-user found another approach to satisfying unmet IT needs: Access to the Internet.

The end-user began to disconnect from large corporate compute resources and connect to the Internet at large. Through the PC, and later through laptops and phones, the end-user gained access to information and data that was previously available only through a library in paper form. In many cases, the access was to information that an IT department had no desire to accumulate and store within the corporation.

The fifth cycle began as corporate IT attempted to rein in external Internet access. They did so through the implementation and expansion of corporate intranets (as portals to trusted information) and through repeated attempts to filter external information sources. Success has been limited at best--success at filtering pornography and similar sources, but continued failure at filtering less obvious and objectionable sources. Adding to the difficulty has been continued evolution of the end-user device; from a simple pager, to a text pager, to a cellular phone, to an Internet mail services device, to a Web-enabled Internet device, and currently to a multi-function smart device that can do most, if not all, desktop compute activities (though on a much smaller scale so productivity has been sacrificed for portability).

The result of this current shift is that the IT department defines the technology (often stating what they will and will not support), and the end-user ignores the restriction and acquires what they think will provide the best use. In turn, the adoption reaches critical mass when enough corporate users (especially executives) demand support so that the IT department has no choice but to support it.

It could be argued that the sixth technology cycle has begun, but each successive cycle has become significantly shorter. As a result, it is becoming increasingly difficult to tell when one cycle has ended and another one has begun. Indeed, it appears that the cycles have begun to overlap. This is occurring because emerging, end-user technologies are coming to market faster than IT departments can gain control over them.

As an example, the iPhone went on sale on June 29th without the benefit of robust third-party support (Apple has made the iPhone a closed architecture meaning access to the underlying hardware and software is severely restricted). As a result, little "Web 2.0" (the one open-standard that was made available to third-party vendors) capabilities were available at launch. Yet, by the end of the weekend following the launch, a wide variety of useful business applications had been written, tested, and published for general use.

These cycles will continue to vex and challenge the corporate IT department (and the end-user, depending on your perspective). Rapidly emerging technical devices and capabilities, open-process standards, and developing business process management standards will continue to present solutions to the end-user and control issues for the IT department.