Innovation will happen on top of the more commodity layers. And, the R&D will mostly come from the vendors, who are more interested in broad distribution of their innovations; lifting all boats as opposed to the few who want to pay for some high-priced proprietary code.
However, adopting the IT as commodity approach has some significant challenges. First, IT organisations tend to hang onto legacy systems for too long. They are reluctant to rip out the old stuff and replace it with less complex, more powerful solutions.
Certainly, risk is inherent in any rip-and-replace strategy, but the alternative is continuing to spend time and money maintaining systems with support personnel and chewing gum rather investing in more cost-effective, modern platforms.
Rip and replace doesn't necessarily mean getting rid of mainframes or other mission-critical systems, but it does require a holistic look at the entire infrastructure in the context of creating a platform that will be competitive in the next 10 years. The upfront costs and risks are potentially sizable, but a slower migration could be a real competitive disadvantage.
A second and more profound challenge is that IT organisations, as well as service providers, lack truly skilled, visionary people who can executive on a bold "commodity" plan. It's not a technology issue, but about people and leadership.
Given the disappointments of the last few years after the bubble, many organisations are gun shy and economically strapped when it comes to making IT investments. The fear factor creates a paralytic effect, which makes companies far more conservative in their decision-making. In addition, an exodus of qualified IT talent, as well as outsourcing, has decimated the ranks of many corporations, creating a situation ripe for consultants who may have their own interests at heart in recommending an IT strategy.
At the end of the day, the measure of IT isn't whether it matters or is a commodity -- it's whether the people responsible for delivering an IT platform have the right goals and can execute on a strategic plan. Blaming the technology for some poor performance simply avoids the fact that it's primarily a people issue.
Talkback
Sounds like an age old problem this.
Not enough education and communication going on here as per usual.
IT & Business do not speak the same language and never have. This is because both sets of people usually come from different work cultures, have different goals and agendas.
Establishing opportunities that are frequent and often for education and communication will soon take down barriers.
It works in other industries so why are we an exception? It is because IT is naive to think that it is inventing the wheel as far as business/ technology relations are concerned?
The education angle is correct, too many IT professionals focus on the technology rather than the business needs.
But then its what we are taught at university, or have been trained from the metaphorical shop floor.
Its time IT changed, not to just concentrating on the tech but on how it affects people. IT does matter but not the way it did in the old days, perhaps we should rename it Information Management again instead of IT and ICT.
And alot of people forget IT automation works for larger companies, but not for small businesses and it is certainly at the mercy of human misunderstanding, we need to support the business in terms of information needs, not just provide technology and fix it.
It is high time that IT practitioners became better informed with regard to the goals and attitudes of business management, (and of course vise-versa).
For too long the two sides have travelled divergent paths each convinced that their sphere of influence is of greater importance than the other.
We should not be forcing businesses to fit around our networks, nor should we reinforce dated and inefficient business practice by making technology fit aound it.
The way forward is to form a partnership between the administrators and managers to take advantage of technology to improve practices and efficiency at the same time keeping an eye formly on the business objectives and not implementing something new for the wrong reasons.