More than 1,500 people died when the Titanic sank on 15 April, 1912. An iceberg had struck the starboard side. Less than three hours later, the great ship was gone. Do you think any survivors from the port side were thinking, "Good thing the iceberg hit the OTHER side"?
This point has relevance for your job. Suppose someone in the IT group is trying to resolve a problem with a customer. In doing so, he or she learns that a colleague, Joe, from a different department within the IT group, gave wrong information to the customer, and that the information created or worsened the problem. Do you think that person would ever say:
- Joe told you WHAT??!
- Don't listen to Joe's department. They're all messed up.
- (Shaking head): $&@ unbelievable.
These sentiments are understandable, and expressing them is easy. However, think about it from the customer's perspective. That customer wants the problem resolved quickly. Hearing that type of comment might cause the customer to think, "Why is this person wasting my time complaining about a colleague?" More seriously, the customer might also think, "Those people in IT: Do they know what they're doing?"
The less familiar we are with an organisation, region, or country, the less we can distinguish small details within it. You know, within your IT group, who the directors and managers are and what they do. You may have a help desk, an infrastructure team, an applications development team, and a data centre team. You know the differences between these departments and you know who is where.
Chances are, though, your customer is less aware of these differences. To that customer, the boxes and lines under the CIO don't exist. All the customer sees is the big box and visualises a label of information technology. Therefore, when one IT person criticises another, the customer doesn't make a distinction but simply thinks, "IT has a problem." Witnessing this type of behaviour can embarrass customers and can cause them to question the competence of the IT group.
You may think your criticism distances you from the other, problematic IT person. However, like the starboard damage to Titanic, this behavior affects and hurts the whole organisation. In fact, one of my clients, the chief information officer of a major energy company, told me once that this type of behaviour, in his mind, was grounds for termination.
I once called the office of the CIO of a major retailer and reached his assistant, whom we'll call Tina. After I explained why I was calling, Tina referred me to the CIO's director of client services. I then called that director and introduced myself and my work. However, when I told him how I was referred to him, the director became furious, saying, "If Tina did that, she's in a lot of trouble." Of course, I made little progress with that director, never hearing from him again.
His outburst was a perfect example of the port side Titanic passenger mentality. By making that statement to me, an outsider, he exposed divisions within the CIO organisation. If I had been that director, here's what I would have done: I would have listened to the caller but would have said nothing about Tina's actions, even if I had a problem with them. Then, after hanging up, I would have gone to Tina and found out more.
If her actions were wrong, I would have spoken to her about it privately, working out an arrangement on handling future calls of that type. More important, if she had a good reason for giving the information (perhaps, for example, the CIO had told her to do so), finding out the details would prevent me from looking foolish and unprofessional.
Postscript
I called back a few times afterward, trying to reach that director. The first time, I heard a voicemail saying that he was on an extended vacation. The next time, the voicemail said his new job responsibilities called for frequent travel. The last time, his voicemail said he was no longer with the company.
So how do we handle this situation? First, accept the fact that differences will occur. IT professionals may disagree on strategy, or choice of vendor, or schedule for rollout. Before a decision is made, you're free to voice your opinion. However, once the decision is made, it's best to support it. In other words, keep the dirty laundry hidden. Criticising a decision or a co-worker publicly may mean serious consequences for you.
Second, realise that a co-worker who gives different information to a customer may not necessarily be wrong. That information may have been based on different assumptions or circumstances (for example, a different software release or system configuration). In such a case, when the customer tells you that Joe said something different, consider telling the customer that you will talk with Joe to understand what Joe said. Afterward, go back to the customer with advice that both you and Joe have agreed on.
Presenting a united front to the customer protects the reputation and image of the IT organisation, and it can protect and enhance your career.
