Greedy Corporate Minimalism...Will It Ever Stop?

Leaders of IT departments have become increasingly financially conservative and risk averse in recent years. The cowardice behaviors of executive leadership has resulted in a lack of innovation and the contentment with misrepresented, bloated, and overhyped software solutions that does nothing to separate the organization from its competition. This trend is driven by a number of factors, pinching pennies in the use of offshore resources, the naive procurement of commercially available off-the-shelf (COTS) software, and the propaganda and associated pressure to conform to the alleged "best practices" from the influencers and other bad actors who stand to profit from these laggard business models.

One of the major factors that has contributed to this trend is the use of offshore resources. Many IT leaders are opting to hire workers from other countries, under the guise of saving money on labor costs based on the false belief that parity exists amongst developers. This practice has resulted in a lack of internal engagement among employees and a lack of motivation to create innovative solutions. These offshore resources are often "out of sight, out of mind" and are motivated primarily by profit, rather than by a desire to create cutting-edge software.

Another factor that has contributed to the financial conservatism and risk aversion of IT leaders is the preference for COTS solutions. COTS solutions are software products that are commercially available and can be purchased off-the-shelf. These solutions are often chosen because they are perceived as being less risky and less expensive than custom-built software. However, this approach has led to a lack of innovation and a failure to create software that truly differentiates the organization from its competition. Additionally, COTS solutions are often held hostage to vendor demands, both functionally and fiscally in the form of delayed releases and hefty software maintenance/licensing costs.

Furthermore, IT leaders often feel pressure to conform to the practices of their peers and other false prophets operating in the technology sector. Executive leadership has developed increased levels of a condition called FOMO (fear of missing out) on the latest renamed or regurgitated buzzwords which unfortunately has come at the expense of a lack of originality and a failure to take bold risks. This pressure to conform or be cast out can be especially pronounced in organizations where IT leaders are judged primarily on the basis of cost and risk, rather than on the basis of innovation and the ability to create game-changing technology led operational efficiencies and analytical insights.

How Did We Get So Weak So Fast?

Wall Street Suckers

There are several factors that have led to corporate environments becoming content with the laggard slug status quo. One of the main factors is the pressure to appease Wall Street and meet unrealistic financial targets. This self-induced pressure has resulted in short-term gains at the expense of long-term innovation and growth, and unfortunately brilliantly disguised from shareholders.

Fake News Propagandists Prophecies

Another factor that has contributed to this environment is the influence of industry analysts and publications such as Gartner and CIO.com. These organizations often promote a "pay-to-play" mentality, where companies must pay for access to research and analysis while others seeking notoriety have paid for the preferential exposure. Similar to the same patterns we see in mainstream media, the consumption of such information has led to a lack of objective and unbiased information, leading to the suffocation of innovation and experimentation.

Same As It Ever Was...Cronyism, Nepotism, and Favoritism

The continuation of the tried-and-true buddy system, where incompetent and inexperienced leaders are promoted through cronyism, blackmail, or other entitled situations, has played a role in this trend. These leaders may be more focused on maintaining their position and pleasing their superiors rather than fostering innovation and taking risks, resulting in a lack of fresh ideas and a resistance to change within the organization.

How Does It Stop?

As commoners and blind enablers of these practices, there are a few ways we can implement change and revert back to the basics. One way is to support and invest in companies that prioritize innovation and organic growth over short-term financial gains. This can be done by researching companies and their practices and choosing to invest in or purchase products and services from those that prioritize innovation and long-term value creation.

Advocate for and support policies that encourage innovation and organic growth with your voting rights at all levels. Focus on policies that promote research and development, provide tax incentives for companies that invest in innovation, and regulations that promote fair competition and prevent monopolies.

As job seekers, it is important to know how to spot the practices of corporate greed and indulgence that many organizations are subscribing to, and to take steps to identify and avoid these types of organizations. One way to do this is to ask specific questions during the interview process that can help to identify the organization's approach to innovation such as the following:

1. Can you describe some innovative software technology that was proposed and built internally that separates you from your peers? This question can help to identify whether the organization is focused on creating unique and differentiated software, or if it is content with following the so-called industry trends and using ordinary commercially available off-the-shelf (COTS) solutions.
2. Can you talk about how you encourage research and development among your internal employees? For example, do you have a corporate library that is regularly updated, or do you allow a set number of hours for innovative thoughts and options and employees are incentivized to participate? This question can help to identify whether the organization values and supports innovation and experimentation among its employees.
3. Can you describe your buy vs. build decision process when looking at new software needs? This question can help to identify whether the organization is focused on creating unique and differentiated software, or if it is content with following the mass marketed industry trends and using commercially available off-the-shelf (COTS) solutions, resulting in more wasteful spending.

By asking these types of questions during the interview process, job seekers can gain a better understanding of the organization's approach to innovation and whether it aligns with their own values and priorities. Additionally, job seekers should also research the company culture, its mission and its practices, they should pay attention to the company's social responsibility and ethical standards, if the company is involved in any controversies or has a history of unethical practices, it may be best to avoid joining such an organization. The truth is out there if proper due diligence is done with maximum effort.

Minimizing Corporate Minimalism

One of the most effective ways to end the practice of minimalism as it applies to information technology is to "starve" organizations that subscribe to these practices of the talent they need to function. By refusing to work for or support these organizations, talented IT professionals can send a strong message that this type of behavior will not be tolerated.

Spreading awareness about the practices of these organizations through various social media circles and encouraging others to avoid working for or supporting them as well can help bring awareness to these cowardice and unfulfilling behaviors. Respectfully sharing information about the organizations' approach to innovation, their use of offshore resources, and their focus on short-term financial gains over long-term value creation can go a long way in not rewarding bad behavior.

For The People, By The People

While it is important for IT professionals to take action to promote a culture of innovation and organic growth, government regulation may also play a role in ending the practice of minimalism as it applies to information technology. One potential solution could be to regulate the offshoring of IT work, requiring organizations to go to great lengths to prove that the skills needed are not available locally. This could help to ensure that jobs and economic opportunities are not being outsourced, and that organizations are investing in and supporting the local economy and thus the livelihood of our people.

Perhaps new metrics similar to the new Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) measures could be developed to determine the extent to which an organization is a contributing member of the national economy. These metrics could include factors such as philanthropy, technology investments, economy stimulator, and the sharing of information for the good of the people. By implementing these measures, organizations would be held accountable for their actions and be encouraged to prioritize innovation, organic growth and contribute positively to the economy and society.

It is important to note that, while government regulation may help to promote a culture of innovation and organic growth, it is ultimately the responsibility of IT professionals and organizations to take action and make the necessary changes to drive this cultural shift. By working together, IT professionals, organizations, and government can help to end the practice of minimalism as it applies to information technology, fostering innovation, and promoting a culture of long-term value creation for the benefit of all stakeholders.

Lastly, it is important to revisit that the concept of "good profit" as defined by Charles Koch as it is closely tied to organic growth, where good profit results from products and services that customers vote for freely with their dollars and that improve people's lives. A culture where employees are empowered to act entrepreneurially to discover customers' preferences and the best ways to satisfy them also helps to drive organic growth and "good profit". In this sense, promoting a culture of innovation and organic growth is not only beneficial for the company, but also for the customers, employees, shareholders and society.