Branding internal IS services 1

[troytate]

I'm not sure if this is the case in your organization(s), but in some organizations there is not necessarily a lot of respect or perception that IS plays a strategic role in a company's success. What do you think about branding your IS services for the organization? What activities did you do to arrive at the brand name you use? How was it perceived by users/staff? How do you keep the brand in front of your users?

Thanks for your support.

 

[enigma174]

I think i know what you mean. I'm working as a one-man-band IT administrator, for a smallish distribution firm. I have the respect of the boss, which is allways a good start, but many of the staff barely know i'm here.

But, on the brighter side, I've found that you can slowly gain respect from other sections simply by being there - IT is a major part of any organisation, and after you've fixed one problem for a staff member, more often than not they will start asking for more help. Once they realise how much easier you can make their job, they will learn to appreciate the value of having an IT department.

I know it's a slow road, but just as a marketing department would have been seen as a waste of money a hundred or so years ago, IT departments still need to convince any of their worth. And i think the best way to do this is on a one-to-one basis.

--w

 

[CajunCenturion]

I think that there are several reasons for this situation.

Information is Power: IT has now become the department which control the corporate information, including access to and its format. That means that other managers have to rely on IT for the information that they need to do their jobs. That reliance is an uncomfortable feeling. Further, although not as true today as it was 15-20 years ago, You couldn't even get your information without the cooperation of the IT/MIS department, and due to the limited staff, you weren't always given priority, and the feeling was - I can't do my job because IT hasn't given me my data yet - its the IT department's fault.

Cost Center: No matter how you slice it - the IT department is purely expense. We do not build the product that our company sells, we do not sell it, we don't support the customers. We do nothing to directly contribute to the bottom line, we only cost money in both equipement and personnel. (This does not apply of course to the small segment of us who work for companies in the business of selling computer hardware/software).

The Payroll: We're not the personnal department. We don't get the credit when the paychecks are delivered, but we're first in line for the blame.

Fear of the Unknown: Most people have no idea what we do, how we do it, or even if we're doing it, or not doing it.

When you get down to it - nobody WANTS an IT department, but they are fully aware that they can't survive without it.

The solution: Be yourself, do your job, be a team player, and over time, you'll as an individual will earn the respect of your co-workers. Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[troytate]

Thanks for the responses.... but here's more about what I'm trying to say... when users think of IS and the services that we provide them, what do they call "it"? When you go order a soft drink, you order a "coke" even though it is a Pepsi or other brand served. This is because the brand name Coke has become synonymous with soft drinks. What is the corollary in your organization? Do you have a name for the systems/services in your organization? How did you arrive at the name? Who was involved in the naming/branding process? How is the IS service branding working? Another way of saying this is Who do We think we are vs Who do They think we are? Also, Who do We think we should be vs Who do They think we should be?

Also, I'm not convinced that IS is purely a cost center for all organizations. It can definitely add value to the products/services an organization which uses it properly. For example, what about the CAD systems or CAM (computer aided manufacturing) systems for manufacturers? These are IS systems that add value to the end product. Without IS and the systems provided, there wouldn't be as good or efficient manufacturing process. The amount of product and quality of the product produced is orders of magnitude above those created using manual methods. So, IS adds value not cost.

 

[CajunCenturion]

I do agree that IT is not purely a cost center for all organizations, but my point is that for the most part, that is how IT is perceived. The CAD/CAM is a good example, but I have to wonder in the eyes of senior management, if they view that scenario as a capital investment in the manufacturing department to improve both quality and quantity, by using better tools and techniques, as opposed to the value of the internal IT department. Does senior management view these as manufacturing systems, or as IT systems?

Belive me when I say that I wish this were not the case, but in my experience, IT does not get the credit that it should. Perhaps that is due largely because IT primarily is viewed as a support group, providing services so that others may be more productive, and be more efficient in their jobs. In a nutshell, out job is not to build the products or sell the products, but make it easier for others to build and sell the products. We don't manage the company, but rather we provide the tools and information so that others can do a better job of management -- or at least have better information upon which to base their decisions

I am not sure just how that helps in arriving at a reasonable branding. As I stated in my original post, our contribution is not direct, and as enigma stated, it will take time for the value of IT to be fully realized, if ever.

We're kind of like the offensive line of a football team - we protect the quarterback, we open the holes for the runners. When we fail, the team can't win. We don't score any points, but they'd never win without us. Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[jcuenca]

Hi,

I agree: it would be good that users had a more realistic idea of us. In my case, there are two groups: clever and patient people, who had learned that we are useful if they tell us their needs and wait (because, as always, we are very few for the huge amounts of work we have to deal with) - I mean, sit down together and speak. The other group is mostly a bunch of Information Black Holes (IBH, see other thread in this forum) that, in their "smartness", think the only thing we do is to reset computers. I know low experienced IT groups that do that, but that's not our case. We have high degrees and experience, and usually got neat solutions. The problem is, you once rebooted a Windows machine because it was a proper and quick solution, and then they go telling people that you only reboot machines. The generalization process they achieve goes up to giving a name to the technique: they loud-cry rebooting as "the IT solution".

You see: (properly rebooting once a Windows machine) -> (only reboot machines -any kind of machines) -> ("the IT solution&quot.

I think sometimes IBH are really miserable

Coming back to the point of this discussion, maybe we need branding, but I don't know if it would be enough, or it should be considered forcing users to solve a problem at least ONCE. When they realize they don't know nothing, maybe they would be more considered.

Greetings,

 

[KenCunningham]

On a (slightly) related point, we're currently in the process of putting together an in-house IT/IS magazine - anyone got any snappy names out there? Cheers.

 

[4cpudoc]

My boss yesterday mentioned that in order to work on our PR image we will be trying to "brand" our department and what we "do". I know how dangerous this kind of thing is so I'm going to be very cautious but hopeful that we can do something to get the negative stigma that a very small but vocal group has given us. I'll let you know how it goes. Edu's are very difficult to work with in this matter because the end result of everything is the student, so we have to relate our effects through several layers to get to the benefit for the students. I'm looking forward to trying to reposition our image and therefore others' perception of us. I'm tired of people who won't accept whatr I have to say and then run to their admins because I told them something they didn't want to hear (I said it nicly!).