I have my employment review coming up soon. Typical discussion affair, reviewing work and projects from the past year and looking for improvments. I was also reading a few articles on how fellow IT admins are being tasked with 'doing more with less', 'reducing the overall expenditure' and 'contributing more to the bottom line'. In this case I am using the cost/budget theme to apply in both a monetary sense and non-monetary sense (ie. staff, projects etc)
it started me thinking, that if we continually have to do more with less, at what point will we reach zero. If every year we have less of a budget, less staff, less room to work, we will eventually reach the zero point. And at that stage, will we have suge a huge 'catch up' cost because we have been reducing over the years?
According to online polls, 80% of an IT budget is spent maintaining current infrastructure and as it gets older, the cost goes up. So if the cost to maintain goes up, the available budget goes down, then we will automatically be doing more with less. Until it gets to the point where the infrastructure can't sustain itself.
It would seem more logical to maintain current spending, use the remaining 20% to become more innovative to drive down the 80% and propell the business with new technologies.
For the companies I work with, and have worked with over the past fifteen years, my goal as the IT admin, IT manager, consultant or what ever it was, has been to use IT as a business tool. Too many CEOs think of IT as a black hole to pour money into. Why not look at it as a hole filled with intelligent pixies, who can use the technologies to improve other areas of the business and reduce their overall costs through automation so that the staff can be freed up to do things more conducive to the business.