{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

IT Separation_Diamond

IT Separation_Diamond - insight Mind the gap How companies...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Henry Beck’s 1933 map of the London Underground system was an incredible piece of work. It simplified the complex geographical maps of the time to a much simpler topological diagram. The billion passengers who use the map each year to navigate the system would be lost without it. The only real criticism of the map is that it can be difficult to estimate journey times between stations. As experienced travellers know, the physical distance between two stations can be different by a factor of 100 and yet all stations are equally spaced on the map. Travellers through IT separations that often occur during a merger, acquisition, divestiture or change in strategy do not have the benefit of one of Henry’s diagrams to guide them. They will need to work out for themselves what the optimal route is and where the critical path lies. They will find that some real world distances are larger than they appeared when planning their journey. Unfortunately, they will encounter unforeseen roadblocks and construction problems in creating new pathways. But experienced travellers will also find significant short cuts along the way, such as retiring unused software applications rather than completing a full migration. This paper is intended as a starting point for anybody involved in separating an IT function as it describes what makes a successful separation distinct from an unsuccessful separation and how senior executives can ensure a successful outcome. NAS Storage Mainframe System Network Capacity Router Configuration HR Applications Finance Applications Data Centre Locations Mind the Gap! How companies can avoid common pitfalls when performing IT separations By Ben Downe and Mark Purowitz insight
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
There are at least three parties involved in a separation exercise; the division being sold (the asset), the company selling the division (the seller), and the entity buying the division (the purchaser). Each party has a different (and sometimes competing) agenda. One of the most significant aspects of a separation—often taken for granted—is that the asset needs to ensure its business continues to operate through a separation in spite of significant distractions. Employees are concerned about losing their jobs once the integration work commences and headcount reductions are identified. The jockeying for position that happens, particularly when an asset is being separated before merging with another company is invariably counter- productive,. With this internal focus, it is all too easy to lose sight of customers and associated revenue, thereby placing a negative value on the asset right at the time when the opposite is needed. Maintaining a focus on “business as usual” activities within all of the chaos caused by a separation is not easy, but it is essential.
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}