Project Management

Project Management Central

Please login or join to subscribe to this thread

Topics: Change Management, Information Technology, Risk Management
Insource vs Outsource - the battle grows
Recently the technology department touted a piece of software they were familiar with over a cloud-based solution from a highly reputable industry leader. This was surprising given their recommended software had an un-patched, publicly-known software vulnerability that could enabled attackers to hijack the user’s account. What is the best way to handle biased internal resistance from the technology department?
Sort By:
Kevin -

I'm assuming there had already been an attempt at an objective, facts-based discussion regarding pros and cons of both approaches?

Was the technology security lead (e.g. CISO) engaged as a stakeholder? If not, they should be brought into the discussions.

It would also help to spend more effort understanding why the technology department folks were so focused on the "known" solution - are there other concerns with the cloud-based solution which they haven't shared?

Kiron
Kiron, The business unit that had the cost come out of their P&L engaged the technology department as a vendor of the service and that was how they the approaches were evaluated. What was deeply concerning to me was the technology department did NOT bring up the security issue at all!!! Given the approach the client used, I would expect BOTH vendors to address all the critical issues in their responses. BTW I am seeing more and more IT departments treated as a supplier and evaluated as such. Interesting times.
...
1 reply by Kiron Bondale
May 05, 2020 4:43 PM
Kiron Bondale
...
In that event, the LOB is in a great position to disqualify their internal technology department and go with a third party as the internal department clearly did not "play fair". While there may be some benefits in treating internal technology departments as a service provider who should compete with third-parties for work, this cost-focused approach is somewhat myopic given the critical importance of technology in all industries. If it is core competency, keep it in house but hold it to a high standard.

Kiron
Last year I began to see internal IT departments treated the same as a vendor. I don't think that time it was a cost matter it was not coming out of the business unit's P&L it was more a customer service issue.

Everyone is entitled to get the most for their money!
May 05, 2020 3:12 PM
Replying to Kevin Coleman
...
Kiron, The business unit that had the cost come out of their P&L engaged the technology department as a vendor of the service and that was how they the approaches were evaluated. What was deeply concerning to me was the technology department did NOT bring up the security issue at all!!! Given the approach the client used, I would expect BOTH vendors to address all the critical issues in their responses. BTW I am seeing more and more IT departments treated as a supplier and evaluated as such. Interesting times.
In that event, the LOB is in a great position to disqualify their internal technology department and go with a third party as the internal department clearly did not "play fair". While there may be some benefits in treating internal technology departments as a service provider who should compete with third-parties for work, this cost-focused approach is somewhat myopic given the critical importance of technology in all industries. If it is core competency, keep it in house but hold it to a high standard.

Kiron
Because your post is very interesting please let me ask what does mean "What is the best way to handle biased internal resistance from the technology department?".

Please login or join to reply

Content ID:
ADVERTISEMENTS

Eighty percent of success is showing up.

- Woody Allen

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsors

Vendor Events

See all Vendor Events