CASE QUESTIONS - CISCO 1a. How did Cisco get into trouble with its planned IT before Brad Boston arrived? Before his arrival, Cisco had a decentralized approach to IT spending. Independent business groups made decisions in functional silos. Each group had its own funds for IT, so redundant applications such as CRM systems were created. This was a global problem as well as a localized problem. Cisco's philosophy on IT was simple: as long as someone was willing to pay for it, IT would work on any specified process/project. This is not only a waste of money, but it also creates problems when trying to work across teams. If two teams use two different processes to obtain the same information and communicate it differently, then they will have difficulty communicating.b. Why didn't the single ERP system improve the situation? The ERP system has become somewhat obsolete as each business group has created custom software applications each with different interfaces. Additionally, business groups were not consistent with their organizational definitions. Some units defined a shipment as the product going from the manufacturer to the distributor, while others defined it as the distributor sending the product to the customer. This inconsistency led departments to create their software that would extract specific information as they defined it.c. Why didn't this provide more consistency? There was no consistency because the process was decentralized. The lack of consistency was inevitable given the number of functional silos established with Cisco. As stated in the case, there was “no centralized group checking for conflicts.” What was Brad Boston's solution to the problem? Brad Boston's solution was to create a centralized IT department that would oversee all IT spending. This department would have a standardized process for individual departmental projects. This would allow the company to retain outside contractors without incurring the additional expense of including them in the Boston workforce. This would also allow departments to initiate projects, but would ensure that these projects do not compromise corporate objectives or duplicate resources. Does the CIO amnesty program have a good chance of uncovering most of Cisco's shadow IT projects? The amnesty program had a chance of uncovering some of the Shadow IT projects, but not most of them. If ministries felt the projects were critical enough to be 'stealth' and implemented on their own, it is unlikely they would be willing to give them up voluntarily. The projects that would be abandoned under the amnesty program would be small projects that would involve little time and money..