If you continue to follow this gospel, you never will be viewed as a leader.

Another accepted wisdom that has crept into many organizations is the virtue of incrementalism. It often is expressed as the insistence that "no project can last more than six months." A fine tactic to limit risk; however, in too many instances, it has developed into a limiting, even paralyzing device. It is one thing to embrace a strategy of "radical incrementalism" built on a notion of rapid waves of near-term initiatives linked by a shared view of strategic direction. It is quite another, as often happens, to limit one's view to six, or a maximum 12, months.There are things in life, and especially the important ones, that can be accomplished only through a large complex effort. Companies and IT units that do not practice large projects are unprepared methodically and mentally. As a result, they tend simply to shy away from anything that does not fit their smallish image. That, for example, is the key reason so few carriers are ready to execute a major attack on replacing their legacy applications. They know they need to do it, but the risk associated with size and complexity of the task overwhelms and paralyzes them.

So, my call to you today is to put on your leader's hat firmly and engage your company in a serious dialogue. Challenge the organization to make a radical–not incremental–qualitative change through use of technology. It may end up being a replacement of your barely breathing 25-year-old policy admin system. The idea that emerges is your ticket to a brighter future.

Undoubtedly, this will challenge your brains and skills as a strategist. It also will test your personal abilities. In my experience, however, CIOs who demonstrate sustained passion, intellect, and courage combined with integrity and authenticity will succeed.

Believe me, it is not as hard as you may think. In many organizations there is a serious, pent-up demand for a major IT change. The trouble is we've forgotten how to do it. Many organizations have not practiced any major strategic deliveries for years. Consequently, their cultural, organizational, and professional skills are either absent or in short supply. This leads us to a key point. There are certain must-have's to assure your ambitious venture does not end up in the nearest ditch.

In setting the partnership stage, CIOs must gain a firm commitment on two points. The first has to do with parity of influence at the executive table–and it starts with the CIO. Wherever on the organizational chart he or she belongs, the key to achieving IT parity is the CIO's ability to do two things: influence and challenge. It is absolutely critical a CIO has full capability to be heard and, if necessary, contest the other senior managers.

The same is true at the lower levels of the organization. Most IT units have learned to behave and act like a service-oriented organization. However, in some of them "service-oriented" morphed into "subservient." That is a mistake. An organization's culture must assure IT never be in a meek or unassertive position vis-?-vis the departments it serves. Many business units still fail to recognize (or perhaps IT people fail to explain to them) managing IT is a complex undertaking, and as such, many decisions must be left to the pros.

The second commitment relates to rules concerning a division of corporate responsibilities and accountabilities for major IT decisions, or as we often refer to it, IT governance. More precisely, IT governance defines rights and accountabilities related to making IT decisions as well as describing desirable behaviors in the context of using IT resources. IT principles set the strategic role for IT, including issues such as structure, strategy alignment, culture, mission, values, norms, and balance of business-unit autonomy vs. commonality. The principles provide a practical guidance on how to use IT. Some may be non-negotiable, e.g., the corporate interests and needs come first when introducing and exploiting technology or when contracting with suppliers. Developing these principles is best done by a relatively intimate group of business and IT senior executives–for example, the CEO, CFO, and CIO.

In the context of a major IT initiative, IT governance must define accountability rules that protect against competing agendas and biases. For example, when developing a business case, a division of responsibilities must reflect the parties' principal roles: the business unit (BU), which is the primary recipient of the investment, and the IT unit responsible for delivering and managing the solution. Such division of roles clearly delineates responsibilities for both elements of the ROI ratio: BU responsible for delivering the numerator side (benefits), and IT responsible for delivering the denominator (investment). Good governance also should address highly probable skewing of the assumptions used in the analysis. For that, the process needs an independent arbiter. That function, in most organizations, should belong to the CFO. As a result, the three parties–CFO (arbiter), business VP (beneficiary), and CIO (supplier)–create a basic structure within which they collaborate to deliver the best possible analysis.

These are examples of governance rules that can help every CIO manage IT investments and assets. A leader-CIO must insist and build consensus on such basic points of process discipline. He or she must engage the executives and make them agree maximizing returns on technology investments is a collaborative process wherein everyone shares risks and rewards. Finally, the CIO must insist all responsibilities be clearly defined.

All of the above means IT must be ready to assume a serious responsibility. This, in turn, implies quality of the IT team is a critical and necessary element of success. For example, no IT organization has a chance of "partnering" with its business clients if its people are seriously short on either business knowledge or business acumen. Similarly, no large project will be delivered successfully without excellence in project management.

Please note in today's world most IT capabilities have little to do with traditional technology skills. The time has long passed when your most important skills were in the hands of programmers. Today, it is the quality of your business analysts, architects/integrators, and project managers that defines the competence and capability of the IT team. If you have weaknesses in any of these areas, be wary.

So, now that you have developed a consensus and a business case and formed a capable team, your big, life-changing project is under way.

Within three to six months, most projects will start giving off either a fragrance of success or a stench of failure. Slipping project schedules and bulging budgets are tough to hide, especially when everyone's focus and attention is on the project. If you need to change key players who do not perform, do so quickly. If you need to add unanticipated resources, don't be afraid to argue the need.

And make sure to keep business to its obligations. This is where a large number of ROI-based decisions lose their credibility if the upfront commitments made by the business are not monitored, verified, nor enforced. This is where influence parity and governance rules become a CIO's irreplaceable power tools.

Making a radical change always involves risk. It also involves reward for those who succeed. The alternatives of either playing second fiddle or being inevitably squeezed out do not look like fun.