Four Things Wrong with the Way We Develop Information Systems

Ronald G.  Ross
Ronald G. Ross Co-Founder & Principal, Business Rule Solutions, LLC , Executive Editor, Business Rules Journal and Co-Chair, Building Business Capability (BBC) Read Author Bio       || Read All Articles by Ronald G. Ross

Is your company as successful as it would like to be in developing information systems? Probably not. Have you identified the reasons? Here are four factors topping my list.

  1. Single-purpose systems that undermine your ability to change. How often have you run into the following situation? A manager likes a spreadsheet and tells you, "That's exactly what I want for my new client-server system." Maybe building new systems that way once or twice is O.K. But build new systems that way dozens or hundreds of times, and you'll produce a tangle not even Einstein could unravel. The problem is that single-purpose systems are neither scalable nor adaptable-they simply are not built for growth and change. The result is rapid loss in the company's ability to direct its own destiny. How can you avoid this? All you need is a good roadmap-in IT we call that "architecture."

  2. Projects that run into belated show stoppers, or that lurch from one gridlock to the next. It's simple enough to think ahead. Yet many projects don't take the time. "Always time to fix it, but never time to plan it" still seems the norm. Do we know how to do better? Yes-and actually it's rather simple. It requires two things. First, you need a top-down, honest-to-God business model. Second, you need a series of continuing checks and balances on your requirements development process. If your approach lacks these two things, I'd say try something different.

  3. Technology-driven solutions. In the old Wild-West days of building information systems (only a decade or two ago), the business side essentially could sit back and let it happen. The advantages of automating were so compelling that you virtually could do no wrong. (Like many things about the old West, that is probably a myth, but no matter-it makes a good story.) Now we are in the Information Age, however, and for practical purposes, business and IT operate inseparably. You would think that in undertaking new work, companies would put together seamless business/IT projects. But many companies are nowhere close to doing that. Worse, they actually do very little to induce, structure or reward creative business thinking in their IT projects. Neither business side nor IT side really is challenged to close the gap-the business side still gets away with fuzzy, ill-focused "requirements," and the IT side continues doing "requirements" barely a notch above code. Is there a solution? Yes-a business-driven requirements approach. The good news is that both sides already have the requisite knowledge-all they need is the right structure to express the right things at the right times. Here's more good news-that's exactly what the business rule approach offers.

  4. AWOL business knowledge. I find many companies seemingly are unaware of one of the biggest risks they face-their own internal brain drain. Much of the company's self-knowledge has disappeared already-downsized, outsourced, re-engineered, or early-retired away. Who's left who has any real idea of how critical areas of the business actually work? Often there are only one or two key people (sometimes on the IT side, sometimes on the business side) who can tell you the criteria for making low-level, day-to-day business deci-sions. If your company is in that situation, better do something quick-those key people may have one foot out the door already. What you need is an initiative to harvest and to manage your com-pany's core business rules. If you end up losing that knowledge, all you'll have left is the source code-straight out of the old Wild West. Come Y2K+1, that's not where you want your company to be!

© 1999, Ronald G. Ross.

Standard citation for this article:


citations icon
Ronald G. Ross, "Four Things Wrong with the Way We Develop Information Systems" (Jan/Feb. 1999)
URL: http://www.brcommunity.com/a1999/a406.html

About our Contributor:


Ronald  G. Ross
Ronald G. Ross Co-Founder & Principal, Business Rule Solutions, LLC , Executive Editor, Business Rules Journal and Co-Chair, Building Business Capability (BBC)

Ronald G. Ross is Principal and Co-Founder of Business Rule Solutions, LLC, where he actively develops and applies the BRS Methodology including RuleSpeak®, DecisionSpeak and TableSpeak.

Ron is recognized internationally as the "father of business rules." He is the author of ten professional books including the groundbreaking first book on business rules The Business Rule Book in 1994. His newest are:


Ron serves as Executive Editor of BRCommunity.com and its flagship publication, Business Rules Journal. He is a sought-after speaker at conferences world-wide. More than 50,000 people have heard him speak; many more have attended his seminars and read his books.

Ron has served as Chair of the annual International Business Rules & Decisions Forum conference since 1997, now part of the Building Business Capability (BBC) conference where he serves as Co-Chair. He was a charter member of the Business Rules Group (BRG) in the 1980s, and an editor of its Business Motivation Model (BMM) standard and the Business Rules Manifesto. He is active in OMG standards development, with core involvement in SBVR.

Ron holds a BA from Rice University and an MS in information science from Illinois Institute of Technology. Find Ron's blog on http://www.brsolutions.com/category/blog/. For more information about Ron visit www.RonRoss.info. Tweets: @Ronald_G_Ross

Read All Articles by Ronald G. Ross
Subscribe to the eBRJ Newsletter
In The Spotlight
 Silvie  Spreeuwenberg
 Jim  Sinur

Online Interactive Training Series

In response to a great many requests, Business Rule Solutions now offers at-a-distance learning options. No travel, no backlogs, no hassles. Same great instructors, but with schedules, content and pricing designed to meet the special needs of busy professionals.