As I was reading Nicolas Carr’s article, IT Doesn’t Matter, I couldn’t help but think how this column might have helped or at least reshaped the thinking of an earlier employer I worked for. For example, the access amount of money a company can spend on IT to create a strategic advantage. In the early ‘90’s, I worked for a company that was moving to a HR enterprise system (PeopleSoft). The company was shifting from a centralized to decentralized organization, with some of the HR functions being shifted to the managers. HR would still play a key role in talent management, but much of the administrative/transactional activities would be delegated to the direct managers. Unfortunately, the company did a poor job of preparing the leadership and culture for change. There was no management consensus on why this new system was important, and no serious discussion on how this would improve the business (i.e., “burning platform”). This system ultimately failed and the company ended up losing millions of dollars in development and implementation costs. And things seemed to be more messed up than before. As I recollect, this process was encouraged because it was the “flavor of the day" ("If GE uses it, it must be good") and pushed by some, but not all senior management. These systems were marketed to provide better integration, reduce cost, and enhance customer value. Unfortunately, the infrastructure and alignment were not in place to make it work.