When talking to business managers, I often find confusion about the roles of technology leadership positions. CIO and CTO titles are frequently used interchangeably. Sometimes they only have a Director of Technology who reacts to “tech issues” when they come up. For the sake of clarity, I’ll offer my observation that Information Technology leaders tend toward one of two orientations: Internal business processes or external product development.
CIO is primarily internally-facing.
The CIO, or the Chief Information Officer, is a company’s top technology strategist who understands the business information needs of the company and the stakeholders of corporate operations. Maintains internal IT systems, including company information domains and business processes. Typically reports to the CEO on business models and vision issues, and collaborates with other business executives to learn their needs and develop new concepts. The CIO is a business person with IT experience.
A CTO is primarily customer-facing.
The CTO, or the Chief Technology Officer, is a company’s top engineer who most understands the science behind technology alternatives and frequently heads product research and development initiatives as they relate to the company’s current and future product offerings. Typically reports to the CIO or CEO (depending on corporate size and structure), and plans for technology evolution of the company systems. The CTO is a technology person having some familiarity with the company business model.
For what its worth, while I have experience in both roles, I am much more qualified for the CIO role.
What’s your take?
Do my descriptions match your understanding of the different roles? Do technology leaders in your organization participate at the highest levels of decision making? Does anybody know what they do at all?
About Christopher Price
Christopher –
Well said, regarding the respective CIO and CTO descriptions. I have some direct experience with the potential trap you explained in the second paragraph of your response to Ehab. During the five years of my consulting business as an expert witness, I became very effective at writing and responding to interrogatories and delivering testimony on the stand. It paid well, but I wound up hating every new “opportunity” and eventually stopped doing it altogether. On the plus side, the experience provided some incremental improvement in my ability to explain technical matters in such things as patent application specifications.
Thanks!
Greg Beveridge
Thanks for commenting, Greg!
Note: I asked Greg to weigh in as he offers a Fortune 50 perspective that I do not. Trust me: If he thought what I posted was different from his experience, he’d say so.
Hi Chris,
I am currently enrolled in EMBA at NYU. Thinking baout my next career challenge considering my current experience as InformationTechnology Specialist and education at NYU. @ major role i am pursuing now. CIO or CTO, not sure what to pursue and based on what ?
I know for sure i do not want to be involved in the Networking side, as much as the business side of IT and specially, servers virtualizations and future growth of IT within an organization.
Which profile you think i can fit on the most? Please give me your insight or ask me any questions if there is anything unclear.
Regards,
Ehab Amin
Information Technology Specialist
BNP Paribas IP New York
Hi Ehab,
Yours is a good question, especially for one who is *capable* of going either way. The fact that you are an MBA candidate and you want to avoid “the networking side” suggests an ROI-driven path of a CIO. But your interest in “server virtualization” is a rather specific and complex discipline that might require the focus of a deliverables-driven technical leader possessing business acumen, like a CTO.
What are you drawn toward? As an anecdote, if a CIO and CTO are going to a bookstore, the CIO will usually go to the Business section while the CTO will usually seek the Engineering/Technical sections. It breaks down to passion at this level, more than capability. Each will have already proven his or her self as a competent manager. A trap that many professionals fall into is getting really good at something they don’t love. The more skilled one becomes at something, the harder it becomes to jump out of that groove. It seems to me most never do. Far better, in my opinion is to become great at something you love to do and stay on track. Yes, you will have to pass on a lot of great opportunities, but I promise you’ll be much happier in the years to come. There is nothing worse than staring at your alarm clock every morning dreading the day ahead, even if you are well paid for it.
From a pragmatic point of view, it is much easier to become a part of a technical team early in your career and work your way up the leadership ladder toward a CTO role. The path is easier to see. To become a CIO, you’ll need a broad spectrum of experience in various functional areas, e.g., Sales, Marketing, Accounting, Operations, etc. to earn the credibility you’ll need to work cooperatively with other department heads. This essentially undefined path is full of twists that can easily derail your long-term plans. However, that may be a good thing if you discover you are especially gifted in one of these other roles. (Hint: CTO-types generally abhor this sort of serendipity.)
I’m not sure of how things work at Stern, but I’d suggest you take every opportunity to work on business cases. Lots of them… until the mental process becomes reflexive. The discipline to quickly identify a challenge and possible solutions and make a decision for how to proceed in 3 pages, is the most valuable skill — by far — I took from business school. Leadership in any form requires a willingness to make informed decisions with incomplete data. Get good at that, and you will go far in whatever direction you choose.
Thanks Chris, this was very helpful.