Change agent

In an interview with InfoWorld Associate Editor Jack McCarthy, Larry Biagini, CTO of Fairfield, Conn.-based General Electric, talks about driving the technology strategy of one of the country’s largest and most diversified companies. With GE’s multiple business units producing everything from aircraft engines to kitchen appliances and managing operations such as medical systems and financial services, Biagini says he needs to focus on finding ways to streamline technology across the enterprise, whether upgrading messaging systems or refining collaboration tools.

What do you think is your toughest challenge?

The biggest challenge is trying to move the company forward from a technology perspective — realizing that each business is in a different cycle when it comes to the ability to invest in technology versus what its own market looks like — and trying to get some consistency across GE when the variables are so different.  Some businesses have money to invest and see value in [technology] because of their business models; others are much more interested in cost-cutting because of their business model and their market conditions. [Getting] everyone to walk in lockstep is a difficult task.

How can you bring technology to solve some of those issues?

In many cases, the means to both ends — which may be different, be it market growth or cost-cutting — can in fact be technology. So the trick is to work on technology implementations that really have nothing but positive effect, a very short payback when it comes to any business implementation. [You] try to lay out the benefits up front, let the businesses implement at the speed [they can] in a quality fashion. And although you may not move as fast as you like, you do move in the right direction. Getting a big ship to move in the right direction is half the battle.

Can you give me an example?

An example would be moving to a new e-mail system. It would be much easier from an implementation standpoint to pick the new platform, put a plan in place, and move from where we are to where we need to go. From an IT and an implementation perspective, that’s the easiest way to do it. From a business-impact perspective, what we need to do is work at the pace that the business can absorb the change and still gain the benefit of moving to a new e-mail system, although the benefit may come later.

Where are you with e-mail and where are you going?

We’re just upgrading to an Exchange 2000 environment from an Exchange 5.5 environment. When you have one of the larger implementations in the world and our businesses are so dependent on it in many different ways, it’s tough to do a migration just because of sheer volume.

How closely do you try to integrate the different business divisions?

We pick spaces that we think are not business-dependent, such as security, e-mail, interoperability collaboration, instant messaging — things like that, where there really is no business differentiation. And what we try to do is set a standard in that area and work with the businesses to implement to that standard.  Because the trick, again, is not to cause them to spend resources just to get to a standard for a standard’s sake.

What are you using for security architecture?

Again, it depends. I’ll just tell you what we’re worried about and what we do in security. We have rules and processes in place for application reviews, for system hardening, for intrusion detection and scanning, vulnerability scanning, remote access, anti-virus, encryption. All those rules and products are in place.  And I’m not going to go down the list and name them because I don’t think it’s appropriate. But those are standard across the businesses. You don’t get to make a choice, you do get to talk about your implementation plans — not whether you will implement but when you’re going to implement and why.

You have talked about the importance of collaboration tools. What kind of collaboration technology have you been thinking about?

One of the big hits here has been instant messaging over the last three years.  We have tens of thousands, if not 150,000 people, using instant messaging every day. We also have instant collaboration, app sharing, desktop sharing, and things like that behind a firewall that we use tens of thousands of times per day. It has actually changed the way we do things. Obviously with instant messaging, [there’s] much more instant feedback. But if I really need to get somebody, I don’t send them an e-mail; I don’t call them anymore. I find out first if they’re online. Second, I ask them if they can take a call if I can’t do it in a quick message. And we stop wasting a lot of time that way.

Are you using Linux to run much of your systems?

Yes, we are using Linux in many of our businesses. It’s part of the whole simplification, standardization effort that we’ve got going on because Linux works well for many of our applications. If, in fact, we can control our usage of it in the way that we configure it and implement it and [if we] standardize the technology stack upon it, it’s a good way to quickly implement technology stacks to support applications. I think we’re less concerned about Linux vs. Windows vs. Unix. It’s just another option that we have. 

Are you using Web-based approaches to collaborating?  Are you using .Net or other Web services?

No. You know, that’s really interesting. .Net is architecture, and we get no value out of implementing an architecture. What we get a value out of is implementing functions that the business needs, and if the architecture that supports those functions is something that we’re willing to adhere to, so be it.  So to implement .Net without knowing what we’re going to use it for is premature. For Web services, we absolutely believe that it has a value going forward. So it’s interesting, we are implementing it for some services like authentication and for some services like directory management. But to adopt it as the underlying architecture for GE? We’re just not ready to do that.

If you could give one piece of advice to a CTO or chief technologist who’s taking over a diverse company in this economic climate, what would it be?

If you’re going to try to push things down from the top, it’s not going to work. What you have to do is understand the unique view of the businesses and the diverse constituents, roll those into your solution, and then get everyone to buy into the solution.