• silicon.com
• Management
• CIO Insights

By Naked CIO, 6 July 2009 09:00

COMMENT

Board members should be held accountable for email and internet usage, just as other staff are, says the Naked CIO.

Last week I wrote about monitoring staff email and internet usage. The two reader comments to the article both questioned how to deal with board members who do not follow company policy with respect to appropriate computer use.

One anonymous reader commented: "What do you do if you know that the company CEO is viewing pornography in the office. Would you then condone monitoring his usage?"

The other, also anonymous, chimed in: "Who monitors the board for inappropriate behaviour and poor business practices in relation to their primary function of lining their own pockets, with best interests of the business secondary?"

In some organisations I have seen different user groups set up for directors and the board that escape detection and monitoring. Personally I believe policy is policy.

Consider HR scenarios where there is a sexual harassment case or grievances against a senior member of staff. The company policies on these issues need to be followed properly to ensure the organisation limits liability - which certainly is of interest to board members who can be held personally liable.

This would hold true with computer policy as well. A structured and objective policy needs to be in place which applies to all staff - and computer misuse offenses must be properly conveyed to all as well.

I suggest businesses should organise, as part of a governance initiative, a high-level computer misuse board that includes the HR, operations and IT leaders to review potential misuse cases and decide further action.

This will shield the CIO singularly from potential conflict in the case of senior staff and board members but also present the cases effectively.

When I was on the board I expected to be under greater scrutiny not less, and governed my actions based on a higher standard of conduct. While I appreciate that organisations have many different dynamics, if a policy is good enough for the average workers, it should be good enough for those on the board.

On a different note the government just announced £1bn of funding for tech start-ups. While I applaud the initiative I am also all too aware the government is still not addressing the systemic problem within the British technology industry. I have always believed that Britain has been a hotbed for developing and breeding technology innovation. Its primary challenge is keeping that innovation within the British Isles once it has been developed.

The government has done nothing to stop the exportation of British ideas and innovations - this is the fundamental problem of the local tech industry. It is nether practical or cost effective for organisations to develop locally when China, India, the US and many of our European neighbours have much better incentive programs to support technology businesses.

Sure the money will breed new ideas - but these ideas will become the mainstay of another countries economy in five years' time.

Instead the government should start putting money and incentives into keeping British innovations in Britain and British workers in jobs. A billion pounds will be much better spent doing this than trying to develop start-ups that will be exported in a few years.