Why Companies Should Consolidate Tech Roles in the C-Suite

Authors: Thomas H. Davenport, John Spens, and Saurabh Gupta

C-LEVEL TECHNOLOGY ROLES have proliferated over the past few decades. Chief information officers first appeared in the early 1980s. Next, chief technology officers became common in high-tech firms and then spread to other types of businesses. These roles were followed by chief information security officers, chief data officers, chief analytics officers, and chief digital officers. Most recently, chief artificial intelligence officers have appeared. Their numbers have greatly increased with the rise of generative AI during the past few years.

While the creation of these roles reflects the increasing importance of technology in business, such a dizzying array of technology leaders can also lead to confusion.

A recent study—sponsored by Thoughtworks (where one of us works) and the MIT Chief Data Officer/Information Quality Symposium—suggests that this is a serious issue. In a survey of 266 technology and data leaders, more than four out of five reported confusion in their organizations around the roles of different technology-oriented groups and where to turn for data- and technology-oriented services and issues. Only 12% reported no confusion.

As more organizations seek to integrate data and AI into their operations, this confusion may be having a negative impact. People in leadership roles are often unsure about their own responsibilities relative to other tech leaders: 30% of the surveyed leaders said they lacked clarity about how their role relates to other technology and data leadership roles. And although 78% of respondents reported that data and technologies are viewed as important or very important by their organizations, only 10% of respondents said they were very satisfied with their data foundations and capabilities for analytics and AI. In comparison, 30% said they were dissatisfied.

There are, of course, many challenges preventing success with data goals: people readiness, politics, diffusion of responsibility (heavily related to overlapping organizational structures in some organizations), budgets or financial constraints, technology readiness, and time—or just limited patience. Addressing all of these challenges will require clear, concerted leadership and a broad mandate for change.

In this study, however, we discovered that some organizations are recognizing the downside of C-level proliferation. To tackle the issue, they’ve begun to consolidate senior technology and data roles; we refer to them as “SuperTech” leaders, although it’s important to note there is variation across organizations in the specifics of their roles and titles.

These individuals are most likely to be known as chief information officers, but they typically have broad responsibility for data and technology functions. Many also have operational responsibilities within the business. Leaders of specialty tech and data functions (data, analytics, AI, cybersecurity) usually report to them. Establishing SuperTech leadership roles will bring clarity and accountability to organizations’ digital transformation initiatives. We interviewed several such leaders for the study and describe some of their backgrounds and perspectives below.

Idea in Brief

Recently, some organizations have begun to recognize the downside of C-level proliferation and decided to consolidate senior technology and data roles. These individuals—referred to as “SuperTech” leaders—are most likely to be known as chief information officers, but they also have broad responsibility for data and technology functions, and many also have operational responsibilities within the business. Leaders of specialty tech and data functions (data, analytics, AI, cybersecurity) report to them. Establishing SuperTech leadership roles will bring clarity and accountability to organizations’ digital transformation initiatives.

Rise of the SuperTech Leader

What skills should a combined-tech leader have? Survey participants named overall leadership and senior executive relationships (85%) and business strategy and vision (82%) as most important. Technology strategy and vision (72%) was somewhat less important. Skills involving managing the employees of the combined-technology function (38%) and technology execution skills (35%) were viewed as substantially less important. In other words, SuperTech leaders should be heavily business-oriented, with a technical underpinning.

The executives who hold multiple technology roles that we interviewed for this report reinforced this view. They talk and think as businesspeople first and tech people second in their day-to-day experience of these roles.

For example, Shamin Mohammad, who is both chief information and chief technology officer at CarMax, told us: “To be effective as a technology leader, I have to be a business leader. I am working side-by-side with the CMO, the COO—we are joined at the hip—and then the CFO, the CEO, and the board. Execution is table stakes. You have to deliver—it’s not even up for discussion. It is more important for a technology leader to be a business leader, to understand what’s happening in the industry, and to envision where the industry is going so you can enable that with technology and bring the rest of the organization on board.” Topics like “keeping the lights on,” renewing technical infrastructure, or dealing with cybersecurity threats are important, but they are not his primary focus; his direct reports ensure they are taken care of.

Sean McCormack, a SuperTech leader at school busing company First Student, noted, “If you are not a value- and innovation-oriented IT executive, it won’t work to oversee technology innovation, analytics and AI, and that sort of activity. If all you’ve done is package implementations, you will not succeed in a broader role.” Sebastian Klapdor, until recently the head of technology, data, and analytics at marketing services company Vista, said that a strong business-value orientation is key to being asked to lead multiple technology- and data-related functions. When he was head of data and analytics for the company, he focused heavily on achieving measurable value through successful data products. He mentioned in an interview that he believes this was a key factor in his being asked to also assume the CTO role.

In the survey, respondents minimized “managing down” skills and technical execution skills, but the SuperTech leaders interviewed suggested they shouldn’t be discounted. Several mentioned the importance of hiring strong specialists in each area reporting to them. Sastry Durvasula, whose title at TIAA is chief information and client services officer, leads all technology functions at TIAA and has direct reports dealing with data and AI, client services, and shared services, as well as chief information and technology officers for TIAA’s different business lines. In each area, he seeks out people who have the relevant technology skills but who also understand how to transform an organization. He reports to the company’s CEO and said he still codes on occasion as well. Klapdor, who worked at Vista, said that he doesn’t think of himself as highly technical, but he did create a small Arduino-based device for capturing sensor data from printing equipment. Understanding the technology helps him lead those who do it for a living. Both of these leaders have at least some degree of technology execution skills.

The broad survey of data and tech leaders suggests that many different groups within the organization are involved in overseeing or coordinating the introduction and use of generative AI. Chief data officers, chief information officers, chief technology officers, chief digital officers, and chief AI officers (in order of their perceived involvement in generative AI strategy and execution) all play a role. While this probably indicates that the potential value of the technology is viewed as high, it may be inefficient or confusing for so many groups to be involved and to have contention around the leadership roles for generative AI. This is another argument for consolidation of tech and data leadership.

Dissenters from This Model

Not all technology and data executives believe that an integrated organization and SuperTech leader is a good idea. In the interviews, we heard some objections that were based on individual attributes of leaders and some that were more principle-based.

Several data leaders told us that they would not be interested in reporting to a chief information officer who is primarily focused on infrastructure and “keeping the lights on,” as opposed to bringing about substantial business change. Other leaders had different concerns with an integrated role. Scott Hallworth, the chief data and analytics officer at Hewlett-Packard, had been interim co-CIO at HP for much of 2023. His concerns about a fully integrated role—particularly the combination of chief digital and chief information officer roles—is that combining the roles would eliminate a check on important decisions within a company.

Of course, the strengths and weaknesses of organizational structures are specific to individual companies and the people who hold roles within them. It’s possible that a particular structure and leader for technology and data would work better or worse depending on the organizational circumstances and the individuals involved.

Actions for the Future

The most obvious action that organizations can take to address these issues is to create an integrated technology and data leadership role with an effective, business-oriented executive occupying it. Judging from our interviews, many organizations have already taken that step and appear to have been successful with it.

If for some reason that isn’t possible, some of the issues raised in this study can be addressed in other ways. One, for example, is to create greater role clarity for C-level tech and data leaders and make the role distinctions known to internal customers. Another is to foster more collaboration among tech and data leaders, which can lead to joint projects and higher levels of success in delivering them.

There are a variety of technologies and applications in use within organizations today, both familiar and emerging. There are times when specialists in particular technologies or management issues with them are needed. However, the trend toward specialized technology and data leaders has, we feel, gone too far. Greater coordination and integration are needed, and SuperTech leaders with a strong connection to the business can help make information technology a more effective business resource.