Thread regarding Enbridge Inc. layoffs

No CTO, now what?

Here's the thing about a company that just fired its CTO and didn't line up nobody to take the seat. Ain't nobody in that boardroom saying it out loud, but what they just did is tell every business unit in the building it's open season. And people don't wait around to be told twice when there's power sitting on the table unattended.

First thing goes is the process. Won't be loud about it neither — nobody's gonna stand up and say "let's stop vetting our technology properly." What happens is smaller. A review gets skipped 'cause there's no one senior enough left to insist on it. Then another. Six months on, don't nobody remember there used to be a process at all, just some folks vaguely recall filling out a form once.

Then the business units start making technology decisions same way a man starts driving a truck he's never driven before — confident right up until the ditch. They ain't wrong to want progress. They're just the wrong people making the call, and everybody in the room knows it, and everybody in the room decides that's a tomorrow problem.

Costs go up. Nobody owns admitting that, 'cause the money's coming out of two pockets now instead of one, and when it's two pockets, it's nobody's fault special. That's not an accident. That's what happens when accountability gets split — same as blame does. Everybody's a little bit responsible, which means don't nobody's really responsible at all.

Give it a year, they bring somebody in from outside to fix it. Stranger walks in, looks around, tells 'em exactly what they already knew walking in the door — you people tore down the fence and now the cattle's in the road. Only difference is they're paying consultant rates to hear it said back to 'em slow.

And the folks who used to complain about the old CTO? They're the ones left standing in a hallway with a job title that don't mean nothing no more, waiting on somebody to tell 'em what they're supposed to be doing today. Nobody comes. That's usually how it goes.


by
| 32 views | | 6 replies (last 7 days ago) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1m25tx7xm

6 replies (most recent on top)

The CTO wasn’t anything more than a Director of Infrastructure. There was no leadership or technology decisions even made within the army he had built up. All that entire group was (and continues to be) is a self-fulfilling series of speed bumps and circular mazes with no real authority or decision making. When something gets stuck, just get your Director to make a phone call and the problem disappears. Good job, EA!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1b6+1m25tx7xm

@x7 We're not talking about a theoretical gap anymore, we've seen what happens without this function. Cynthia was the one EVP who actually held her business unit accountable when projects started piling up without justification. Now, no one is. New CIO already said he plans to punt the problem down the road rather than deal with it now, so this isn't an accident, it's a choice to let the mess grow and hand it to whoever comes next.

The bigger issue isn't just too many projects — it's that nobody's checking whether the value people claim these projects deliver is even real. Left unchecked, that means we're building up costly, poorly justified tech decisions that look approved on paper. That's much harder to unwind later, because ki-ling a bad project means admitting the original numbers were never true.

Doesn't need to be a CTO specifically. But it needs to be someone senior enough to tell an EVP no.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @xp+1m25tx7xm

Enbridge does not need a CTO position. We are not a technology company developing any groundbreaking software / technology. Majority of of TIS is implementing / maintaining vendor products that are configured to meet our needs.

Just because a CTO position is vacant doesn't mean technology governance goes out the window. This function can be easily absorbed by other TIS teams ( e.g. CISO and/or respective BU VPs ).

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @x7+1m25tx7xm

@c0 uh huh, get off the sauce

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @c8+1m25tx7xm

@ay Hold on there, little fella — wasn't a fan no more than you were, but we're both still standing here looking at the same mess. Ain't about who owned it. It's about who's gonna clean it up.

Ain't about power neither, it's about a job needing done. Like my mama used to say when my uncle Earl came home three sheets to the wind — "That man ain't dangerous 'cause he's mean, he's dangerous 'cause he can't be trusted to know his own limits."

Everybody here's been trained to wait on orders instead of using judgment, 'cause judgment used to get you burned. Minute nobody's answering to, don't nobody step up smart — somebody grabs the reins who's got no business grabbing 'em, or everybody just waits on permission that ain't coming.

First year'll feel like freedom. Every unit buys what it wants, builds what it wants, stands up its own AI project unchecked. Feels good. But that's three departments digging the same well three different ways — and that ain't progress, that's waste wearing a party hat. Debt piles up quiet as snow, till the roof caves and everybody wants to know how nobody saw it coming.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @c0+1m25tx7xm

@OP I couldn’t follow half of what you said. You should consider checking your grammar before you submit. But to follow up on what I could distill out of your tirade…your old CTO didn’t do anything worth mentioning anyway. This power vacuum that you were alluding to was likely already taking place as he didn’t have much in the way of accountability. He will be replaced eventually…better to find a quality replacement a month or two down the line than slap a band-aid on it for the sake of “optics”.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ay+1m25tx7xm

Post a reply

: