Hacker News Reader

Comment by brudgers | Hacker News Reader

'Target CEO Gregg Steinhafel described the search for an interim CIO as a “first step.”'

Well actually the first step was scapegoating the CIO rather than those responsible for putting someone without an IT background in the position. This was the failure of institutional culture, not an individual who accepted an offered promotion to a level but not a position for which they were qualified.

Target's hiring of a consultant specializing in risk management and regulatory compliance says it all. The culture hasn't changed and Target's board still doesn't see technological expertise as a core skill.

View on HN

"Jacob, who holds an M.B.A. from the University of Minnesota, first joined the company in 1984 as a department store assistant buyer when it was known as Dayton’s, then left and returned in 2002 to Target as director of guest contact centers. She was promoted to CIO and executive vice president of Target Technology Services in 2008, and reported to Steinhafel."

Yes, whoever promoted Jacob to CIO should also resign.

To me, it looks like a corporate culture where CIO was just another position and happened to be the one that was open when it was her turn to be promoted. It's the sort of decision of which the board and senior management would all be aware.

They still don't seem to know what happened. That is not good.

Didn't you mean to say that she was the one who happened to be available, when the position needed to be filled?

If it's "her turn to be promoted" I find that they just invent an appropriate title.

I've been told Target is a total shark tank. If you come in and show potential (whatever your background is) they go to great lengths to push you up the hierarchy and get you promoted. Those managers who don't have "The drive" as they call it, are effectively culled from the herd and never promoted and languish in middle management until they either move on or let go.

Judging by her youthful looks, I'd say she was clearly on one of these "fast tracks" and landed in the CIO position exactly as you pointed out.

I worked at Target while in college. The people that were brought in as managers (execs) were not people I had ever met. They'd show up one day from some internship program, and bam 6 months later, they'd be in charge of everything. That said, the people typically were top notch... so I couldn't complain about their management abilities. We'd always say, "they showed up already promoted". It was college life for me though, so I had no illusions of ever wanting to be more than a minimum wage salesfloor guy for a couple of years. 15 years later, and I still have dreams that I still somehow am employed there, and I just happen to check the schedule... and CRAP, I have a shift this week!

Nah, I bet she has a bunch of certs and knows PCI by heart. I also bet that Target is covered on paper.

This is how big business operates. They dont care about real security of data, all they care is compliance.

>>> They dont care about real security of data, all they care is compliance.

Not so sure about that either:

http://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2008/08/target-to-pay-6...

"Target has settled a class action lawsuit with the National Federation of the Blind over accessibility complaints with Target.com. Despite the law being unclear as to whether the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) applies to websites, the company will pay a substantial fee and update its web site to make it accessible to the blind."

This was after repeated appeals by the NFB to have them correct the site. It took a class action lawsuit for them to actually to do something. Even then Target sought to have the case dismissed:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Federation_of_the_Blin...

"Target moved to dismiss the case, claiming its brick and mortar stores are accessible to the blind, and that civil rights laws apply to the accessibility of its stores."

CIOs are actively discouraged from possessing any IT background.

Just look at the retardation UW is teaching:

https://www.coursera.org/course/inforiskman

https://www.coursera.org/course/inforisk

https://www.coursera.org/course/infosec

Those "people", they call themselves teachers/professionals in the field, will tell you that Information Security is ALL about covering your ass and shifting blame to a third party. All three courses are about getting a slip of paper that says you delegated responsibility clearing your company from any lawful obligations in case of a breach. Not a single peep about technical aspects or real security of data/infrastructure. Its all about getting that "we paid company X to do it for us" waiver.

There was (deleted now) a huge thread on Coursera forum titled Disappointment covering this topic and demonstrating total lack of professionalism or any real world knowledge. Whole UW program is a government funds skimming scheme. Just look at this garbage:

"Center of Information Assurance and Cybersecurity at the University of Washington, designated by the NSA/DHS as a Center for Academic Excellence in Information Assurance Education and Research"

I highly encourage you to check out those courses (I think there is preview available for old lectures) if you are in need of a laugh, or reality check concerning state of CIO education.

Every Coursera course has a big thread labled "disappointed" or words to that effect.

Do they all have specifics like razl_pl says, and do they all get deleted?

From experience, they hire top level by religious affinity however, this time they most likely were burned by this tradition.

What religion?

I wonder if the poster is referring to this.

http://www.theawl.com/2010/08/real-america-the-ceo-of-target...

Not so much affinity, as ideology?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com