Regular followers of this blog will be readily aware of how vociferously opinionated we are about the need to dismantle and burn outmoded manual processes which eat up valuable resources within the IT department. Why? Because they are so unnecessary… and the alternative is highly beneficial to all concerned. New practices can free you up to be strategic and innovative with IT rather than continually being chained to the fire-fighting grindstone (how’s about that for mixing metaphors?).
So in the midst of the current debate about the future of the humble cheque, you’d probably expect us to be firmly in the camp that says they should be swept away in favour of 100% electronic transactions? Well no. You might be surprised…
Let’s face it – there are some similarities here between the cheque debate and what goes on within IT departments up and down the land. Many people refuse to give up the idea of a tried and trusted mechanism which has ‘served us well’ for so long. In the case of cheques, they certainly do their job, in fact they are such a good instrument that the principle has (partly) enabled the successful development of trade and commerce for over 300 years.
But the fact that a process has always been that way doesn’t necessarily mean it can’t be improved. But the humble cheque has already seen its fair share of development over 300 years, and IT has enabled a great deal of that over the last few decades.
If the process of increasing the automation of cheque transactions any further has been exhausted (and we’d question whether it actually has), then before we kill it off let’s remember that the cheque itself is not a ‘process’ at all. The cheque is an audit trail, a record of authentication, and – crucially – a symbol of credit trust. With major retailers already refusing cheques at the till, it is also becoming a key differentiator for smaller outlets who remain dedicated to serving the 6 million or so UK consumers who continue to rely upon it to make payments.
We believe that progress is only progress when it is reasoned and intelligent. Progress for the sake of progress is movement without direction.
What do you make of the cheque debate?
