If you have a turnover policy for the PCs
The company should provide capital to each group to actually DO it. It sounds like a brain dead "DUH!" statement, but more often then not, computer equipment turnover policies state generally 3 to 5 year replacements but due to budgeting cuts and bottom lines, they tend to go 8-10 years before replacing the old junkers. It has always boggled the mind that company say to do you best and make the customer happy... but don't spend any money to do it. It doesn't make sense. Every small business owner I know spends the money needed to get the job done so they can MAKE money over and above their spending. Large companies seem to loose sight of this since they're on the stock market and have to please overfed, brain dead analysts that think tax write-offs are more important than proper acquisitions for greater profit margins. Sometimes a loss one quarter due to expansion and capital expenditure will lead to more profitable quarters to follow, but analysts will kill a company for such "nonsense" because they had a down quarter when they could have maintained a smaller increase in profits. And then they'll kill the company if it maintains only small gains. To fix the IT issues (as well as ALL equipment turnover issues) we need to fix the stock market analysts and re-school them on proper understanding of business tactics in the LONG term and tell them to stop trying to analyze anything that hasn't taken more than 6 months or a year to accomplish and preferably 5 to 10 year trends. Their job could be much easier focusing on 30 year trends for older companies and for younger companies, focusing on their build up and expansion and comparing it to how they're managing their income and bonuses. Let the company accountants deal with the tax issues and focus more on how the company is doing as a whole in managing their assets instead of focusing on how big their tax write-offs are for a given quarter.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
