What makes a business successful in today’s market? Is it being on the cutting edge, constantly innovating new technology and products, or perhaps being consistent and stable with what is already available? For some reason, there is a distinction in some businesses that the two cannot converge. The Research and Development (R&D) department, or innovators, drive the business forward and have their own specific wants when it comes to technology. The Information Technology (IT) department, on the other hand, seeks to standardized processes, and is seen by innovators as too orderly to deal with innovation. As such, there is a misconception that the two cannot work closely together.

In the article “The IT Audit That Boosts Innovation”, the authors discuss the problems that currently exist between the two departments in many companies, offer solutions to bridge the gap between the two departments, and identify key points that CEOs and IT departments can improve and build their business around. This paper will analyze the article’s points and provide examples of how the article’s ideals can be applied to the accounting profession.

In today's business environment, R&D and IT departments often lack high levels of collaboration. This is largely due to the belief that IT's computerized and standardized objectives will limit the creative components necessary to foster innovation during the R&D process. However, businesses that continue to hold this philosophy are likely to lose future market share to businesses that expand the use of IT in their R&D departments, leading to an increase in the speed and quality of innovation.

The cause of slow IT implementation within R&D is rooted in the belief that creativity cannot or should not be organized into a cold, hard business process. Developers of products are often uneasy about following a structured system for an activity that has historically been free-flowing, idea driven, and human in nature. The belief that technology cannot or should not perform a “human” task is not a new one, and people will maintain distaste for change in other areas long after IT has been heavily implemented in R&D departments around the world. According to Marianne Bradford, author of Modern ERP, “Without change, performance would never improve. Successful companies have a culture that keeps moving and changing proactively” (Modern ERP pg 89). Companies cannot afford to resist change because there will be other companies that embrace it and thrive.

Resisting change is natural for many people and is the very reason that change management is needed in organizations of all sizes. This quality seems especially true when it comes to technology, and is exaggerated even further by the belief that technology cannot perform the task to the same standard as a human. However, businesses must change. In his article, “IT Doesn’t Matter”, Nicholas Carr writes, “Twenty years ago most executives looked down on computers as proletarian tools - glorified typewriters and calculators - best relegated to low level employees like secretaries, analysts, and technicians. It was a rare executive who would let his fingers touch a keyboard...” (Carr). In time, excluding IT from R&D may seem like just as blind a choice.

While current IT does have limits to its useful involvement in R&D, the negative stigma is stifling the development and growth of IT tools that could be useful to innovations, and therefore, is slowing the progress of R&D itself. The reluctance of many R&D departments to learn about and use IT resources to their advantage is causing competitive disadvantages in their businesses. As companies all over the world strive for efficiency, the spread of IT into every possible business process is likely to continue, as it has over the last several decades. R&D functions are no exception, and companies who continue to place barriers between IT and R&D departments may be vulnerable to losing market