Is IT Still a Cost Centre? CIO100 Panel Sparks Lively Debate

The debate on whether IT is still a cost centre took centre stage at the 17th edition of the CIO100 Symposium & Awards, where moderator Joseph Mathenge, COO of Serianu, led a spirited conversation with Adam Nyaga, Chief Revenue Officer, Computech Group, Stanley Igwe, Group Manager, ICT Ibom Air, Musa Musazi, CTDO dfcu Bank Uganda, and Orlando Lyomu, Member Board of Directors, Next Media. What emerged was a nuanced and unfiltered examination of the persistent tension between finance and technology in modern organisations.

The conversation began with Lyomu offering the finance perspective, noting that many CIOs still misunderstand the logic of investment. “In finance, not everything you spend on is an investment,” he said. “If you buy a house and live in it, that is shelter. If you rent it out, then it becomes an investment. The same applies to technology.” His point was that while CIOs often pitch large digital programmes under the banner of innovation, few articulate measurable returns that a CFO can defend at the board level.

CIOs on the panel argued that the misunderstanding is mutual. Musazi noted that CFOs frequently expect IT to pause or stretch critical projects without appreciating long-term risks. “There is always tension between CFOs and CIOs. The CFO looks at the bottom line, especially in listed companies where performance is reviewed quarter by quarter. Meanwhile, CIOs work with a long-term horizon. So we are often asked, ‘Can’t you postpone that project?’ They sometimes believe we have a magic wand—that we can delay a critical initiative without losing momentum or compromising delivery,” he said. “That is one of the biggest disconnects.” Igwe added that the tension is structural. “In their eyes, the CIO is really the Chief Investment Officer,” he joked. “We make risk heavy investments for the future. They manage the present. CFOs and CIOs are rarely friends.”

But the panel agreed the misalignment goes beyond finance. Lyomu described the rise of shadow IT, where business units develop their own technology preferences and assumptions. “The tension today between CIOs and CFOs—and it’s not just them, but across the whole leadership table—is what we call shadow IT. Because technology is so ubiquitous, everyone thinks they’re a mini-CIO. Everyone believes they have a better idea of how to invest in tech than the CIO. At the same time, CIOs aren’t always becoming pseudo-CFOs or pseudo-marketers—able to push back on business arguments. So you see everyone pushing on technology decisions, but CIOs rarely challenge marketing spend, or these ‘loose cash’ projects that creep in. That imbalance creates friction. Everyone thinks they’re an IT master, but they also feel IT doesn’t understand their world.”

CIOs were criticised for occasionally pitching overly complex and costly solutions. Lyomu delivered one of the day’s most memorable lines: “Stop recommending a Ferrari as a family car for a family of six. There are perfectly good family cars out there. A Ferrari is just a car. It moves fast, but that does not mean you need it.”

The discussion soon turned to governance, and here the panel found even greater gaps. When asked how many people worked in organisations with a dedicated board committee for IT, very few hands went up. Musazi said this has far reaching effects. “We have audit committees, risk committees, finance committees, but almost no technology committees,” he said. “Yet in many organisations, technology is the business.” Lyomu agreed, adding that boards must evolve to include people who understand how technology shapes future business models. “Boardrooms are still populated by people from an older era,” he said. “We need people who understand how technology creates future value.”

The panel also explored the role of compliance and regulation and whether the speed of innovation inevitably puts CIOs at odds with auditors. Nyaga argued that the dynamic nature of technology makes it almost impossible to hold a CIO down. “The laptop you deployed four years ago is now obsolete, so you must buy a more expensive one. Which standard do you use, the past cost or the future requirement,” he asked. “Each innovation is never static. So if an auditor tries to criminalise a CIO, he will slip through your hands. That is the reality of technology.” Yet Orlando cautioned that innovation cannot excuse avoidable failures. “IT teams do waste a lot of organisational capital on audit issues,” he said. “If CIOs spent a bit less time chasing the next shiny thing and a bit more time tightening bolts, everyone else would save time.”

Musazi placed this friction in a global context, noting that innovation almost always moves faster than regulation. “Regulators cannot regulate what they do not understand,” he said. “Innovation comes first, it takes the world by storm, and only then do regulators realise they must intervene. That delay is why audits feel heavy.”

A recurring theme throughout the session was the importance of translation, the ability of CIOs to express technical decisions in business language. The panel agreed that CIOs often struggle not because they lack technical expertise, but because they fail to communicate value in a way CFOs and CEOs can meaningfully evaluate. As Lyomu put it: “Everything must be measurable. What you cannot measure, you cannot manage. If efficiency is your promise, what useful output is coming from it? Translate that value into dollars and no CFO will refuse you.”

There was also broad consensus that innovation should not be narrowly defined as technology. “Innovation is not the exclusive domain of engineers,” Lyomu argued. “Some of the greatest innovations are financial, figuring out how to deliver the same level of technology at a fraction of the cost.”

By the end of the session, the consensus was clear. IT is no longer simply a cost centre, its role is foundational to competitiveness, efficiency, customer experience and risk management. But without stronger communication, clearer measurement, and more modern governance structures, organisations continue to undervalue and misunderstand the strategic function of technology. The future, the panel suggested, belongs to companies where CIOs and CFOs operate not as opposing forces, but as aligned partners shaping long-term value.