A Jamaican Adventure: Transforming PID into IBM Software Distribution Department
By: Baron Stewart
The Team That Would Restructure PID
I was fortunate to be selected as part of a four-person team of analysts tasked with an enormous challenge: restructuring PID in preparation for its transformation into IBM Software Distribution. This wasn’t just any assignment. It was high-stakes, complex, and crucial to IBM’s future in the software business.
The work we were about to do wasn’t theoretical. IBM was betting on software and needed a distribution system to keep pace with explosive growth. We were going to lay the groundwork.
The methodology we used was called Business System Planning (BSP).
What is Business System Planning (BSP)?
At IBM, BSP was developed to help clients understand their business needs and translate them into the hardware and software solutions they should buy. It wasn’t about selling boxes—it was about profoundly understanding a business from the inside out and designing systems that could support its strategy and operations.
BSP was rigorous. It forced you to step back and see the business as an integrated system rather than a collection of disconnected departments and processes. It asked tough, fundamental questions:
What is the business strategy?
What are the key business processes that make the strategy work?
What critical data does the business depend on?
Who owns what within the organization?
When you answered these questions honestly and thoroughly, patterns emerged. You could spot the gaps, the redundancies, and the inefficiencies. You could see where information flowed smoothly—and where it got stuck. BSP was like building an x-ray of the business. Once you had that model, you could design business and IT systems—that made everything run better.
Applying BSP to PID: Turning the Lens Inward
Until then, IBM’s marketing teams had primarily used BSP to help external clients. This time, we turned that same disciplined approach inward. Our team of four analysts became internal consultants, and we applied BSP to PID itself.
It was eye-opening.
We mapped out PID’s business strategy, which, at its core, was shifting from hardware distribution to a software-first model. That change alone had ripple effects throughout the organization. Many of PID’s traditional processes were optimized for physical inventory: tracking shipments, managing warehouses, and handling customs paperwork. But software distribution was a different beast. It required speed, precision, and a new licensing and fulfillment approach.
We examined PID’s business processes, some of which hadn’t changed in decades. Some were solid, but others—designed for the old world of physical products—didn’t fit anymore. For example, order processing that took weeks for hardware needed to be cut down to hours, if not minutes, for software.
We analyzed PID’s critical data: order information, licensing records, inventory tracking, and customer entitlements. We found that data was often siloed in different systems owned by other departments and was not always consistent. In the software world, where the product was usually just a license key, clean, accurate data was everything.
We also examined organizational ownership. Who owned the process of fulfilling a software order? Who was responsible for licensing compliance? These roles weren’t always clear, creating gaps in accountability.
Identifying the Gaps—and Closing Them
BSP helped us identify the holes and weak spots in how PID operated—and there were plenty. Some were simple, like redundant data entry. Others were more complex, like how customer entitlements were tracked—or not tracked well enough—to prevent duplication or license misuse.
Once we had the model of PID’s business, we started designing the future-state architecture for IBM Software Distribution. We recommended:
Streamlining order management to reduce cycle times.
Implementing centralized data management for customer and product information.
Redefining roles and responsibilities to ensure every process had clear ownership.
Laying the groundwork for electronic software delivery, which, at the time, was a bold new frontier.
A Small Team, a Big Impact
We were a small team, but we had a big mandate. Every analysis session, interview with a PID stakeholder, and brown-paper process map we sketched out mattered. We defined how IBM Software Distribution would work in the future and the next decade.
Our work had a sense of purpose. We knew that if we did this right, IBM would be ready for the software explosion. If we got it wrong, the consequences would be felt across the entire company.
Earning IBM’s Trust
When I was asked to join PID's Business System Planning (BSP) team, I had already established a reputation for delivering results and adding value. This wasn’t luck; it was the result of leading projects that solved real problems.
One of those projects was my compaction initiative, which saved PID money and space—clear, measurable outcomes that leadership valued. I also introduced structured programming techniques to PID, bringing modern software engineering practices into the division. I built a significant software system for the older processing department, streamlining key operations that had been inefficient for years.
These efforts earned me IBM’s trust. They saw me as someone who didn’t just talk about solutions but implemented them effectively and brought others along. That trust led to my selection for the BSP team that transformed PID into IBM Software Distribution.
The Challenge of Following Instead of Leading
Joining the BSP team was an honor but came with a personal challenge. The hardest part for me wasn’t the complexity of the task or the tight deadlines. It was learning how to follow instead of lead.
Up until then, I had typically driven the projects I worked on. I was used to setting the directions and making the calls. But Steve Wolpert was our leader on this team. Steve was thoughtful, fair, and incredibly capable. He had a calm, even-handed approach that created trust within the team. And while I respected his leadership deeply, I had to learn to step back, trust the process, and play a supporting role.
That experience taught me a lesson I carry with me to this day: sometimes leadership means knowing when to follow when to support others in their roles, and when to put team success ahead of personal ambition. It wasn’t easy then—and if I’m honest, it’s something I still work on today.
Making Change Manageable
We all knew making change was hard. But by then, I had grown familiar with the challenges and had gained tools to help manage them.
One of the most effective techniques we introduced during the PID restructuring was the IBM Software Distribution Maturity Assessment Survey. This tool allowed people across the organization to see where they were in the transformation process and visualize the path forward. It helped them understand their role in creating a mature, high-functioning organization and what actions they could take to move the needle.
This simple tool transformed how we framed change. Instead of asking people to take blind leaps, we gave them a roadmap—one they could understand, engage with, and influence. It made our work more manageable and helped us build alignment during significant upheaval.
Why I Left the Fast Track
After the successful transformation of PID into IBM Software Distribution and our move into the beautiful Sterling Forest offices, I was on the fast track at IBM. I was working alongside incredibly talented people like Steve and Michelle, who were advancing rapidly in their careers. And yet, I made a different choice.
I wanted to give back—to contribute to people like me who had struggled to find a path to success. I knew what it felt like to doubt whether there was a place for me in the world of technology. And I wanted to help young people see themselves in those spaces, to help them believe they belonged.
That’s why I joined the Comprehensive Math and Science Program (CMSP) through IBM’s Faculty Loan Program. CMSP, led by Gil Lopez at Cooper Union University, was a citywide collaboration of engineering schools with a mission: to increase the number of Black and Hispanic students pursuing careers in engineering.
For two years, I worked in New York City high schools, collaborating with guidance counselors to identify and nurture students with potential in math and science. I also worked with teachers and families to open doors and create opportunities. It was personal and deeply fulfilling.
The Cost—and the Reward
Professionally, it was a career risk. While I was at CMSP, I didn’t get promoted. Others moved ahead of me. Keith and Michelle, both deserving, were elevated while I stayed where I was.
Some might call it a career mistake. But life isn’t about promotions. It’s about purpose.
While at CMSP, I also met my wife in New York. That single meeting reshaped my life in ways no job title ever could. But that’s a story for another time.
What I Learned at CMSP
At CMSP, I learned how the education system worked in America—and how it often failed the students who needed it most. I saw how systemic barriers and lack of access limited opportunities for talented young people. Mentoring, advocacy, and belief were as critical as academics.
This experience transformed my understanding of leadership. It wasn’t just about delivering projects or hitting milestones. It was about creating environments where people could thrive, whether they were coworkers, students, or community members.
Two Transformations, One Purpose
Looking back, my journey from leading change at IBM to helping students through CMSP may seem like two separate paths. But it was the same mission: to help people and organizations reach their potential.
At IBM, I helped transform PID into a world-class software distribution engine. At CMSP, I helped students see themselves as future engineers and scientists, breaking barriers and expanding opportunities.
Both experiences taught me that real change takes time, commitment, and belief, whether it’s restructuring a business or reshaping a life.
Summary Lesson: Trade-offs, Purpose, and the Power of Choice
One of my biggest lessons is that career choices aren’t always clear-cut. Sometimes, you have to step away from the fast track to follow a calling that feels personal and deeply meaningful.
I made a choice that cost me promotions—but it gave me perspective, purpose, and relationships that changed my life.
If you measure success by titles alone, you might see a misstep. But if you measure it by impact, fulfillment, and the lives you touch, you’ll see a growth story.
Every leader has to define success for themselves, and sometimes, the most important choices are the ones you make for reasons that can’t be found on a résumé.
Call to Action: Find Your Path, Make a Difference
If you’re reading this and wondering about your path, here’s what I offer you:
Lead where you can, but learn to follow when it matters.
Use your skills to improve things—whether a business process or a student’s future.
Take risks that align with your values, not just your ambitions.
Measure your success by the lives you touch and the opportunities you create.
If you can ever open a door for someone else, do it. Someone did that for me, and it made all the difference. Being part of that team, using BSP to rebuild an organization from the inside out, gave me a deep appreciation for how strategy, process, data, and people connect. It wasn’t just about systems. It was about creating an organization that could thrive in a rapidly changing world.