How WIN Brands' CIO Turns Conflict Into Catalyst For Structured Inclusion

For most CIOs, the job sits at a messy intersection of technology, risk, and transformation. With competing priorities, conflicting incentives, and incomplete data coming from every corner of the C-suite, conflict is almost constant. Today, the real question for leaders isn’t how to avoid it, but how to use it productively.

To get an expert's take on the subject, we spoke with Ken Knapton, Chief Information Officer at WIN Brands, where he's responsible for information and technology solutions for Costa Vida, Fresh Mexican Grill, and FatCats Entertainment. His almost 30-year career began at Intel, where Knapton was an architect of the antivirus solution acquired by Symantec and marketed as Norton Anti-Virus, Corporate Edition. Since then, he's served as a Chief Information Officer, Chief Technology Officer, and Chief Information Security Officer across the finance, healthcare, and retail sectors for companies like Merrick Bank and ContentWatch. In his experience, the most effective CISOs are the ones who can master conflict as a tool for structured inclusion.

"Leaders make decisions with between 40-60% of the data. So, if we wait until we have 100% of the data, then we've missed our window," Knapton said. Citing a lesson from Colin Powell, he explained how security leaders must act with conviction, even in the face of uncertainty. For him, the key to success is a philosophy called “disagree and commit.”

• Listen first: Here, every voice has a space in the conversation before a decision is made, Knapton continued. "I don't want to taint the waters. I want people to express their opinion first. And that way, you move away from even the disagreement because they don't know they're disagreeing with you yet."

But managing downward with inclusion is different from managing sideways with peers, Knapton explained. When dealing with the executive team, his approach is about earning authority through proof, not politics. "I'm a data guy. And so I think it's important to leave opinions at the door and make sure that you're talking about data. 'This is why I'm proposing what I'm proposing, or this is why I'm disagreeing with what you're saying. Because here's the data that backs that up.'"