I hear a lot of organizations talk about the challenges they have with their legacy information systems. Most organizations spend 70%-80% of their information technology (IT) budgets on maintaining these legacy systems, even though they prefer that these systems would simply go away. This is a common IT complaint. So what exactly is a "legacy," and why is it seen in such a negative context? The word itself is defined as either 1) Money or property bequeathed to another by will, or 2) Something handed down from an ancestor or a predecessor or from the past, as in a legacy of religious freedom. Under this definition, the term has a more positive connotation than it does when it is used to describe dated IT systems. In business technology circles, legacy usually means old, outdated, and expensive to maintain. It often implies that a company is being held back by antiquated, inflexible systems. Of course, with 80% of your IT budget committed to maintaining these systems, you would hope that they would contribute to 80% of your business's revenue. However, in most cases, legacy systems fall far short of that mark. How do these legacy assets come into being? When do they become legacy systems instead of just another part of your IT portfolio? The answer is that they result from poor enterprise architecture, poor IT governance, lack of technology retirement practices, underinvestment in renovating IT systems, and a poor portfolio management process, among other contributing factors. Legacy systems don't magically appear. At the outset, they are acquired and implemented, brimming with promise, and then, for one reason or another, they are never retired or replaced. Eventually they are treated with scorn and derision. Now consider other usages of the word "legacy." General Motors' legacy challenge is the pension payouts it owes its aging and already-retired workforce. GM's legacy problems relate to personnel; specifically, funding retirement and pension benefits and healthcare costs for workers that have long since left the organization. This affects many large, established organizations including IBM, HP, and others. In response, many have recently changed their retirement packages to stem the tide. Here, legacy refers to human assets, but the negative connotation lingers. How did the legacy personnel issue arise? You could argue that it was from underinvestment in skills training, poor strategic planning to anticipate needed skills, and an overall lack of human resources strategy. While these "legacy assets" -- a company's older workforce -- are said to be valued, in truth they are treated like legacy IT systems: old, outdated, problematic. What business executives must realize is that systems, people, processes, and other business assets are destined to become "legacy" assets if they are not refreshed, renewed, or valued through continuous improvement. Failure to invest in these assets is a behavior and a decision made by business leaders. Now and then we hear the word "heritage" used to refer to legacy IT systems, but that kinder, gentler term does not change the perception. They are still old, costly, and inflexible. Many financial services folks will say that 80% of the world's software runs on legacy mainframe systems. What does this say about our business climate? I believe that legacy behavior creates legacy systems and legacy personnel issues. What will your legacy be?