Monday, June 27, 2016
Is Cloud ready for the mainstream?
Friday, March 16, 2012
Six Essentials for Effective IT Strategy
- explain to the Business (our paymasters) what the IT Team is actually doing
- justify existing and future IT expenditure
- engage with Business sponsors to address issues with “problem applications”.
- improve internal planning and control resource allocation.
- “golden references” that hold master data which is replicated to other tools.
- clear ownership of tools and skills to run them.
- maximum utilisation and maximum return on software investment.
- Building on existing behaviours rather than enforcing textbook patterns,
- Improvement techniques such as LEAN and Six-Sigma,
- Processes that deliver measurable “outputs” to the business,
- Legacy applications with high maintenance costs
- Heterogeneous data centre technologies,
- Scarcity of resources capable of supporting old infrastructure
- A multiplicity of different support teams, and duplication of support effort.
- Spiralling costs of technology refresh.
- achieving the task
- managing the team or group
- managing individuals
- building a distinctive culture through team communications
- envisioning the team by a shared strategy
- acknowledging success and challenges as a common experience.
- is practical and workable.
- is easy to communicate and gives genuine improvements.
- uses proven techniques from IT and Quality Management in a systematic way.
- creatively combines solutions to build a better future.
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
The Cloud won’t solve your Management Issues
I like the idea of “cloud computing”; in our own consultancy business we use shared services for most of our key business processes. But I don’t think the cloud will solve some of the problems people had hoped for.
Of course, I may be just over-cautious.
Having worked in IT for a number of years, I have to fight the temptation to resist the “next big thing” which promises to solve all our IT problems. To make matters worse, I used to work in the sharp end of Software Sales, so I have seen over-zealous marketing glossing over the practical challenges of implementing the latest solution.
But this time my concern is more fundamental; It is based on our core motivation for embracing the Cloud concept in the first place.
Outsourcing compute processing, even core data, brings risks - security risks, performance and capacity risks to name a few. The justification for cloud computing is that the benefits outweigh the risks.
The attraction of the cloud approach is that someone else looks after hardware provisioning, capacity planning, availability management etc. etc. leaving you to get on with running your business processes.
So what if you need more capacity? Just pay more - Simple! Or is it?
The fact is that no technology provider has unlimited resources, and if you choose a supplier which is not the “right size” for you, you could end up with excess costs or (worse) a provider that cannot provision to your needs.
So you still need to think about Capacity Management.
The Cloud enables you to outsource technology. But there is no such thing as outsourcing responsibility.
For some, the attraction of moving to the cloud is that they no longer need to manage hardware and software. Instead, they need to manage the “wetware”; the people who supply the cloud solution.
You might get rid of Availability and Capacity Management.
But instead you have to replace it with Supplier Management.
And, as many people will tell you, managing people can be far more complex and hazardous than managing technology.
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
IT Production – Cinderella or Ugly Sister?
IT Production – Cinderella or Ugly Sister?
With the pantomime season fast upon us, many IT managers will be dreading the pager call in the middle of Act 2 “IT’s behind you!”, or rather “IT’s not working”. While the rest of us bask in the warm friendship of friends and family, other poor lost souls may well be struggling with a callout on a cold hardware failure, or a stubborn Oracle or SAP system refusing to produce the correct results.
For others, it will be a case of “I can’t come to the ball (for which read: consume massive quantities of alcohol etc. etc.), I’m on call this evening.”
Like it or not, our information-industrial society cannot survive without 24 * 7 IT. And that means 24 * 7 IT Production Support.
Surprisingly, given that for many companies as much as 75% of their IT Budget is spent on Business As Usual (“BAU”) or Production issues, it seems there are too few answers to the question of how to best manage this vital part of the IT landscape.
One approach to addressing these challanges is “MOPS”.
As is common these days, MOPS is a 4-letter acronym. (At which point, it may be worth remarking that there has been a plethora of FLAs – or four-letter acronyms – over the last few years. This is surely another indication of the growth of IT exceeding its “name space”).
The “M” in MOPS stands for “Metrics” and highlights the importance of capturing meaningful data on the Assets and Activity of IT Production. This can include all sorts of data from an Asset Register or small Configuration Management Database (CMDB) to track the growing responsibilities of Production. Also included are Key Performance Indicators to show Service Levels, Incidents and Callouts. Not to be forgotten is the importance of capturing the activity of the Support Teams by means of Timesheets. All of these metrics, properly collected, managed and structured, can go a long way towards helping the IT Production manger with his biggest challenge – explaining and justifying the IT Production costs.
Operational Tools comprises the second letter. Simply put, this part of the acronym highlights the importance of Software to help run Software and Hardware. The range of useful software extends from Backup utilities, Software Distribution, Monitoring, Management, Alerting and Capacity Planning. However, Software Tools in and of themselves would be unable to deliver the levels of efficiency and automation in IT Production unless they are properly integrated. In fact, the cost of IT Management Software is relatively cheap. The real cost of deploying such tools is the implementation and integration within the IT Production organisation. Here, the MOPS approach discusses how to establish a Monitoring and Management Tools Strategy, and how to build a “Referential” approach to Software Tools integration.
As we all know, effective management of IT is impossible without clear and appropriate Processes and Procedures –the “P” of the MOPS acronym. This is where the ITIL framework dovetails into the MOPS approach, since MOPS recommends using ITIL as the basis for defining processes. However, MOPS also identifies other processes such as how to manage Infrastructure Research & Development, how to build engagement processes with the Development projects, and how to build a Standards Governance process. MOPS also recommends using process improvement techniques such as Six-Sigma and LEAN to increase the efficiency of existing process workflows.
Often forgotten in IT Production, the final letter of the acronym (“S”) refers to the importance of IT Production Standards. Here, the MOPS approach discusses the importance of defining Infrastructure Technical Standards and how to define an IT Production Strategy and Architecture role to act as “gatekeeper” to the production estate. How many times in IT Production have we seen applications deployed that are functionally rich from a business perspective, but lacking in supportability, without reference to the IT Production imperatives such as resilience, scalability, backup and recovery capability and the ability to be monitored in Production. MOPS seeks to address this by looking at the definition of “Production supportable”, and setting a Standards process in place to be applied to proposed new application developments.
So MOPS may be one approach that could enable us to get a better level of control over the frenetic world that is IT Production.
So will things change in future? I hope so.
For a long time, the IT Production team was the Cinderella of the story. She was kept away in the dark recesses of the organisation, with few people realising or acknowledging that she was a vital part of the story.
Armed with “MOPS”, she may be able to sweep out some of the cobwebs that have built up over the years, and even be able to take time off for a party or two. Who knows?
I wish you all well in the festive season, whether or not you are on callout.
Thursday, November 24, 2011
Where has IT Quality disappeared?
What happened to the concept of Quality?
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
What Makes you Mad about the current state of the IT Industry?
Friday, February 12, 2010
Is "Big Bang" a good way to implement Infrastructure?
Saturday, September 19, 2009
What's in a name? Do we call ourselves Infrastructure and Operations or IT Production?
"Infrastructure and Operations" appears to be a recognised market segment these days. It is a useful descriptive term, since it covers the main aspects of the IT Production role:
- Infrastructure - looking after the equipment, hardware, software, networking and other technical stuff which modern IT needs to have in order to run day-to-day
- Operations - the processes and behaviours required to look after the "stuff" (the Infrastructure).
However, I personally prefer the term "IT Production", for a number of reasons. In my view, it ...
- Is simpler and easier to remember
- Highlights a logical contrast between "Development" and "Production".
- Implies a single organisational structure dedicated to a single purpose.
- Defines a clearly recognisable marketplace for tools and services.
- Recognises the importance of the "after go-live" part of IT, as a discipline in it's own right.
The last point is the most important: Whilst IT Development enable a business to gain competitive advantage by using technology, it is the IT Production side which actually ensures that the competitive advantage is realised.
One of the areas we are speaking to Gartner about at the moment is the importance of terminology, and the use of IT Production as the recognisable term for what we work in.
Names do mean something. They confer expectations, and status. And IT Production needs to receive the status which it deserves.
Which, of course, means that we have to start delivering to a higher set of expectations.
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Understanding and Managing People who Manage IT
For some time, we have advocated using the four "MOPS" as a means of identifying how to improve the management of IT Production.
However, although these "MOPS" are necessary in order to improve the management of IT Production, they are not sufficient.
IT Production Management is also significantly a people skill. Technical Managers can often benefit from a scientific approach to understanding and managing people.
The use of personality profiling is not particularly common in the IT industry at the moment. However, it may be gaining ground. It can enable IT Managers to ask questions such as “How can I…
- Improve the way I communicate with my team and peers?
- Enhance the motivation of my teams?
- Identify the strengths and weaknesses of a person/team and maximize his/her performance?
- Best manage a specific person/team?
One such technique is the Birkman Report, an internet-based assessment system. It describes your unique style of leadership - your goals, your approach, what motivates you to lead, and what happens to you under stress.
Armed with this information, the IT Manager is able to develop and refine their leadership skills.
Legal Stuff
The MOPS ™ acronym is trademarked by Dennis Adams Associates Limited. The acronym stands for Metrics, Operational Tools, Processes and Standards, the four foundational requirements for IT Production Management.
Birkman Direct ® is a registered trademark of Birkman International, Inc. Copyright © 1989 – 2002, Birkman International, Inc, Houston, Texas. All rights reserved. Only BIrkman-certified consultants or persons working under the direct supervision of such consultants, are authorised to give you information relating to the BIrkman Report.
Friday, July 24, 2009
How is the economy impacting IT Consulting?
How bad is it really?
We have all heard a lot of feedback over the last few months about how dire the IT consulting market is. I have to say that, at the moment, things don't appear to be as bad as some people are saying. Of course, there is always the effort in trying to get new prospects to part with their money, but that's part of business !
We certainly haven't been inundated with requests for work, but there does appear to be an appetite among some companies to bring in people. Who knows, maybe the worst is over?
Having studied economics (a long time ago !), I am aware that many of the economic indicators are subject to a "lag". In other words, we only know that we have come out of recession about 6 months after it actually happened. The same occurred when we entered recession, as you may recall. We kept getting economics reports saying that we were already facing a crises, and that it had been going on for months.
Consequently, I think that a more accurate indicator of the state of the economy is typically the extent of the "feel good factor". Speaking to CTOs and others, I get the impression that they are feeling more positive, and have more budget to spend than previously.
Meanwhile, it's a case of chasing people to close the next business deal...
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Oracle Buys Sun. A Natural Progression, or Unnatural Mistake?
Can the Software Giant make sense of Hardware?
Java and Solaris are the prize.
The announcement that Oracle will be taking over Sun Microsystems has generated a huge amount of reaction in the blogs and within the IT industry generally. There have been questions about what Oracle's strategy is, what the future will be for Solaris on Sparc, where the free MySQL database lives etc. etc. There have also been been some questions in some minds about Larry Ellison's sanity. It has certainly been a bold move. Some claim to have seen it coming - I certainly did not.
My own interpretation is that Oracle are being opportunist. There was an ailing company - Sun Microsystems - whose heydays in the .COM boom were long gone. They had a huge commitment to R&D without much to show for it. They have some distinctive products (the Sparc chips), some OEM market (Storage from Hitachi), and some very interesting free, or nearly free software and commitment to the Open Source world (Solaris 10, Star Office which forks development in Open Office, and MySQL). They also own the JAVA stack. Maybe they are worth a few billion, even if they don't currently make a profit.
The Profit Motive
And that is the key point. If Oracle is about anything, it is about a business that exploits their assets to make a profit. I suspect that there was no "grand strategy". Charles Wang, the former head of Computer Associates, once said that at the level he worked, people "make it up as we go along". Oracle is driven by a Profit Motive. That, and a hatred of Microsoft. Add to that the fact that IBM and Cisco are circling around Oracle's historical profit levels, and the deal makes sense.
More than just a database company
Oracle has been more than a database product company for many years. They started with the database, but over the last years have positioned the company as an Application Platform. Oracle Financials was one attempt. Then add PeopleSoft, and myriads of other acquisitions. So they have diversified away from the database. If you look at their latest figures, you see that the Oracle database itself is less that 50% of the revenue of the company as a whole. So this is an exercise is diversification. Move up and down the software stack to ensure that you can offer everything the customer could possibly want. All at a profit.Hardware is not Software, Larry
Oracle has tried to move into the Hardware space before. They created a product called "Raw Iron" which was an embedded hardware product for running the Oracle database. Coincidentally (maybe?) this was based on Sun hardware. There is a very interesting FAQ released by Oracle yesterday which says "Oracle's ownership of two key Sun software assets, Java and Solaris, is expected to provide our customers with significant benefit.". This suggests strongly that Oracle are still seeing Sun as a software vendor. Whilst Oracle have lots of experience in integrating companies, they have always been other software companies. Running a Hardware company is a different thing. The sales model is different, the lead times are different. And you have to ship physical equipment all round the world. It will not be an easy integration.Predictions
Everyone else is making predictions. Usually, these are based on what the author would do. However, these are my predictions on what Oracle themselves will do. Whether they are accurate predictions, I will leave history to determine. Whether they are good business, that will be the realm of Economics.Product | Prediction |
---|---|
Java | I doubt if Oracle want to upset the Java community. In fact, I suspect that Java will become more open. Oracle's view will be - why do the work ourselves when there are so many willing volunteers to do it for us? Oracle want Java so that they can ensure that all their applications have a good strong application server stack. But watch out for "Oracle Extensions" to the main product. |
Solaris | Oracle claims that it can now optimize the Oracle database for some of the unique high-end features of Solaris. It has always had this option, but was afraid of "lock-in" to another vendor's product. I predict that there will be some new features of Solaris that Oracle can exploit. But there won't be much. They don't want to alienate the Linux users. |
Sparc Chips | This is the nub of the question. Oracle have said that they will grow the business. Oracle salesmen may clinch deals by selling integrated hardware alongside the application. They will be able to point to Oracle-specific APIs in Solaris to show performance gains. However, if Fujitsu decide to come calling, I would not put it past them to hand over Sparc development, and OEM the solutions. |
Sun Storage | If Oracle can sell storage at a marginal profit, they will do so. Particularly if it means software license sales. |
Star Office | Maybe this is a product that can be stacked against Microsoft. But you have to sell a lot of Star Office licenses to equate to a single Oracle DBMS license. Is it worth it? I suspect that, as with Sun, Star Office will be a sideshow. |
MySQL | Who cares? The fact is that MySQL generates relatively little profit. So R&D will be cut back. The product will still be there, but will rely on the OpenSource community to develop it. Oracle knows that MySQL is not much of a threat. It will be allowed to stand, or fall, on it's own. |