Uncomfortable truths

I follow an "insider's" blog pretty religiously. The person that writes this particular spot on the internet is usually very insightful and relevant. Today, however, I read a posting entitled "Uncomfortable Truths..." that narrowed my viewpoint quite a bit.

I am not one to comment on others' blogs, really at all. Heck - I am not even sure anyone reads this one - maybe I'm just writing to be therapeutic. Today, however, I was compelled to write a response to the Uncomfortable Truths writing. I did so on his blog, and I'll expand on it here. My point isn't to "blow up" my e-friend's premise, but I am quite afraid that the person I have come to trust, admire and read as often as he cares to post is quite wrong in his musing.

You see, my e-friend wrote about how he made a career change, and that his new company's offerings are so much better than the rest of the IT industry's. That's fine - it's good to be proud and feel like you made a good career move. However, the posting illustrated to me how out of touch with the real world he may actually be.

The posting stated that one particular segment of IT had a much greater advantage than all of the others, and this elevated that segment above all others in importance. The problem with that statement is it simply isn't true. Let me see if I can illustrate my point:

At its' most fundamental, any application that multiple users access at any given time require some sort of  component stack similar to what you see here.

The application requires multiple layers of services, many of which can be contained within one delivery vehicle (server), many of which have multiple discrete layers of services. Of all of the different layers shown here, none really work without the other.

The author of the discussion topic that prompted my writing stated that his new company caters to one specific segment of this layered services model, and that made the people that ran the layer much more important and relevant.

My argument is this:

In this model, there are none more important in this equation then the picture at the top. That is the consumer of the services this entire service stack was created for.

In the model shown above, there is no data without data storage. There is no data organization without databases. There is no presentation of the data within the databases without application services. There is no data or application security without, well, security. And the data cannot move logically within this simple diagram, nor can the end user access it without networks.

The premise of the Uncomfortable Truth posting referenced above is that the database administrators are much more relevant, since they have an unfettered view of the data they are managing. In the real world, however, the database administrators had better NOT have a view into the data at all. They must understand how the data is organized and presented, for sure - but they have no business knowing what my personally identifiable information is (as an example).

Here's the uncomfortable truth: The model shown above is necessary. Whether it's all running on your laptop or running in a complicated multi tier infrastructure stack, every application you and I use works fundamentally the same way. Each part is interdependent on the other. The uncomfortable truth here is without the entire stack, the data is useless. The value chain associated with applications relies on all of the application components being there.

/finis

Waterfalls and Agility

When I think of waterfalls, I think of tranquility, nature, peace, soothing sounds. Until I start thinking of waterfall in the context of information management.

For those not familiar with the term, waterfall is most commonly associated with a specific method of writing software. I, personally, also think of waterfall as a specific method of deploying and managing IT infrastructure.

But first...

Let me start by explaining what the waterfall concept is. Waterfall, by definition is a methodical, iterative process that takes progressive steps in the implementation or development of a thing that IT delivers. For example, if a new application needs to be deployed, the waterfall process  if followed correctly looks something like this:

1. Business says "I need / want something"
2. IT develops the response and negotiates with the business on their requirements
3. Analysis is done to determine how much work is required to do #1 and #2
4. IT starts to design the application environments and starts to build infrastructure (both software and hardware)
5. As IT prepares for implementation, the software and hardware solution(s) are rigorously tested 
6. Once testing is complete and accepted, the thing that the business wants is handed over to be operated.

Once the process is complete, it typically starts over with features or functionality that was kicked out during the negotiation process that happens throughout this extensive cycle. Waterfall has been a very widely accepted practice by companies and IT organizations for a very long time.

One thing to realize is that this process can apply to many implementations across a wide variety of initiatives. This does not necessarily limit itself to IT and software development. It's most commonly thought of int he IT world as a "software development" process, but variants of this are used in "off the shelf" software deployments, server and infrastructure replacement and refresh, etc.

Silly kids

In 2007, the world changed. A bunch of "kids in Cupertino" changed the world by bringing the smartphone to the masses. It wasn't long before the masses started realizing the utility in these devices, and started replacing their everyday computers with them. Apps became commonplace. Social media exploded. What that translates to is that the waterfall process started to encumber the agility of business. A different approach was needed. A different way to build software, servers, storage, networks, "the cloud". All of these different taxonomies converged to threaten the relevance of organizations whose very existence was to build and support stuff that the business needs.

Agile methods aren't really new, but they definitely require a new way to think about everything. The software development process embraced these methods first, and aggressively. Soon after software development became "agile", however, software teams began to realize that the infrastructure types weren't building stuff fast enough to deploy the software they were cranking out.

Fundamentally, midsets and deployment methods had to change. Organizations couldn't afford to wait  any longer for rigorous testing cycles to ensure that the data center equipment was ready. Redundancy and disaster tolerance / recovery took too long to build into infrastructure. 

Image: boxesandarrows.com

As new methods were adopted (commonly known as "Agile Processes" - again not universally the same way - but fundamentally the same concepts.

With an Agile process in place, infrastructure had to adapt and be faster. Software releases under waterfall processes used to happen  monthly in highly aggressive release environments. With Agile, software releases could come HOURLY. 

The infrastructure towers started giving way to cloud based services. With cloud based services, building an environment simply meant clicking a few buttons, and you had an environment complete with representative databases, application services, deployment services and the appearance of some level of resilience.

There became no room for "waterfall infrastructure" in this new world. There simply wasn't enough time. Agile infrastructure was essential to success. EMC, VMware and Cisco created the VCE company in 2009 to address the problem with rapid deployment of servers, storage and network infrastructure in a tested, consistent way. VCE created white-papers, reference architectures, and Converged Systems called VBLOCKS that greatly increased the amount of time and decreased the complexity of building and deploying systems to support these great new applications. Companies that have embraced VBLOCKS enjoy faster time to business solutions, greater uptime, and huge customer satisfaction with their infrastructure.

These systems have enabled companies to quickly deploy infrastructure and applications while greatly reducing the risk and time to do so. 

These systems underpin some of the largest Agile software development implementations in the world. These systems also are the foundation of some of the largest applications ever deployed, regardless of development method.

These systems have enabled EMC and our Federation Partners to deliver a completely tested, certified and supported "data center in a box" to you in just 30 days!

The Point

Consider your smart device (phone, tablet, even PC) and the way you receive applications (or for you kids - apps). How much different is it today then even 5 years ago? How often do your apps update themselves "magically" without you ever even knowing it happened? Probably more than you might think. What was the last time you used physical media to install anything?

The point is this dear reader: If you're in IT infrastructure, learn everything you can about Agile. Know what is driving this significant transformation in the business you support. Understand why the development teams need this capability. This will keep you off of the dust heap of technical irrelevance.

Get briefed on what VCE converged infrastructure can do for your organization - you'll be amazed at how liberating it is to not have to turn screwdrivers in your data centers for weeks. Think of all of the valuable skills you can apply by not having to "rack and stack". Consider how much easier it is to make one phone call for help with your infrastructure instead of 3 or 4.

Get smart on Agile infrastructure and methods. It will pay off. I promise. 

/finis

Transformation Tuesday

The pendulum may be one of the oldest technology metaphors that exists. The pendulum swings from left to right, and as long as the weights are set or there's power to move it, the pendulum never stops. Technology, it is said swings like a pendulum, consistently swinging from left - to right - back to left again.

Once upon a time, and to the FAR FAR left, there was a big giant computer in some big room with beefy armed guards making sure no one got in. Mysterious things happened in that room, and somehow that mystery made it to our terminals so that we could enter data. That data made the companies we worked for run somehow, but we never really gave it much thought.

Transformation happens
Then came Provo, Utah. And it begat Novell. Novell was pretty cool - you could take stuff that only ran on those huge, expensive mystery machines and run them on a PC. Clever folks even figured out how to create large groups of terminals and using a very simple diskette with a driver could connect to all kinds of magic.

Novell dominated the "server" market for quite a while until the desktop came to the server, and Windows NT was born. The pendulum swung HARD to the right. These desktop computers became industrialized and millions of them made their way into the room that once contained a single monolithic computer. Computers found their way to every desk in every office in every company around the world. People starting buying computers for home. Companies started sending software to consumers in the mail so they could join the online revolution. They started chatting to each other across great distances using telephones to connect to the "internets" (or some such fanciness).  You probably know the rest so I'll skip it, but that brings us to today.

Clouds on the horizon

The pendulum is swinging to the left again, only this time, instead of a single massive computer delivering terminal based services, we're all a part of the largest consolidation of compute services ever. This consolidation isn't just "a computer" - this consolidation is massive buildings full of computers, storage, network - all orchestrated to act as one huge pool of resources, serving many masters and many consumers. This is commonly called "cloud" computing.

The cloud, as an internet meme so cleverly describes it is "just someone else's computer". But truthfully, the advent of using someone else's computer to do work isn't new at all. It's been around since the mystery machines. We've been effectively using "someone else's computer" all along. We've all been using compute, storage, network capacity since the beginning of the modern computer age - and probably didn't know it. Think about this though: Cloud computing isn't a computer at all. Cloud is really a massive change in how we consume the huge compute capacity and new services that are enabled by these massive buildings full of carefully orchestrated "workload engines". When was the last time you thought about email? Not "read" email - but thought about what's behind your internet.com email address? It's someone else's computer, storage, network - all acting on your behalf (well - most of us but we'll leave the political commentary for someone else to tackle).

Swipe a credit card - someone else's computer. Deposit your paycheck - someone else's computer.
Turn your discarded coins into a coupon for cash - someone else's computer. Buy a lottery ticket - someone else's computer. Pay $243 for a cup of carefully brewed 5 shot grande latte with a light dusting of Madagascar fair-trade vanilla and a whisper of cinnamon poured over 1/2 skim, 1/2 whole milk steamed to a perfect 172 degrees - someone else's computer.

Get the point? Some of these things are so commonplace that we don't even consider them to be "computing" services. But these days, every facet of our lives is affected by a computer - someone else's computer.

The funny thing about pendulums. They never stop in the middle. If they do, they cease to perform the function they were put in place to perform.

The point
So, I'll get to the point. Transformation in the use of someone else's computer is happening at the speed of life. In fact, in some cases, it's happening faster. Did you know that 52% of the Fortune 500 company names from 2000 don't exist anymore? Still think transformation isn't happening?

Those who refuse to accept this transformation aren't doomed to the scrap heap of . They're already there - they just don't know it. 

My point is simple. Transformation means learning something you're not necessarily comfortable with. Transformation is a personal journey. That will expand beyond you to your peers, making it a workgroup journey. And so on... and so on... What you'll find is that transformation is contagious. Catch it - before you can't.

Isn't that the point of transformation?

Comments welcome.

/finis

Feedback on feedback

In my position at work, I'm constantly providing and receiving feedback. In fact, it's probably safe to say I am, like you, constantly in a feedback loop of some sort.

I recently attended a conference on leadership and one of the topics I found completely insightful was on feedback. The topic was presented in a way I had never even considered before.

In the context of leadership, feedback is omnipresent. It's everywhere. When an individual interacts with another, if you're paying attention, you'll both provide and receive feedback. We're creatures that leverage feedback in almost every aspect of life.

Think about a dog. If, while I'm writing this post, I blurt out "Do you want a treat?" Here's what will happen:

Meet Macie

That simple question will be met with ears up, tail going 800MPH, and ultimately a dog that will follow me to where the treats are - until one is delivered.

The dog doesn't know she's providing feedback. She doesn't know that in response to her feedback, people will comment on how incredibly cute she is and what an amazing little puppy she is. What she knows is that she heard the sound "treat" and her conditioned response to that sound is... physical feedback.

It's everywhere.

Feedback is everywhere, so I began thinking how I can apply the lessons I learned from this talk track in my life. The speaker had some really interesting points that I'll attempt to convey here:

1. Be aware when you're receiving feedback. 
2. In the feedback loop, it's the receiver of the feedback that's in charge. It's up the receiver to decide what he or she does with the feedback they've received. 
3. Be constructive. There is absolutely nothing whatsoever to be gained by feedback that is always critical. If critical feedback is warranted, offer a solution - don't just whine.
4. Here's an interesting one: If you, as the receiver of feedback ignore it, you've still acted on it. 
5. Last, but certainly not the least of these: Consider the feedback you've received (or are giving). Are you receiving (or giving) feedback to someone or about something someone did?

That last one is a big one. Think about the last time you provided feedback on a person. Was it to that person, or was it about that person to someone else? If it was the latter - be honest - was it gossip?

There are a lot of things in this post that I relate to directly. It's definitely a growth area for me, and I'm committed to it. It's already helped me - and I hope it helps you.

Feedback welcome.

/finis

A resurgence of sorts

I'll be resurrecting this blogging effort in an attempt to convey my thoughts on the world around me.
The frequency of my posts will be based on my ability and time. I won't post just to say something (or is that what this post is?) - or maybe I will :)

I'm also going to start tagging so that you, dear reader, can select those that interest you, and those that don't.

One more thing: I'm going to try and encourage interaction. I have a fairly diverse collection of friends, colleagues and acquaintances spread throughout the social-sphere (did I just create a term?) so I'll link to these various social outlets to try and encourage the conversation.

Let me know if you've read this. Or blogger analytics will - either way :)