This just in across the email transom, worth a discussion on this blog…
Jon,
Enjoyed meeting you at the Tech Target event in DC last June, I’ve been enjoying your comments at drunkendata.com. However, the one issue that I’ve never seen anyone address adequately is that the issues facing most data centers come not from the technology, or lack there of, but rather in my view from lack of clear and well though out long-term strategic planning.
Granted, if you go to most Fortune 1000 data centers the people there, for the most part, are in their position because of experience and the money they spend in most cases shows a clear level of understanding of technology (fueled perhaps by fear of losing well paying jobs perhaps?). I’m not saying they’re perfect, but they tend to do things a lot better then your average IT department.
Unfortunately, this is not true with the vast majority of sites out there, particularly in the government space. The whole short acquisition cycle in conjunction with perceived immediate needs lends itself to exasperation of issues rather then solving them. The question that I always ask of potential customers is if a documented plan exists for the projected lifespan of the equipment being considered. In most cases I get the deer in headlights look. When technology is primarily driven by the desire of non-technical decision makers to reduce cost for the short term, rather then making sure the equipment fits long-term needs keeps knee nippers like myself in business. I’m not saying my company doesn’t have a great product (with great strategic and design people behind it), but my stress level is so much higher when I see the lack of planning associated with a design that a customer considers.
Michael Lillie
Federal Storage Architect
Compellent Technologies Inc.
And my response…
Mike,
You are reading my mind. This is the subject of my next book, co-authored with long time friend Randy Chalfant, called Making IT Matter. Yes, there is a dearth of strategic planning in most companies. Partly, this is a consequence of the proliferation of tactical issues (putting out daily fires) and partly because of the disconnect that exists even in larger companies between the back office and the front office. To get strategic, companies must first wrangle their data assets. Then, they need to purpose-build infrastructure. Most shops go the other way around: deploy whatever is fashionable — assuming that the cost and performance fits — then figure out how to map business processes and data to it.
For what its worth.
With your permission, I would like to reprint your comments on the blog and see whether we can get this conversation going. I can make you anonymous if you’d like.
Let me know.
I happen to be writing about this right now. Are we too overwhelmed by the complexity and fragility of our infrastructure to make strategic choices going forward? I’d love to hear from readers of this blog.
Post your comments!
{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }
I wonder whether the lack of long term strategic planning is a reflection on the way employment has changed over the years. Once up on a time people worked for the same company for almost their entire working life. In those circumstances it makes sense for employees to think strategically, because if they don’t, 10 years down the road they’ll be cleaning the mess up.
Today, people just don’t stay that long, especially IT talent that’s always in demand. So if you don’t expect to be with the company for more than a couple of years it makes sense to focus on short term projects so that you can point to success when writing your next resume.
On the other hand it could just be the alligator syndrome, “it’s hard to remember you came to clean out the swamp when your up to your a** in alligators!”
I started writing a response to this excellent question, but it got longer and longer, so I decided to post it over at my blog:
http://blog.fosketts.net/2007/08/16/a-seat-at-the-table/
In short, we aren’t strategic because we aren’t let into the “what is this stuff” question enough to be strategic. We simply lack knowledge and empowerment and thus are forced to be tactical in our thinking.
Stephen
I think to some extent, there is a middle ground to planning. At one extreme are the long term planners that take all contingencies into account and months to plan and acquire new technologies and sometimes years to fully implement. I liken this to a story that may or may not be true: painting the Golden Gate Bridge. Bridge painters start painting at one side, and cross the span at the end of 1 year. Then they go back the other direction and that takes up the next year (and so forth). Some would say the bridge is always painted – I would say the bridge always needs painting.
Both large and small customers are guilty here. A customer in this space has spent 8 months investigating a small (5 TB) SAN. In the meantime, they have had 2 server crashes that each took 7 hours to restore. Sometimes the need to acquire a new technology takes paramount importance to strategic planning. There is a value in taking immediate advantage of technology from time to time.
On the other side of things are the short term decision makers and implementers. We’ve all made impulse purchases, some good some bad. Here you could be taking your chances and not investigating your own environment enough (storage size, performance needs, recovery needs) to size your technology investment and implementation right. You simply could have ordered the wrong length cables too. Or maybe you have the “I never got fired before for buying EMC” mentality and don’t evaluate your options. What about the promotion for investing in a Knee Knipper? Here there is a value to at least some planning, research, and thorough review.
You must log in to post a comment.