Who is in control? I am sure that’s a question that is often debated in conference rooms around the world. There are many recommendations that are adopted to help define who is ultimately responsible. Yet no governance strategy does anything except to reinforce it’s defined policies and practices as outlined. There is often no measurement to determine if those practices are even compatible with how services are being used. Too often solving one problem creates unintended additional problems. Layering in more complexity. Reinforcing policies and procedures that only add overhead. Reducing agility when that could be the most important resource required. No matter what processes are being followed if you are working in any role in the catch all basket called operations, You need to know what is happening. You are often the person who is responding to text messages in the middle of the night. You are the first person to create a conference call over many things that ultimately are out of your direct control. Despite being the key to keeping everything running there are only a few things that you can actually influence or decide for yourself. Day to day marching forward just hoping to keep the phone from ringing. Only in those quiet moments can you contemplate how to prevent that next email or text message in the middle of the night. So despite your low ranking in the organization it’s time to take control of this situation.
Such a rag-tag collection of technology. Various providers, consultants, developers, contractors, internal infrastructure teams, numerous applications, and business units. With every phone call, email and text message seems nearly impossible to juggle each priority. There is no simple solution. Gathering together disparate teams often representing conflicting interests. Building trust across these factions is never easy. Each group with supporting specialized tools, many technology specific, locked into a limited view, missing out on the big picture. This leaves gaps in support, missing opportunities for integration and efficiency.
Where can you start? There is often common goals to deliver the highest quality at the lowest cost. Yet there is often resistance to change. A long time ago, technology services were provided in the smallest possible footprint. File and print servers, internal email, specific business related applications. In the early days these services barely extended beyond the foundation of the location where the users worked. Today it’s something different but the concepts of providing services remains the same. Each service delivery is supported by a group somewhere. The users of those services are also somewhere. In every case these services require a network. A view into the health of these services without details of the network leaves out much of what could go wrong. Yet too often there is no apparent network related issue for any given incident. Integrated monitoring of network performance in conjunction with monitoring of service infrastructure and when possible application monitoring is key to success. Being able to display the big picture that can be drilled down on to learn specific details. Connecting teams, correlating information between teams and tools used by these teams. Shortening problem resolution, leaving managers and end users with a higher confidence that technology is actually responding to their needs.
Various tools exist attempting to occupy this space. Many complex highly integrated systems that often prove to be more complicated than the problem that actually needs to be solved. Too often by the time these systems are deployed and customized and users of the tool are trained, the very specifics of what was going to be delivered has shifted. This results in tool development continuing as if attempting to catch up to meet the evolving requirements. Too often even these tools don’t actually cross the boundaries between technology groups. Despite the advanced capabilities the very scope of deployment is limited to specific groups in technology. Leaving out many of the advantages while still being touted as enterprise wide with the cost of being enterprise wide. These tools often require a dedicated team for support leaving yet another faction with a self serving interest in maintaining the status quo.
So it does come down what tools you use. To achieve better integration a tool must not be limited in scope. A shared tool in which users from various teams have access. Each individual being able to get a big picture and specifics for their related supported technology. When an application team can see that the network is up and available they will likely look elsewhere before calling for network support. An infrastructure team can quickly determine that all required services are up before or after rebooting a virtual machine. Network teams can devote resources to drinking more coffee. When the network is trusted other technology issues come into better focus. Of course there will be moments when all of that utopia flies out the window. Imagine that other technology groups are quickly informed when a network issue exists. Leaving network resources more time to resolve an issue and less time talking about it. Having one pane of glass to work from is almost better than a conference call. Possibly in conjunction with a conference call where everyone can agree on what the next steps should be. Having a tool where users of the tool actually configure the tool to meet the current need. No turn around, or development or addition cost. A tool that is simple to use, with an intuitive interface that can be used with a minimal amount of formal training. A tool that is owned by those users of the tool. A tool that fosters collaboration between teams. A tool that is modular that does not require total replacement to meet additional requirements. There is one obstacle, changing the status quo. Yet it is clear something must change the status quo is not instilling confidence or reducing cost. The marching orders have been issued, “Do more with less”. Using a tool that brings teams together, reduces incident cycle time, has the flexibility in terms of modularity and cost, and does not require much overhead are all essential requirements.
Are you wondering where you can find a tool like this?
