It has been a while since I was solely responsible for the outcome of a project. That is probably a good thing. I have led teams of people on a number of projects across a wide range of technologies and services. Common to most of these efforts has been a team of devoted engineers, programmers, and project leaders committed to getting the job done. In spite of those efforts sometimes projects to fail. The big question is, why?
It has been my experience that projects that drag on have a higher likelihood of "failure" than those that can be brought to a conclusion more quickly. On the surface it would seem that efforts that extend beyond 18 months are often doomed to failure. The key to preventing this type of thing from happening is to bundle tasks into projects that are more manageable and can be achieved in under 18 months. We used to have a saying of "build a little and test a lot". When implemented it might mean the ultimate end goal is still 2 years away but measurable progress can be made by closing out a "project" and opening a new one to allow for more progress to be made. This often means you can bring in a new team of people for the follow-on effort and possibly prevent burning out your team. At the same time you can also facilitate more junior folks to gain valuable experience and see measurable progress faster.
The above is true for development projects, infrastructure upgrades, and even maintenance efforts.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Information Assets
I am back from the RSA show in San Francisco I can now outline my impressions of the show and some of the things I learned while I was there.
First, out of approximately 425 vendors represented there were a grand total of 6 that included the term "NAC" in their business descriptions. This compared to a "bazillion" that featured this technology term last year. What to take from this? NAC is a solution that may get built into network infrastructures and other desktop agents in the future but it is not the "magic bullet" that everyone was dreaming about a year ago.
The major theme for this year was clearly data protection. There is a huge market out there for data that an enterprise has and that market is getting more sophisticated by the hour. Anyone with a bit of cash can turn it into gold by mining for data that is easily taken from many organizations and sold in the electronic marketplace. You no longer have to be a hacker to get to it. You can rent time on a botnet now, rent or own your own malware, and gain access to personal account information which you can then sell on a ready made marketplace for a tidy profit. Until enterprises get to the point that they realize they have created a virtual storefront for "information assets" they will continue to be robbed without knowing it.
The smart organizations are now understanding that there is no perimeter anymore that needs to be protected. The wolves are at the door and they are taking what they want. If you want to keep any of these assets, start treating them like to have them stored away in a vault or safe deposit box. You would not give away the location and the key to these vaults to allow someone to steal from you, would you?
The key here is to get your CFO on board with the idea that information is really an asset that needs proper management and control. Once you do, the funding to do the management job the right way will be made available and there will be no discussion of ROI for the investment.
First, out of approximately 425 vendors represented there were a grand total of 6 that included the term "NAC" in their business descriptions. This compared to a "bazillion" that featured this technology term last year. What to take from this? NAC is a solution that may get built into network infrastructures and other desktop agents in the future but it is not the "magic bullet" that everyone was dreaming about a year ago.
The major theme for this year was clearly data protection. There is a huge market out there for data that an enterprise has and that market is getting more sophisticated by the hour. Anyone with a bit of cash can turn it into gold by mining for data that is easily taken from many organizations and sold in the electronic marketplace. You no longer have to be a hacker to get to it. You can rent time on a botnet now, rent or own your own malware, and gain access to personal account information which you can then sell on a ready made marketplace for a tidy profit. Until enterprises get to the point that they realize they have created a virtual storefront for "information assets" they will continue to be robbed without knowing it.
The smart organizations are now understanding that there is no perimeter anymore that needs to be protected. The wolves are at the door and they are taking what they want. If you want to keep any of these assets, start treating them like to have them stored away in a vault or safe deposit box. You would not give away the location and the key to these vaults to allow someone to steal from you, would you?
The key here is to get your CFO on board with the idea that information is really an asset that needs proper management and control. Once you do, the funding to do the management job the right way will be made available and there will be no discussion of ROI for the investment.
Sunday, April 6, 2008
Balance and too much of a good thing
In the IT world we run into this question a lot; "When is too much of something a bad thing?"
In my world of networking too much bandwidth makes your CFO angry but typically your users are very happy to not have limits placed on their use of the network. The angry CFO will then ask you to justify every "circuit" or network expense in an effort to see that you have just enough to get by and that is all he/she will be willing to pay for.
I recently encountered a situation that reminded me that balance is also needed for those of us who strive to have a career in IT. Balance applies to numerous situations including decisions like how much to outsource, how hard to push a project team to get something done, and how hard to push yourself to achieve whatever goals you have in mind.
The situation was one of having too much of a good thing but having it out of balance. As most of you know I fly airplanes for fun and I enjoy the process of teaching others how to fly as well. Recently I encountered a situation in a plane I had not flown before where there was too much fuel on one side of the plane and too little on the other. This is not an unusual situation for the most part but in this case it was exaggerated a bit. Taking off for the first time the plane wanted to turn to the side with the most fuel. Logical enough, but when I could not stop the turn from continuing the situation got a bit more intense. I had a mountain in front of me and no real place to go if things turned really ugly. Fortunately with a bit of experimentation I was able to get the situation "righted" for the moment until I could figure out what was truly going on. Turned out that the cause of the imbalance was a fuel miss-feed issue from a previous flight.
When things get really hairy in the IT world you have to wonder whether we are keeping everything in balance or not. Too much pressure on one side can cause things to go out of control in the direction the pressure is being applied to. The question remains if there is enough control authority to get things level again. In my case I had plenty of tools in the bag to make that happen but not every situation in the IT world allows for that. Turns are good and serve as the only way to change direction when needed. The trick is to do them under control and in balance with other things. Making your IT staff aware of the situation, the need for a change in direction and that the control authority exists to stop the turn when you have reached the desired course are all good things to know and communicate.
The fact that a mountain stands in the way of your current path helps as well as long as everyone can see it coming.
In my world of networking too much bandwidth makes your CFO angry but typically your users are very happy to not have limits placed on their use of the network. The angry CFO will then ask you to justify every "circuit" or network expense in an effort to see that you have just enough to get by and that is all he/she will be willing to pay for.
I recently encountered a situation that reminded me that balance is also needed for those of us who strive to have a career in IT. Balance applies to numerous situations including decisions like how much to outsource, how hard to push a project team to get something done, and how hard to push yourself to achieve whatever goals you have in mind.
The situation was one of having too much of a good thing but having it out of balance. As most of you know I fly airplanes for fun and I enjoy the process of teaching others how to fly as well. Recently I encountered a situation in a plane I had not flown before where there was too much fuel on one side of the plane and too little on the other. This is not an unusual situation for the most part but in this case it was exaggerated a bit. Taking off for the first time the plane wanted to turn to the side with the most fuel. Logical enough, but when I could not stop the turn from continuing the situation got a bit more intense. I had a mountain in front of me and no real place to go if things turned really ugly. Fortunately with a bit of experimentation I was able to get the situation "righted" for the moment until I could figure out what was truly going on. Turned out that the cause of the imbalance was a fuel miss-feed issue from a previous flight.
When things get really hairy in the IT world you have to wonder whether we are keeping everything in balance or not. Too much pressure on one side can cause things to go out of control in the direction the pressure is being applied to. The question remains if there is enough control authority to get things level again. In my case I had plenty of tools in the bag to make that happen but not every situation in the IT world allows for that. Turns are good and serve as the only way to change direction when needed. The trick is to do them under control and in balance with other things. Making your IT staff aware of the situation, the need for a change in direction and that the control authority exists to stop the turn when you have reached the desired course are all good things to know and communicate.
The fact that a mountain stands in the way of your current path helps as well as long as everyone can see it coming.
Friday, April 4, 2008
Flying off to RSA
This is a big weekend. It is the last one before the annual IT security fun-fest at RSA. I recall last year there were predictions that this year there would only be three vendors in the Exhibit Hall due to consolidation. I hate to say it by I know from my meeting calendar that this is clearly not the case this year.
We have seen some interesting things happen since last year's event. Several NAC vendors have either gone on to other things or have dropped off the radar screen altogether. This was predictable given the lack of uptake for NAC that has been evident since the summer of 2006 time frame. Enterprise IT security folks are still watching the developments in this area but it would appear to be an "NFL" kind of game, requiring big bucks to make it work as advertised.
With several well publicised data breaches since the last RSA conference it will be interesting to see what everyone is talking about this year. I was amazed to see that someone actually walked out of an enterprise with $600 Million in intellectual property going to China and no one but the airport inspector knew it had happened.
And to think that there are still some corporate managers still trying to justify IT infrastructure improvements.
We have seen some interesting things happen since last year's event. Several NAC vendors have either gone on to other things or have dropped off the radar screen altogether. This was predictable given the lack of uptake for NAC that has been evident since the summer of 2006 time frame. Enterprise IT security folks are still watching the developments in this area but it would appear to be an "NFL" kind of game, requiring big bucks to make it work as advertised.
With several well publicised data breaches since the last RSA conference it will be interesting to see what everyone is talking about this year. I was amazed to see that someone actually walked out of an enterprise with $600 Million in intellectual property going to China and no one but the airport inspector knew it had happened.
And to think that there are still some corporate managers still trying to justify IT infrastructure improvements.
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Where technology has failed the business
For nearly 19 years of my IT career I had the opportunity to support all of the major airlines of the world in their quest for servicing their customers. Along the way I had a chance to work with wireless technologies to serve the airline customer along with other technologies to automate airline services directly and indirectly. Public access wireless LANs were first tried in airports and I was there to solve coverage issues and make the service work. I was also there to help justify the use of RFID for baggage tracking. It is still not in use for that purpose.
I am very disappointed in where we are right now with airline service. Getting people on and off aircraft at gates seems like a hugely difficult task but your favorate restaurant does a better job of filling your favorate seat with low tech solutions. You have little to no chance of knowing whether your bag is going to make it to your destination even though you can be notified of 1000 things in your life straight to your cell phone, including where your teenager is and how fast they are driving. You stand in line and have to remove your shoes in order to prove you are one of the millions of flyers every day that use airlines without posing a threat to yourself, the crews, or your fellow passengers. All of these things were solvable by technology 20 years ago. I know, as I was involved with demonstrations of most of them. Recent revelations of congested airspace in the New York city area were also predictable back then.
There has never been a better example of how technology could have been better deployed had the business been more willing to be forward thinking. I recall offering one airline executive to cut his cost of lost luggage in half ( a seven figure number by the way) if he would allow me to implement my ideas for automating his operation. He refused. In my latest version of the solution I could eliminate that figure completely, sending all the savings to the bottom line.
Technology professionals should be watchful of opportunities to demonstrate the ability to contribute to the bottom line of organizations. At the same time it is wise to be aware that at times your potential contribution can fall on deaf ears in spite of your best efforts. Sometimes that is what "skunk-works" are for.
I am very disappointed in where we are right now with airline service. Getting people on and off aircraft at gates seems like a hugely difficult task but your favorate restaurant does a better job of filling your favorate seat with low tech solutions. You have little to no chance of knowing whether your bag is going to make it to your destination even though you can be notified of 1000 things in your life straight to your cell phone, including where your teenager is and how fast they are driving. You stand in line and have to remove your shoes in order to prove you are one of the millions of flyers every day that use airlines without posing a threat to yourself, the crews, or your fellow passengers. All of these things were solvable by technology 20 years ago. I know, as I was involved with demonstrations of most of them. Recent revelations of congested airspace in the New York city area were also predictable back then.
There has never been a better example of how technology could have been better deployed had the business been more willing to be forward thinking. I recall offering one airline executive to cut his cost of lost luggage in half ( a seven figure number by the way) if he would allow me to implement my ideas for automating his operation. He refused. In my latest version of the solution I could eliminate that figure completely, sending all the savings to the bottom line.
Technology professionals should be watchful of opportunities to demonstrate the ability to contribute to the bottom line of organizations. At the same time it is wise to be aware that at times your potential contribution can fall on deaf ears in spite of your best efforts. Sometimes that is what "skunk-works" are for.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)