This week I was reflecting on my IT journey in the last few years and how I successfully adopted new technology. I thought that sharing this type of information may be helpful to those out there that are either about to start or in the middle of their integration of Intel® vPro™ Technology. First things first, here’s an illustration of the different camps within an IT shop (architecture, engineering, operations, finance, security) and then of course there is the leadership (mgmt) that provides air cover for such new adoptions / also a key stakeholder in the success.
For each of these camps there is a different perspective and frames of reference, therefore let me dive into each one.
ARCHITECTURE: for the architect community, the requirement is to understand their 3-5 year roadmap and how a new client technology fits in - does it violate any major design rules, does it embrace the technology strategy?. Specifically the focus is around conceptual and reference architecture with focus on high level themes i.e. Compliance, Provisioning, Remediation, Automation, Virtualization. The vantage point here is looking at the big picture and being able to define it in relationship to the rest of the architecture. This includes the BDAT model as well (business, data, applications and technology), focus is around the business process changes, data architecture changes with respect to where data is being stored, retained, transmitted, etc.. Applications are all about the application architecture requirements and potentially any changes to the high level picture.
ENGINEERING: for engineering it’s all about the connection points, ports, protocol’s, access rights. What I find very compelling in this realm is that the dialogue is around AS IS and TO BE solution architecture with heavy reference to the BDAT model output. How does it specifically fit in w/ the rest of the pieces, what is the traffic pattern, what is the fault tolerance, how does it reuse the pieces of infrastructure already in place, how does each level of the support stack manage their respective pieces without breaking the separation of duties requirements, scaling out ramifications.
OPERATIONS: for operations it all about what is the process change, realization of the value and how does it all work. As you dig in more in this area it is about the 1-x process steps required, there is a heavier view on automation of remedial tasks, there is focus on ownership of problems, reliability of the solution, SLA’s, OLA’s (operational level agreements). The dialogue for operations is about the minutes it takes to operate a given function, the time to execute, back out, re provision, etc.. This is where the business process understanding and changes are the most critical as they are truly tested in live production scenarios
FINANCE: for finance, it’s a few things that I think are important to know, it’s not all about the ROI & TCO, however that is about 90% of it. The other 10% is primarily focused on how this solution would enable company objectives, goals and vision. They are also the keepers of the value (from Headcount, costs, impact, including how to verbalize) when it’s all said and done, as they play the role in delivering a projected vs. actual account of the events, therefore their keen involvement and insight is important. An Enlisted finance manager can make a world of difference.
SECURITY: I initially did not draw in security & then went back to add this into the picture above. Why you ask? Well, years back security was an afterthought, however Ever since the Code Red/Nimda/SQL Slammer days – they’ve had a pretty strong foothold in decisions within IT – especially in evaluating new technologies… They have to ensure that the ‘last mile’ is covered in the enterprise, 1 box can wreak havoc on the network, etc. What this means is that it’s all about CIA (Confidentiality, Availability & Integrity), therefore diving into the technology & understanding the RISK is the key part here (specifically the Risk Assessment).
LEADERSHIP/MANAGEMENT: the focus here is around not just being an “approver” but to also being a champion for the new technology. The goal is to have them very aware & equally as passionate as the adopter of the technology. If you can drive this passion from the top the air cover is significant in removing roadblocks that may arise.
So is one more important than the other? No, they are all critical for full adoption, however I will highlight that the message crafted towards the leadership team is critical.
Does a small/medium IT shops have these same challenges? I think so, they are just differing in size of the work required . for example in a small business the IT director may be participating in arch-eng-ops type of roles and rolling out the technology, where as in large enterprises these may be broken out over different people and groups.
So.. how do you go for the WIN?
My past has taught me that if I can understand the differing roles, what is needed to satisfy their requirements, the process is smoother (not perfect). I have also realized that sometimes even in IT you have to put on a marketing’ish type of role to help push the adoption along, whether it’s brown bag lunch meetings to show off the technology or just asking the Sr. Exec to join you in the data center for a hands on demo. In every case of new technology I’ve enlisted a team of passionate peers that see the vision and then together we tackle the key area’s as a team, while also diffusing that passion to others.
I’d like to share some examples of each area if there is interest in the community, specifically focused around Intel® vPro™ Technology. please comment back and then I will attach examples for each..
Also. What have I missed? What key questions do you think need to get answered for a “WIN”.