Home > Blogs > VMware Operations Transformation Services > Tag Archives: operations transformation

Tag Archives: operations transformation

EMC, VMware Release ‘State of IT Transformation’ Report

The ‘State of IT Transformation’ report takes a look at more than 660 EMC and VMware enterprise customers across 18 industries, and identifies gaps, progress and goals in their current IT Transformation initiatives.

By focusing on data provided by CIOs and their direct reports who participated in a transformation workshop led by EMC or VMware, this analysis provides deep insight into the biggest goals and challenges for organizations who are actually in the midst of an IT transformation.

The full State of IT Transformation Report (PDF) can be downloaded here.

Where do Organizations Want to Improve Most in 2016?

State of IT TransformationCloud Infrastructure

While more than 90% of organizations are only in the early stages of evaluating a well-engineered hybrid cloud architecture, and 91% of organizations have no organized, consistent means of evaluating workloads for hybrid cloud, 70% want to standardize on a hybrid cloud architecture across the organization within the next two years.

Operating Model

Running IT like a customer-focused business is a high priority for IT organizations, but 88% of companies have not begun, or are only in the preliminary stages of developing skills in business-facing service definition, and only 24% have a well developed service catalog in place.

Organizations recognize that collaboration is key to meeting customer expectations, with 95% of organizations expressing that having no silos and working together to deliver business-focused services at the lowest cost this is critical.  However, less than 4% of organizations reported that they currently operate like this.

Agility is also critical to success.  For over half of the participants it currently takes between a week and a month to provision infrastructure resources.  The goal this year for 77% of participants is to be able to do this in less than a day, or dynamically when needed.

Applications

Accelerating application development is a high priority for CIOs this year.  68% of the organizations surveyd take 6-12 months to complete a new development cycle.  This is likely due to the fact that 82% of the companies currently don’t have a scalable, infrastructure-independent application delivery framework on which to rapidly and consistently build mobile-friendly, cloud-native apps.

How does your organization stack up?

Are you curious about how the results changed by industry, or by geography?  Read the full State of IT Transformation Report to see how your organization compares to your peers.

If you need assistance identifying the gaps in your own organization, and developing a comprehensive strategy and roadmap for moving forward, contact your VMware Advisory Services strategist or your local VMware representative today.

Cloud Services Definition

Part 3 of the Cloud Business Management Series

By Khalid Hakim, Kai Holthaus and Bill Irvine

Services DefinitionIn our last cloud operations business transformation blog, we talked about the cloud business strategy and its importance in formulating the vision and the plan as to how you want to run your cloud as a business. In today’s blog, the focus begins to shift to executing the strategy and laying out the foundations of a service-oriented and business-driven “operating model”.

There is a saying: you can’t manage what you can’t control, and you can’t control what you can’t define.  Imagine that you are planning to open a new business. The first step is to define what services/products you want to offer your consumers and what distinguishes your market value among the others. Similarly, cloud business management starts at this point. IT should identify and define what cloud services would be offered to its consumers in order to truly drive a services-oriented and value-driven organization.

Key Areas of Services Definition

VMware recommends a unique approach for defining cloud services, through which a service owner defines a 360-degree view of how the cloud services would be established, managed and delivered effectively and efficiently to meet or exceed the expected value. To paint this panoramic view, cloud service owners should consider the following areas:

  • Service Overview – describe the service in terms of its purpose, goals, consumers, criticality, availability criteria and rhythm of business.
  • Virtual Service Team – organize your team members around the services you deliver. Team up as a virtual service team.
  • Services Definition ChartService Chart – map out the end-to-end cloud service in a graphical representation that is easy to consume. The service chart helps to visually understand the core components of a service and contributes when costing services.
  • Service Portfolio and Consumer Management – the service portfolio answers the questions, who are our customers and why should they buy the service from us. It contains all of the service categories and the business units that consume them and aids with making informed “service” and “business” based investment decisions.
  • Service Design and Development – provide high level information about how the services will be designed and developed, especially if the service isn’t yet in production. This helps with understanding the customer business need and developing the most valuable solution possible.
  • Service Catalog Management – identify service catalog structure parameters and possible blueprints. Also, define what columns or key fields should be included in service catalog entries.
  • Service Level Management – define key SLA/OLA targets to ensure provisioning time and quality meets specific business needs.
  • Service Desk Management – describe how the service will be supported. Draft a plan for service-desk requirements, skills needed and required knowledge transfer.
  • Proactive Operations Management – define the service operation requirements for support and reliability from the event and performance monitoring to availability, demand, capacity, continuity and security management.
  • Provisioning and Change Management – define the service provisioning lifecycle and associated change management policies including how the service will be pre-approved and auto-provisioned (for maximum efficiency). New leaner change management workflow needs to defined / refined (i.e. standard changes).
  • Service Financial Management – define the service cost and charge back/ show back model along with pricing and connections to the service catalog.
  • Service Performance and KPIs – define any applicable service related strategic, tactical and operational performance indicators (KPIs), and the metrics that will be collected to demonstrate that required performance was achieved. Also define how and when the KPIs and metrics will be reported, and to whom.
  • Service Reviews – define service-based review meetings to discuss and remediate any operational or consumer related topics. Follow a standard cadence for all services. Discuss potential changes in demand for services. Capture new or enhanced service requirements.
  • Service Marketing – define the key applicable service marketing elements for a successful service promotion and value realization within different company cultures.

Now, how long do you think this exercise will take? In most of our engagements, defining a service takes between 1 to 2 weeks. It is never intended to fully document all the areas above immediately, or establish all of the processes, as many organizations don’t have this all of this information available. Think of the Service Definition as a living and breathing document. The service owner should establish a working draft, develop it to the point of release and then maintain in for its life as an active service offering. All undefined services are treated as areas for improvement.

In our next blog, we will take this to the next level as we learn to establish a cloud service-based cost model and cost out cloud services end-to-end.  This will enable you to understand the cost of a unit of a cloud and provide the required level of cost transparency internally and to consumers.

=======

Khalid Hakim is an IT Business/Financial Management Lead with the VMware Operations Transformation global practice. You can follow him on Twitter @KhalidHakim47.

Kai Holthaus is a Sr. Transformation Consultant with VMware Operations Transformation Services and is based in Oregon.

Bill Irvine is a Principal Strategist with VMware Accelerate Advisory Services and is based in Colorado.

3 Common Mistakes when Breaking Organizational Silos for Cloud and DevOps

Pierre Moncassin-cropOrganizational SilosBy Pierre Moncassin

Every customer’s journey to Cloud, DevOps or other transformative initiatives is unique to an extent.  Yet all those journeys will come across a similar set of challenges.  With the exception of truly green-field projects, each transformation to Cloud/DevOps involves dealing with the weight of legacy – organizational and technical silos that hamper their momentum towards change.

This is why I often hear from customer teams: “We know that we need to break down those silos – but exactly how do you break them?”

Whilst I do not advocate a one-size-fit-all answer, I want to share some recommendations I promote on how to go about breaking those silos – and some mistakes to avoid along the way.

From where do silos come?

As discussed in earlier blogs, silos usually come into existence for valid reasons – at the origin. For example, when infrastructure administration relies on manual and highly specialized skills, it appears to make sense to group the skills together into clusters of deep expertise. Unix gurus, for example, might cluster together, as might Microsoft Windows experts, SQL database specialists and so on.  These are examples of silos teams build around infrastructure skills – experts of all those areas need to align their mode of operation to support cloud infrastructure services.

Other examples of commonly found silos include:

  • Application Development to Operations: DevOps emerged precisely as a way to break down one of the ‘last great silos’ of IT – the persistent gap between the Development teams and Operations teams.
  • Business to IT: When IT becomes so reliant on a specialist set of skills (think mainframe programming) significant inefficiencies arise in cross-training IT staff to business or vice-versa. In transitioning to Cloud/DevOps, this is another of the ‘great silo risks’ that the transformation will mitigate and ultimately break down completely as Business, Application Development and Operations function as an integrated team.

Common mistakes when attempting to break down silos.

a) Toolset-only approach.

A frequent temptation for project teams is to install software-based tools and assume (or rather, hope) that the silos will just vanish by themselves. In Cloud transitions, teams might install automated provisioning, but forget to work across the business/IT silos. Result – adoption by the business generally ends up minimal. In DevOps transition attempts, the technology approach might consist of deploying, for example, Jenkins, Code Stream etc. – tools meant for continuous delivery efforts, but failing to bridge the gap fully with day two operations management, for example without governance around incident-handling or idempotent configuration management. Without a clear path to resolution that cuts across the silos, it is easy to see when issues are not resolved satisfactorily. The impact on customer satisfaction is predictably less than optimal.

b) Overlook the value of ‘traditional’ skills

During the transition to Cloud/DevOps, especially when considering a toolset-only approach, it can appear at first sight that many of the legacy skills have become irrelevant.   But this is often a mistaken perception. Legacy skills are likely still relevant, they simply need to be applied differently.

For example, traditional operating systems skills are almost always relevant for Cloud, however they will be applied differently. Instead of manually configuring servers, the administrators will develop blueprints to provision servers automatically. They will use their knowledge to define standardized operating system builds.

Traditional skills become all the more critical when we look into soft skills. The ability to manage stakeholder relationships, communicate across teams, organizational and business specific knowledge – are all essential to running an effective Cloud/DevOps organization.

c) Focus on problem not solution

This is a well-known principle of change management – focusing on the problem will not solve it. Rather than present the teams with a problem, for example existence of a silo, it is often far more effective to work on the solution – cross-silo organization and processes.

Does it work? I can certainly relate the experience of ‘seeing light bulb’ moments with highly specialized teams.  Once they see the value of a cross-silo solution, the response is far more often “we can do this” as opposed to defending the status quo of individual silos.

In sum, focus on the vision, the end-state and the value of the end-to-end solutions.

Five recommendations to help break down silos.

  1. Shift from silo mindset to Systems Thinking. Conceptually, all the ‘common mistakes’ that I mentioned above can be traced back to the persistence of a silo mindset – whether focusing on traditional (versus leading-edge skills), new toolsets (versus legacy ones), or isolated ‘problem’ areas. The better approach is Systems Thinking. Systems thinking implies an understanding that the overall organization is more than the sum of the parts. It means looking for ways not just to improve the efficiency of individual elements (skillsets, tools, process steps) but optimize the way these elements interact.
  2. Create vision. As mentioned earlier, creating the vision is a vital step to get the team’s buy-in and to overcome silos. This can entail an initial catalog of services and outline workflows to fulfill these services. Potentially, it may be worth setting up a pilot platform to showcase some examples.
  3. Build momentum. Building the vision is important but not enough. One the initial acceptance is reached, the transformation team will need to build the momentum. For example by recruiting ‘champions’ in each of the former silos.
  4. Proceed in incremental steps, building up a track record of ‘small wins’ and gradually increasing the pace of change.
  5. Establish the permanent structure. One the change in motion, it will be necessary to define the long-term roles that operate the Cloud/ DevOps operations. These roles are detailed in ‘Organizing for the Cloud’: https://www.vmware.com/files/pdf/services/VMware-Organizing-for-the-Cloud-Whitepaper.pdf.

Take-aways

  • Breaking silos is a result rather than the end. Start by building the vision to engage teams and motivate them to break the silos themselves.
  • Do not rely on technology alone. Toolsets augment processes, but do by themselves overcome silos (e.g. vRealize Code Stream, vRealize Cloud Automation and other VMware Cloud automation tooling) as long at they are leveraged to sustain the vision and constantly build momentum.
  • Leverage existing skills. Many of the legacy, previously silo’ed skills can be adapted to the future cloud/DevOps organization.

=======

Pierre Moncassin is an operations architect with the VMware Operations Transformation global practice and is based in the UK.

Building a Holistic IT Strategy Using a Top-Down, Bottom-Up and Middle-Out Approach

Part 2 of the “Cloud Capable – Now What?” Series

Dion ShingBy Dion Shing

The modern business environment is fast, fluid, complex and ambiguous. Businesses in all markets are embattled and face challenges and threats both internally and externally.

In order to adapt, survive and thrive, business strategies should be fluid, adaptable and innovative. From an implementation perspective, strategy should be well communicated to all levels of the organization.

Challenges in IT Strategy Definition

IT StrategyFor many organizations, IT strategy definition occurs infrequently and is based on protecting current position and revenue streams, not taking into account feedback from middle and front line tiers of the business.  Furthermore that strategy is not clearly communicated to the business, or even within the IT organization.

This broken process for strategy definition results in tactics and plans that are often watered down, inadequate and not geared towards leveraging the unique strengths of the company.  For example, a company may say that their strategy is to “improve operating efficiency and provide excellent customer service.”  This strategy only brings their IT department up to par with everyone else, it does not provide any competitive advantage.

To find unique and creative competitive advantages many enterprises adapt an inclusive approach to strategy and develop frameworks such as Top-Down, Bottom-Up and Middle-Out.  This approach recognizes that IT is not only a support function that underpins business processes, but a source of competitive advantage that can provide innovative services that will help drive the strategy and success of the company as a whole.

Top-Down, Bottom-Up and Middle-Out

On their own Top-Down, Bottom-Up and Middle-Out strategies are only partially effective. What is required for effective strategy selection and for the development of rationalized strategies is coordination between all three approaches.

Top-Down

The strategy is established by senior management, and filters down the ranks. Often implementation is not well supported and results are lacking.

Bottom-Up

Strategies developed here focused on specific improvement initiatives and address specific needs, they are typically managed by a single group and manager and are effective.

The downside is that the improvement may occur only in a single area, may not be institutionalized and can lead to complexity and inconsistency. Shadow IT and unsanctioned IT Services can occur.

Middle-Out

Middle management is where the strategies that enable competitive advantages can be championed and communicated.  The effective Bottom-Up strategies developed at the frontline can be supported, nurtured, advocated for and developed by finding sponsors at the executive level, elevating bottom-up strategies to top-down strategies.  Middle management is also effective at translating Top-Down strategies from High-level language into Operational activities to be executed at the frontline

Combined, these represent a force for developing action out of strategy that ultimately drives innovation and finding the illusive competitive advantages.

=======

Dion Shing is an Operations Architect based in Dubai.

DevOps: The Operations Side

Ahmed_croppedBy Ahmed Al-Buheissi

DevOps is about getting Development and Operations to work together and avoid conflicts in how they operate is to achieve their goals. The most commonly noted objective is shifting to Agile processes where applications are released more often and with better quality. While development and operations are of equal importance to a DevOps methodology, this article focuses on the role of Operations in facilitating an efficient and successful DevOps implementation.

In a DevOps environment, the operations team participates in the following activities:

Automation Tools

DevOps AutomationAutomation is a cornerstone to DevOps, as it facilitates continuous integration and delivery of applications into various environments (dev, test, prod, etc.). An example of such automation tools is VMware’s vRealize CodeStream, which allows the creation of release pipelines (e.g., from dev, to test, to production), with various tasks to retrieve application builds, deploy environments, automation testing, and etc. These tools are typically implemented and maintained by the operations teams.

Blueprints

Infrastructure and application blueprints may consist of a number items, such as VM templates, configuration management code, or workflows. Configuration code, e.g., Puppet manifest or Chef cookbooks, are used to configure deployed VM’s and the applications running thereon. Configuration Workflows may also be developed using tools such as vRealize Orchestrator. Dev and operations teams share responsibility for developing the blueprints to ensure deployed environments are correct and ready for use in the various release stages.

Patching and Upgrading

Historically, operations teams held responsibility for maintaining the various tools used by the development and release teams, such as build tools, source-code management tools, automated testing systems, and etc. However, the lines are blurring here as developers take on more coding responsibility for such management. This means Operations teams are housing development teams capable of developing the management automation.

Monitoring

This is one of the areas that are frequently overlooked, or at least rarely mentioned, in a DevOps environment. Monitoring applications through the various promotion environments is very important to ensure a fail-fast approach: potential issues are reported and investigated in early stages (dev and test), before they become real problems.

The operation team also builds dashboards for developers and operations so the application and its environment can be monitored throughout the Continuous-Integration/Continuous-Delivery process. This provides developers with feedback on the applications impact on the environment in which it runs, allows operations to become familiar with the same from an environment (VM/vApp) perspective, and provides confidence to the operations team that the Continuous-Integration/Continuous-Delivery process is working and there will be no issues when the application is released into production

It is worth mentioning that collaboration between development and operations should start very early, as developers need to embed operations considerations in their application code (such as adequate logging information), while the operations team need to ensure infrastructure availability for developers to start their work.

=======

Ahmed Al-Buheissi is an operations technical architect with the VMware Operations Transformation global practice and is based in Melbourne, Australia.

3 Capabilities Needed for DevOps that You Should Already Have in Your Cloud Organization

Pierre Moncassin-cropBy Pierre Moncassin

A number of enterprise customers have established dedicated organizations to leverage VMware’s cloud technology. As these organizations reach increasing levels of cloud maturity, we are more and more often asked by our customers: “how is our organization going to be impacted by DevOps?“

Whilst there are many facets – and interpretations – to DevOps, I will highlight in this blog that many of the skills needed for DevOps are already inherent to a fully- functioning cloud organization. Broadly speaking, my view is that we are looking at evolution, not revolution.

First, let’s outline briefly what we understand by DevOps from a people/process/technology point of view:

  • DevOps EvolutionPeople: DevOps originated as an approach, even a philosophy that aims to break down organization silos, specifically the traditional gap between application developers and operations teams. This is why it is often said that DevOps is first of all, about people and culture. Application Developers are sometimes depicted as “agents of change” whilst the Operations team are seen as “guardians of stability” – teams with opposite objectives that can lead to well-documented inefficiencies.
  • Process: From a methodology point of view, DevOps integrates principles such as “agile development”. Agile this provides the methodological underpinning for Continuous Delivery, an approach that relies on the frequent release of production-ready code. Whilst Agile development was originally about applications, DevOps extends the principle to infrastructure (leading to the idea of “agile infrastructure”).
  • Technology: DevOps processes necessarily incorporate the use of development and automation technologies such as: source code control and management (e.g, Git); code review systems (e.g., Gerrit); configuration management (e.g., Puppet, Chef, Ansible, SaltStack); task execution and management (e.g., Jenkins); artifact and application release tooling (e.g., VMware vRealize Codestream); and others. In order to manage those tools as well as applications generated by them, DevOps also incorporates operations tooling such as provisioning and monitoring of the underlying infrastructure (e.g., vRealize Automation and vRealize Operations).

Features of a cloud organization adapted for VMware’s cloud technology, are described in detail in the white paper “Organizing for the Cloud” (link below):

https://www.vmware.com/files/pdf/services/VMware-Organizing-for-the-Cloud-Whitepaper.pdf

DevOps Organizational Model

Here are, in my view, some key capabilities in the cloud organization as recommended by VMware:

1) The rise of developers’ reach.

As development departments mature beyond  writing strictly  application code, their reach spans broader knowledge bases. This includes writing code that performs end-to-end automation of application development, deployment and management: applications and infrastructure as code. Developers utilize the same skills traditionally relied on in application teams and apply them towards  cloud services:

  • Provisioning for example with VMware vRealize Automation.
  • Automating network configuration with VMware NSX
  • Automating monitoring and performance management (VMware vRealize Operations).

This shift in reach from Ops to Dev forms the the basis of ‘infrastructure-as-code’ – a now relatively standard cornerstone of DevOps.

2) Ability to work across silos

One of the defining capabilities of a cloud team  – and a key skill required of all team members, is to be able to break the boundaries between silos:

  • Technical silos: for example the customer-facing team (Tenant Operations, also known as IT Service Center) will define end-to-end cloud services across technical silos such as compute (servers), networks and storage. Service Owners and Service Architects will define the scope and remit of such services; Service Developers will put together the workflows and scripts to allow end users to provision those services automatically.
  • Functional silos – merging “Design” and “Run”. Whilst traditional IT organizations tend to separate teams of architects/designers from operations team, the cloud development teams bring those skills together. Service Developers for example will build workflows that include not only the deployment of infrastructure, but automate its monitoring and configuration management at runtime. Service Owners are involved both in the definition of services but also act as point of contact in resolving incidents impacting those services.  DevOps takes this trend to the next level by merging the “dev” and “ops” teams.

3) Increased alignment with the business

Whilst all IT organizations aim to align with the business,  A model organization (as described in “Organizing for the Cloud”) aligns business lines with practical structures and roles.  For example this model defines dedicated roles such as:

  • Service Architects who translate business requirements into functional and technical architectures.

DevOps continues this trend towards business alignment: in a context where business is increasingly driven by revenue-generating applications, application development becomes integral to the lines of business.

DevOps Organization

In sum, a well-functioning cloud team will have established many of the positive traits needed for DevOps – a preference for rapid development over fire-fighting, for bridging silos across technologies and processes, and for close cooperation across business lines.

Going one step further DevOps pushes these traits to the extreme – preferring continually improving development and automation of application and infrastructure. For example a Devops team might leverage VMware’s Cloud Native Apps capabilities to build applications optimized to run on cloud from “day one” (for more details see https://www.vmware.com/cloudnative/technologies).

Take-away – practical ways to prepare your cloud team for DevOps;

  • Encourage job rotation of key team members across technical skills and functions.
  • Continuously expand your team’s knowledge and practice of cloud automation tools. This can include advanced training on tool such as vRealize Automation, vRealize Operations; as well as generic skills in analysis and design.
  • Ensure that key tenant operations roles (i.e. customer facing roles) are in place and give them increasing exposure to application development and business lines.
  • Develop an awareness of Agile approach for example by formal training and/or nominating ‘Champions’ in your team.
  • Build up a skill base in Continuous delivery, for example leveraging training or a pilot with vRealize Codestream.

—-
Pierre Moncassin is an operations architect with the VMware Operations Transformation global practice and is based in the UK.

How to Overcome the Resistance to Change

Gordon HodgsonBy Gordon Hodgson

As the New Year begins IT Organizations are beginning to implement their strategies for 2016 which will bring change to their operations that will have impact their staff.  Mark Fields, the CEO at Ford addresses strategy when he is quoted as saying, “You can have the best plan in the world, and if the culture is not going to let it happen, it’s going to die on the vine.”, in other words the culture of the organization needs to change as much if not more than the technology or the methodologies and this is going to be a much bigger challenge.

In 500 BC Heraclitus the Greek Philosopher said that “The Only Thing That Is Constant Is Change -” He seems to have been right and change continues at much faster pace today especially in technology.  Some people embrace change, some fear it, while others try to avoid it all together but no matter your view change is constant and it is disruptive. Change arrives at your doorstep in many ways and with it comes the opportunity to respond either in a positive or negative style and to influence those around you.

My Experience as a CIO

Change

A few years ago I had the great opportunity to lead IT at the world’s largest faith based humanitarian organization as their International CIO. This large Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) had IT staff in 102 countries mostly in the developing world. As you might imagine organizational change in this type of environment was a challenge almost on a daily basis as the majority of employees were focused on solving world hunger and oppression and not on the concerns of IT.  NGO’s by nature are non-profit and meeting the bottom line was not always top priority.

As the CIO I was charged with bringing systems into the 21st century and reducing the overall cost of IT on a global basis.  Organizational Change for IT is difficult in the western world but move that into the developing world with a 102 different cultures and the challenges multiply significantly.  In order to accomplish this initiative many things needed to happen but most of all I needed to be an influencer so that the vison of what needed to be done would resonate in this multicultural environment.  While many IT professional may not have all of the challenges of a large NGO they still face an uphill battle when attempting to implement major IT changes in their organizations.

With Innovation Comes Organizational Change

No one needs to tell IT Professionals that change is inevitable as they have experienced significant changes in this just the past few years.  The Cloud, Software as a Service (SaaS) Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) Desktop as a Service (DaaS) and the most recent and perhaps the most challenging DevOps.  Customer who embrace cloud technology such as VMware’s to transform their IT services (whether Iaas, PaaS, DaaS or SaaS) will have managed a significant level of organization change. Those who continue this transformation journey towards DevOps will implement even further changes.  This article is not about these new technologies or methodologies it is about the change that they bring and some ideas on how to deal with that change from an organizational perspective.

Considerable materials have been written on the topic of Organizational Change Management and the methods to change corporate culture to adapt to the impact of a large project or of new methodologies.  In spite of all these materials the problem still exists and IT executives need to have a strategy to address these issues so that as they implement new tools they will be assimilated successfully into the organization.  There is no magic formula or silver bullet but by following some proven principles of Organizational Change Management there is an enhanced opportunity for success.

Adapted from P. Atkinson, How to Implement Change Effectively, (2014). P.34

Adapted from P. Atkinson, How to Implement Change Effectively, (2014). P.34

Taking look at some of the organizational change management challenges that are required, for example when making the move to a Dev/Ops or a Bi-modal approach to application development, which is a Gartner defined concept of optimizing both the traditional SDLC method of development with the concept of agile application development,.  In the chart below is the estimated adoption of a major change by the typical organization.  As you can see by these estimated numbers and Organizational Change requires some heavy lifting to gain acceptance across the enterprise.

To be effective with major changes such as DevOps the IT Organization needs to lead the change not just manage it. Since over 74% of the impacted staff are estimated to be either resistors or fence sitters certain steps need to be taken to influence these stakeholders to see the value of the proposed change.

Overcoming Cynicism around Change

As stated earlier, change is the one constant in almost every environment and this can cause many to become cynics to the next new corporate plan to implement a change.  From the chart presented earlier there are resistors and fence sitters and many of them could possibly be considered cynics. So to move a change forward there is a need to change the cynic’s mind about the change that is being implemented. 

It has been suggested by several studies, (Stanley, Meyer & Topolnytsky) that employee cynicism can be manifested in resistance to change at the organizational level.  Due to this finding it is important for management to take this into consideration when attempting to implement changes such as Dev/Ops. Cynicism is not always easy to overcome it can be addressed by improved communications, adding a trusted advisor within the company to the project team, someone that others look up to and respect.  Management should be a transparent about the change as possible to be continue to show the value to the overall organization of this change.

Becoming a Champion for Change

Cynicism is not the only roadblock to organizational change that management needs to consider and to deal with to be successful.  The overall organizational culture is a very powerful element that can thwart the efforts of a major organizational change such as DevOps.  To help overcome cynicism and other challenges to organizational change to the ability to become an influencer can be a great asset to your success.

Too many times management issues a mandate to implement new systems or methodologies and sends the email down the chain expecting results and success. Gartner states in a 2014 survey that only 37% of IT projects are considered successful.  If that statistic is true, and there is no reason to believe that it is not, those of us in IT need to review our approach to organizational changes that are created by IT projects and develop the ability to lead and not just manage. “We call this ability to create changes in human behavior influence and the people who do in influencers. At the end of the day, what qualifies people to be called leaders is there capacity to influence others to change” (Grenny, Patterson, Maxfield, McMillian & Switzer, p.6 2013).

As the International CIO of a large NGO I had complete responsibility for all of the IT functions outside the US but did not have the authority to mandate change, I would need to move strategy forward with influence and relationship building.  This approach is more difficult and can take a longer time to reach the goal however it is attainable and you can be successful even without a mandate.  (Grenny et al., 2013) stated that there are six major sources of influence and each one has a specific focus area and expected outcome.  By focusing on these six major sources of influence one has an increased chance to implement major IT initiatives and create organizational change.

Adapted from (Grenny et al, (2013). Influencer. p. 70). McGraw Hill Education, New York

Adapted from (Grenny et al, (2013). Influencer. p. 70). McGraw Hill Education, New York

Transparency and Communication

By following some of these suggestions and being as transparent about the changes that need to be made will contribute to your success.  Communicate as much as possible and be involved with changes as much as possible, be the change champion and allow people to see that IT leadership is behind the change with more than lip service but with support and resources to make the change happen.  Consider these points for communication (P. Moncassin, 2013) for any major organizational change as they will help to remove barriers to change and get buy in from the resistors and fence sitters.

  • Enlist visible leaders to paint the vision and be responsible or be the conduit for regular communication.
  • Communicate often and in small chunks.  Plan to communicate over an extended period of time throughout the transformation and beyond.
  • Include enough detail to make the communication personal and practical whenever possible.
  • Vary the communication approaches. Some people prefer visual communications. But others respond better to verbal communication.
  • Avoid too specialized vocabulary (a.k.a. “jargon”) or too technical content, especially at the early stages when concepts are being introduced.
  • Explain the continuity, or at least relationship with “traditional” approaches, concepts and practices that individual are familiar with.
  • Welcome resistance to change (to a point).

It is my experience there is no magic bullet that will make everyone accept the changes that need to be made and not everyone will see your vision for the future.  According to Gartner statistics only 37% of IT projects are successful and that it is estimated that 74% of employees are either resistors or fence sitters with regard to organizational changes.  IT Leadership and especially the CIO need to fully appreciate that no matter how important or necessary a change such as Dev/Ops might be there will resistance. It is futile to not recognize resistance will be present with any major change. Failure to include a plan to mitigate this resistance could negativity impact your initiatives and cause the project to fail or not be as effective as possible.

References

  • Atkinson, P. (2014) How to Implement Change Effectively. Management Services Autumn Edition. Ps. 33-38
  • Gartner. Run IT Like a Business and What does it Mean and How do you do it. Published by VMware 2014.
  • Grenny, J., Patterson, K., Maxfield, D., McMillan, R. & Switzler, A. (2013). Influencer. McGraw-Hill Publishers, New York.
  • Moncassin, P., (2013). 7 Communication Tips to Facilitate Culture Change When Adopting a Cloud Model.  VMWare Blogs
  • Stanley, D., Meyer, J. & Topolnytsky, L. (2005).  Employee Cynicism and Resistance to Organizational Change. Journal of Business and Psychology, Vol. 19, No. 4, summer 2005. Ps.429-459

=======

Gordon Hodgson is a Transformation Senior Consultant with VMware Operations Transformation Services and is based in the Portland, OR metro area.

The Cloud Business Manager Role

Part One of the Cloud Business Management Series

Khalid HakimCharlie McVeighBy Khalid Hakim and Charlie McVeigh

Business leaders look at the cloud model and see new ways to accelerate innovation, create competitive advantage, and drive new business models. IT executives look at private, public and hybrid cloud models and see a host of new possibilities for positive IT outcomes, including among others:

  • Optimizing CapEx
  • Lowering OpEx
  • Shifting focus to optimize the “run IT” budget thus freeing funding for the “grow IT” budget
  • Improved service delivery times through app and infrastructure delivery automation
  • Improved asset utilization by understanding consumption and usage patterns in the cloud

Never forget your history lessons.   Have you ever participated in a successful transformation project that didn’t factor in People, Process and Technology? We still find that all too often, a critical aspect of harnessing the cloud is overlooked: the organizational impact of moving to the cloud model. The fact is, the transition to the cloud model requires an evolution in roles, skills, processes, and organizational structure.

Organizing for the cloud cannot be an afterthought in the formulation of an effective IT transformation strategy. When IT is in transition, roles and responsibilities are more important than ever. The right people, with the right skills, have to be in the right places and serve the right roles.

Chief among these critical organizational shifts is establishing a Cloud Business Management discipline. This blog is the first in a four part series recommending specific Cloud Business Management roles and processes to consider.

Cloud Business Manager Role:  Run Cloud Like a Business

The Cloud Business Manager role  drives a new business management discipline within IT to lead a comprehensive cloud business management practice, leveraging investments in vRealize Business. The Cloud Business Manager supports Cloud Infrastructure and Tenant Operations to help the business better manage:

  • Cloud spend
  • Rate cards
  • Showback and chargeback
  • Reporting of consumption and wastage
  • Service tier options
  • Fair recovery of IT costs
  • Incentives driving the right economic usage patterns by cloud consumers.

Cloud Business Management

Responsibilities of the Cloud Business Manager are in the following 4 categories:

  • Financial
    • The focus here is primarily to develop the cloud service-based cost model along with a repeatable service costing process for Cloud consumption. Among other responsibilities, this includes service-based cost allocation and classification strategy, tracking and management of cloud costs, cloud services rates settings, and defining consumption and showback/chargeback reports from both the provider and consumer perspective.
  • Business
    • Included here are responsibilities for developing a cloud strategy roadmap, a cloud services marketing program, and liaison work among IT, Corporate Marketing, and Business Unit consumers of the cloud.
  • IT/Cloud
    • Here the responsibilities include defining SLA’s, ensuring delivery, and making cloud workload placement decisions based on the right economic factors to avoid shadow-IT situations.
  •  Value
    • Responsibilities here include defining value metrics, continuous improvement reporting, and regular business performance reporting for key stakeholders. This enables the business consumers of the cloud to make the right economic decisions about where and how to run their workloads.
  • Corporate/IT Marketing
    • Develop a Cloud Services marketing strategy; offers and promotions to ensures cloud services consumption and value. Once you understand the economics of cloud workload placement, cloud marketing will drive users to that desired behavior.

What does the Cloud Business Manager contribute to the business?

The Cloud Business Manager helps IT deliver on cloud promises for the desired quality at the right cost, by ensuring tighter alignment and accountability between IT, Business and Finance.  This roles makes a significant contribution in the workload placement decision-making process, as well as hybrid cloud, cost takeout, application rationalization and bill-of-cloud.

Let us know if we can help you further define this role in your company.  And keep a look out for Part Two in this Cloud Business Management Series next month, where I cover the Cloud Business Strategy topic.

=======

Khalid Hakim is an operations architect with the VMware Operations Transformation global practice. You can follow him on Twitter @KhalidHakim47.

Charlie McVeigh is an IT business management strategic advisor for VMware. You can follow him on Twitter @cbmcveigh

Why and How to Overcome the CAPEX to OPEX Barrier

Benoit-cropBy Richard Benoit

Anyone who has ever struggled with the “moving from CAPEX to OPEX” question knows that it is one of the most difficult barriers to overcome within IT.  Although it is a challenge, it can be achieved if you can answer the following 3 questions:

  • What is the barrier?
  • Why do we want to overcome the barrier?
  • How do we overcome the barrier?

In the rest of this post we will try to answer each one of these quandaries.

What is the barrier?

Resistance to moving away from CAPEX essentially falls into 2 categories: Business Resistance and Finance Rules.

Business resistance to loss of control

As we’ve seen with the move to virtualization, one of the biggest obstacles to adoption is resistance from the business because of their sense that they are losing control.  In the days of old, the business was used to having a ring-fenced domain where its developers, production support, and users had complete control over its every detail.  IT was there to just make sure that the network and server were up and running.  The idea of sharing was a completely foreign concept.  They had a CAPEX budget and they wanted complete control over how it was used.  Going to a completely shared environment is just one of the last steps of a process that started many years ago, but is still no less difficult.

Business resistance to show back or charge back

Invariably when we discuss OPEX, the topic of show back and charge back come up.  In an effort to use resources more efficiently, many organizations attempt to instrument first show back (or shame back as its known in some circles) and then charge back.  Like above, the business is not used to having to justify the use of resources it paid for and is, not surprisingly, resistant to the idea of starting.

Finance Rules

Although various elements of the business will resist going to an OPEX model, the biggest challenge to moving to an OPEX model is an organizations finance rules.  Given that this level of effort is not trivial and will certainly involve C-Level people and probably the board, it’s no wonder that organizations are hesitant to address this conundrum.

Why do we want to overcome the barrier?

Change behavior

CAPEX to OPEXProbably one of the biggest reasons to adopt an OPEX model is to change how the Business consumes IT.  In an environment without chargeback or an OPEX model, the business is used to “squatting” on as many resources as possible due to the fact that getting new ones often has to wait until the next fiscal year. Under the traditional way of delivering IT, the business wants as much as they can get all of the time.

An example of this was at a large East Coast bank where before any form of OPEX or chargeback, every business unit had every environment backed up every night.  This included even test and development systems.  Trying to get business units to consume less backup resources was largely unsuccessful.  However, once an OPEX chargeback cost was introduced, this behavior changed almost over night.  Very quickly when business units saw how much it cost them for just backups, they slashed their use of backups to mostly just production databases.  All other things such as development and production environments were expected to be backed up through other means by the developers and production support teams.

Traditionally, IT has tried to restrain the use of resources of the business units, which has been largely unsuccessful.  By charging businesses for what they use, the business now controls its own usage to maximize their OPEX value.

Granularity and choice

As part of changing behavior, giving the business the ability to choose what they consume with their OPEX payments, allows them to save money on things they really don’t need.  It also allows IT to offer multiple types and levels of service depending on what the business needs.  Common examples of this are the silver, gold and platinum levels of service for virtualized workloads, but can also include things such as backups and storage tiers.

Another example of this was at the same large East Coast bank where before choice was in place, performance of production VMs had to be guaranteed at all times no matter what.  This led to IT providing their platinum service that had no over commitment and was as a result fairly expensive.   However, IT also offered a gold service that had some degree of performance guarantee, but was much cheaper.  As a result, over time many business units elected to go with the gold level of service by improving the resiliency of their applications and planning for scale out when needed.  This saved them quite a bit of money that then they could use on other projects.

Enable innovation

If you combine the granularity and choice available with an OPEX model with automated provisioning, the business can innovate like they haven’t been able to in the past.  Between technical restrictions that require new resources to be manually provisioned over the course of several weeks and financial rules that don’t allow much flexibility to change allocations quickly, many projects don’t take flight because they take too long and are too much trouble.

However, when a project can be launched in a matter of hours because automation allows a new environment to be spun up quickly and the OPEX model allows discretion on how funds are applied, many new opportunities are open to the business that weren’t worth it in the past.

Be more efficient

Traditional IT is essentially a form of rationing in how resources are allocated.  Users are encouraged to hold on to resources they don’t need because they know they may not be able to get them when they need them.  This of course assumes that they can give them back, which in many CAPEX models, they can’t.

By going to a shared resource OPEX model, business units can consume what they need and give back what they don’t.

Avoid shadow IT

One of the biggest drivers for IT moving to an OPEX model with the above advantages is that, like it or not, IT is competing with the open market.  Many Business units today are just pulling out a credit card and buying resources directly from hosting and cloud providers because IT isn’t responsive or competitive.  As offerings on the Internet continue to improve, shadow IT is likely to increase as a result.

How do we overcome the barrier?

IT as a Business

To be relevant, IT needs to start operating as a business.  Traditionally IT has provided resources to business units by essentially “throwing it over the wall”.  Unless it breaks there is very little effort spent of the resources.  Successful IT departments now define services that they offer to their customers with defined service definitions that describe not only the technology provide, but any SLAs provided along with other non-function requirements that have been included.  As part of that, IT can highlight the value added that they provide above what hosting or cloud providers offer.  IT has to also start doing customer relationship management to make sure that the right services are being offered, at the right time, and at the right price.

CAPEX and OPEX can co-exist

Many finance departments resist going to an OPEX model because it is presented as either CAPEX or OPEX.  In reality this doesn’t have to be.  In order for IT to realize the benefits outlined in this article, OPEX only has to exist in the relationship between IT and the business.  CAPEX can still exist in the bowels of IT somewhere; it would just need to be converted to OPEX according to rules set up by finance.

A good example of this is how some private clouds operate today.  They assume the CAPEX budget of the business unit in return for OPEX credits that the business can use over a predetermined time period.

Conclusion

By answering the questions above regarding moving to an OPEX model, IT departments can become enablers to the business instead of a hindrance.

=======

Richard Benoit is an Operations Architect with the Operations Transformation Services practice and is based in Michigan.

IT Transformation and Organizational Process Maturity

John WorthingtonBy John Worthington

Regardless of what process framework you use, and especially if you’ve done some ‘adaptation’ of processes, building process capability over the long haul goes hand-in-hand with building the organization’s process maturity.

Having thought about my comment, ‘so go ahead, adopt and adapt’, in one of my previous posts I thought further discussion might be in order.

Measuring Organizational Process Maturity

Based on the ISO standard[i], an organization’s process maturity is measured by establishing base and extended process sets at each stage of maturity. These base and extended process sets are tailored based on the domain and scope of the assessment and/or client-specific requirements.

For example, if a company decided that process A, B and C are critical to achieving organizational objectives they may determine that these represent the base process set. They could not achieve a process maturity of Level 1 (Basic) unless process A, B and C all met a Level 1 process maturity.

At Level 2, the organization may determine that there are additional processes that must be established. These would represent the ‘extended process set’ at a Level 2. To reach an organizational maturity of Level 2 (Managed), both the base and extended process sets would need to achieve Level 2 process maturity. Additional extended process sets might be added at higher levels of maturity as shown in the figure below.

Process Maturity

Process Capability versus Maturity

Capability

Process capability is focused on the ability of the process to achieve its desired outcomes based on business objectives. The process ‘base’ practices are directly related to the process objectives; which means the base practice attributes of a process are different for each process. So rating the degree to which each process expected outcome is met (or not) is a quick way to provide insight to its capability, which may (or may not) be adequate for a given organization’s business objectives. An example for Incident Management is given below. (Note: A formal process assessment will also review the process inputs/outputs, supporting people/technology and other evidence

Process Maturity

Process Capability Attribute  – Incident Management
(i.e., objectives/process desired outcomes)
Rating
An incident and service request management strategy is defined and implemented
Incidents are reported, prioritized, analyzed for business impact, classified, resolved and closed
Customers are kept informed of the status and progress of their incidents or service requests
Management of potential service level breaches are communicated to and agreed with the customer
Incidents which are not progressed according to agreed service levels are escalated by customers

If all the objectives of the process are either Largely or Fully achieved, the process will meet Level 1 (performed) requirements.

Maturity

Process maturity attributes apply to all processes, and are considered ‘generic’ attributes. These ratings are usually taken across a group of processes (such as the base and extended process set). Each level of process maturity builds on the next:

  • Level 1 – Performed (Process Performance)
  • Level 2 – Managed (Process Performance Management, Work Product management)
  • Level 3 – Established (Process Definition, Process Deployment)
  • Level 4 – Predictable (Process Measurement, Process Control)
  • Level 5 – Optimizing (Process Innovation, Process Optimization)

How mature are your processes?

Download this simple exercise using the ISO standard generic process attributes. Identify what you feel would be your ‘base process set’, and if you want a ‘extended process set’ as well. Then answer these questions for each process.

Organizational Process Maturity and ITaaS Transformation

Each organization has different starting points, different goals and objectives, and different levels of capability/maturity. So while we can effectively leverage our extensive experience with ITaaS transformations, each transformation path will be unique.

As processes are adapted along an ITaaS transformation path, changes in process boundaries, roles, controls and supporting technology can dilute organizational process maturity. This is another reason why ‘slow and steady’ may win the IT transformation race; frantic attempts to speed up the hill (again and again) increase the costs associated with the transformation effort an ultimately exhaust IT staff.

So go ahead, ‘adopt and adapt’, but be careful to maintain your hard-earned gains in organizational process maturity.

[i] ISO15504 – http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=54175

=====================

John Worthington is a VMware transformation consultant and is based in New Jersey. Follow @jMarcusWorthy and@VMwareCloudOps on Twitter.