In the quest for a mature practice, modern and predictable enterprise computing, a strange thing happened: internet has made a dramatic breakthrough and transformed the technology to virtually all levels. He also changed the entire computer model, from architecture, software development and service delivery to operational models and rates of change, through the same spirit behind the computer.
Or at least, that is what is happening today in most companies and the results (or lack thereof) are sobering .
Company formerly was to apply technology to support enterprise computing, usually to automate processes, make them more affordable, faster and more efficient (usually in that order) or, increasingly, for communicate, collaborate and interact as a company with the world. In general, it was not to reinvent the company itself, but to better support it.
Today, however, for most industries, IT has become the business. The motto is that we are all technology companies now. Technological facilitation remains important, but with the possibilities offered by today’s technology and a truly pervasive global network, the largest proposed technology value has shifted to the new ways of working deeply hyperconnected, scalable up ‘billions of devices and permanently active than today is the digital business. Result: today we are virtually all connected to the rest of the world 24/24 and 7 days / 7, with the devices that are in our pockets and our bags.
As I have not ceased to point out in my previous reports and articles, the main priority for companies now is to determine what to do with this historical capacity and profound. We now have at our disposal an unlimited connectivity and economic capacity infinite, and an inexhaustible reservoir of innovative ideas that we can grasp and feel easy and affordable way until we just knocking.
What shall we do with this own ability to change the world? Too often, we’ll just ignore it and keep our old ways of working and thinking.
The new computer: creative destruction?
By observing our digital competitors, we can clearly see that almost always obsessed internet startups around the world operate and take full advantage of our global digital connectivity very recent. This is where our future depends: internet has shown countless times that he was a huge innovation lab, trying (literally) millions of new large-scale ideas , constantly having to find best way to create value through networking, maintain and constantly find new models that limit the friction and cost to a minimum, while providing greater speed, more agility and better ability to exploit the shared innovation.
From there we can begin to see that we have often failed as businesses to learn enough of this vast flow of innovation.
While the company has gradually developed into a model where much of fundamental computer is deployed in a few giant software suites offered by several major publishers, internet borrowed the opposite direction: an unlimited flow of new applications and services connected changing the situation. As companies continue to develop new silos, internet down into the application programming interfaces (APIs), simple integration standards developers and networks. If companies are still struggling to simply transpose some key applications on mobile devices, developers perform on the internet for their shopping on applications million new apps every day that redefine the possibilities these new powerful access points . The list is long (or long) and you can see in the above diagram how these two worlds have become different and divergent.
Internet and computer technology: a unified model
As pointed out recently , even simple things such as looking at a very low in most companies, not to mention very irregular upgrades of applications and operating systems. There is usually a considerable latent demand for more and better technological solutions, but users are already tired of seeing the IT department trying to keep up with the basics. Bubbling in areas such as mobile technology, delays add up quickly to a truly unsustainable pace .
Most IT departments are fully aware of this very complex state of affairs, but just out of control spending mode that was in place for five years or more (since the economic crisis), at the same time when technology is ever more crucial and strategic for the company.
However, the simplistic increasing budgets to compensate for time lost is probably not the answer either, at least not at first, especially at a time when budgets remain relatively stable despite the great progress towards the company Digital. Indeed, the challenges currently faced in terms of integration and technology operations for the company certainly originated in the limitations of the traditional 20th century computing model. In most companies, IT remains a bureaucratic department, command and control, hierarchical and highly centralized stuck in arrears and operational problems and too focused on technology to the exclusion of the business, even the two become inseparable. Clearly this must change, and radically, before it becomes unmanageable, as is already the case in some companies.
There are nearly ten years already ZDNet , companies were encouraged to be less ossified, flexible and agile, and less waste by adopting the avant-garde models that emerged from the depths of the internet. Even then, it was obvious that these “new technologies could accelerate the abandonment of existing practices.” For most, however, companies have not widely adopted techniques that startups use every day to create and maintain some of the main products in the world.
The good news is that agile methods, efficient processes and new practices such as DevOps have come a long way in companies (data indicate that nine out of ten new projects now use ) and led to a difference in many companies traditional. However, this only occurs in certain hotspots and only affects some aspects of IT, such as software development or system operations. However, this change must occur throughout the enterprise, not just the IT department.
I think much of the problem is that technological experimentation in the world of startups anticipates and tolerates more failures. The general rule is that only one in ten test will result in success. However, it is a failure rate that is generally considered unacceptable in the business world, at least in the way IT is structured today.
But is this so sure? Is it better to tolerate the poor results we get when virtually all IT projects are accepted, as long as it is not a complete failure? Or is it better to chain fast and inexpensive chess until the optimal solution is created? It is a model that is very difficult to adopt for the traditional IT department, where most of the projects are to succeed and find the right answer the first time, with some subsequent iterations to smooth out rough edges.
Instead, when I see the IT departments around the world, I see a big difference between the extremely successful models applied in the largest technology laboratory in the world (internet) and what do most IT departments. Examples of widely divergent models now include a common information environment (internet mainly uses a single flat structure and deeply connected, unlike companies), a constant competition and competition between services to win users (companies just make computer technology available, then review their decision occasionally), and an overall emphasis on research and discovery (rarely a priority for most companies). The list is long, it does not stop there.
Internet will also absorb IT (Traditional)
What is frustrating is that none of this is very new. However, IT is changing very slowly. Thus, it is likely that absorb the internet business world . While it is undeniable that we need to change and / or adapt much of what works so well with the internet in our business, and quickly, it also remains true that the company is no internet and that it should be not. Instead, the transition to new computer models should be adapting external successes and powerful new models (well most effective ways to create and manage technology solutions) to the realities and needs of our local businesses, well Step outside of the additional digital transformation .
So why do companies are not more likely to adapt new and more efficient models? There are two main reasons are invoked repeatedly. The first is that the computer’s ability to change enough to bridge the gap requires a “momentum” very important additional to overcome difficulties in order to effectively recreate the technological environment with sufficient speed and focus. And “sufficient” at this stage, one must understand a doubling or three short-term investment, which discourages the outset most companies, even knowing that the technology becomes crucial and essential to virtually every aspect of their business.
The second reason is that the computer industry itself has not reached a global consensus on a new, less centralized and federated model computer , where the bases are largely derived from cloud computing, while strategic capabilities are integrated a new digital business unit of adequate size. In other words, there are few successful examples of traditional companies who are transformed into technology companies. This is not to say that there is no (witness the case of Houghton Mifflin Harcourt and Telstra ), but they are relatively limited in scope.
We are entering the era of intelligent machines and cloud computing , which will grow back together operations and work on skills such computers, out of our businesses. It will be the same attempts to reinvent itself, then quickly remodel our more companies around a core technology, that hundreds of companies are now trying to do with the new role full digital director of development . This chamboulera almost certainly the responsibilities of the CIO and all he oversees unless IT managers take adequate and effective measures .
There are opportunities for that today, only a few companies are sufficiently lucky and determined to avoid the imminent creative destruction that will fill the gap between the direction taken by the world with technology and that taken today most companies. But it need not be so.