Showing posts with label movement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label movement. Show all posts

Thursday, September 26, 2019

Orientation and the sad face

Without orientation, strategy will make little sense.

Consider the scenario where it is vital that you get to a destination.  You’ll need a map.  Orientation of the map will potentially change the meaning, or the perceived meaning, of the directions you’ll move.  The tried and true method of orienting a map is to identify correct orientation of the map, utilizing the “compass rose” or other cardinal direction indicator.

By Abraham Cresques - This image comes from Gallica Digital Library and is available under the digital ID btv1b55002481n, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=15582034
If you’re using a GPS, that’s all well and good.  GPS has orientation built-in*.  If you’re using verbal directions, the directions are as important as the starting point, but I digress…

Without Orientation, there is no situational awareness and the strategy is specious at best.  Furthermore, motion is not well defined. Directions are difficult (kind of like verbal directions above).

Consider the OODA that Simon Wardley created to describe the two types of why and you’ll immediately discover orientation.  
In the simplest of measures, you conduct yourself around this strategy cycle by gut feeling and often without even knowing about it.  There’s nothing wrong with this, it’s actually how people operate and will continue to until our #AIOverlords take over.

It is far more problematic when the actions affect other people.

What happens in business, possibly more than we care to admit, is the ‘Gut feeling’ becomes the action of purpose.  As described by Powermaps.net (edited), the ‘why of movement’ is eliminated from the decision process.

History and life have taught us that this method works individually, but when it’s applied to a group action, the consequences are roughly as successful as reading tea leaves.  This because decisions that are ‘Gut feelings’ are based objectively on purpose.

For anything larger than an individual, this causes disorientation.  Leadership should position the business and the people for movement, expecting some result.  What they end up doing with gut feeling is expressing the purpose and then wonder why the action was not well executed. 

It takes planning, understanding the climate (which includes things like financial, business, technological, etc).  It takes planning, understanding WHAT movement causes WHAT result.  And that "WHAT result" is so very important in determining your effectiveness...

On twitter, I jokingly said that if Simon had drawn this OODA slightly differently, the effect would have exemplified the traumatic result of gut feeling on strategy, as a cute emoticon that would have further exemplified the poor results of the ‘gut feel’ action.  Here’s what I was thinking….


* https://twitter.com/JeffGrigg1/status/1177551001261359104, brings up the lack of software attributes in simple gps vs integrated navigation software and the execution of α in modern systems. (edited)

Monday, November 21, 2016

Diminution of the Enterprise Data Center

Where the Public Cloud is extremely accepting of what IDC calls the 3rd Platform of application delivery (Digital / Web Applications), the 2nd Platform (Client Server) and 1st Platform (Centralized Mainframe/Minicomputer) do not always fair well in that same operating space.

As the fixed cost of the Enterprise Data Center is liquidated across an ever shrinking volume of 2nd and 1st Platform applications, CIOs need to look at the means to revitalize this application area or at the very least consider options for lower the cost of delivery.

In this space, transformation of the application and reduction of the associated technical debt of the application can be considered.  Where this is not possible, or unpalatable to the business for financial or strategic reasons, the locality of execution is the next logical place to look for better cost of delivery.

Figure 1.  Data Center CapEx vs OpEx
Workloads not able to move to Public Cloud may be moved to a co-location provider for optimal cost of delivery.  Consider also that the liquidated cost of the Enterprise Data Center per workload-month is expected to grow as more workloads move to the Public Cloud.

Financially, Co-Location results in a flat cost per unit of delivery, similar to Utility.  The monthly cost can be associated directly with the cost of doing business, even down to the individual applications being hosted.  The business can start to eliminate the CapEx cost of the Enterprise Data Center as well as future upgrades required for the facility.  Not an insignificant burden to the business.

The means to do this is well within reach of modern Network providers.  Telecommunications vendors are offering SD-WAN, WAN Switching, L2 Tunneling and other mechanisms for creating the next generation of connections to service the move to the OpEx Data Center.

With an average savings over Enterprise Data Center in the neighborhood of 30% per workload-month, the effect to the business by flattening the gap becomes significant.

Why?  http://www.abusedbits.com/2016/11/why-public-cloud-wins-workload-love.html 


Part 1:  There is a shift afoot, that is changing the business.
     http://www.abusedbits.com/2016/11/public-cloud-echo-in-data-center.html

Part 2: Moving time for the Enterprise Data Center?
     http://www.abusedbits.com/2016/11/diminution-of-enterprise-data-center.html

Part 3: The Enterprise Data Center is getting smaller.  Time to add that to the roadmap.
     http://www.abusedbits.com/2016/11/smallering-of-enterprise-data-center.html