There will be rewarding careers in IT for many years to come, but we need to be flexible and understand where the new opportunities will be.
Last week I took a pessimistic view of IT, wondering whether the IT careers that we take for granted are over.
The two things that worry me are the rise of outsourcing, and the trends towards packages and everything-as-a-service. To what extent does this leave rewarding careers in IT, especially in end user organisations, especially in relatively rich countries like the UK?
Outsourcing is attractive because it allows you to benefit from the economies of scale of the service provider, giving lower cost, access to greater skills and more flexible resourcing. However, this comes at the cost of greater distance from business. There will always be a role for specialists close to business who understand how to apply IT, and who can respond quickly to changing requirements. There is no benefit in outsourcing this business knowledge.
The trend away from bespoke software to packages and software-as-a-service will continue up to a point, and on-demand applications will be commonplace. However, there will still be situations unique to each organisation that will require local knowledge and local development (though this may be on an on-demand platform).
As hardware and network infrastructure becomes cheaper and easier, there is actually less of a case for outsourcing because doing it yourself is also cheaper and easier. Cost and control issues will still make it worthwhile for large companies to run their own IT, as they do for many non-IT services.
Business change will continue. Although large IT departments are often a casualty of mergers, IT is vital during the change process. As businesses merge, new businesses start up. We have more to gain from business change than most.
Technical change will continue, and we will be required to navigate businesses through it. As more services are provided on-demand, there will be many technical challenges to keep us busy.
All this suggests that there will be rewarding careers in IT for many years to come. Some things will change forever. Large companies used to have armies of in-house development staff and IT operations staff. Those jobs have gone or moved, as have the management jobs that they supported. However, if you take those jobs away, there are many jobs left, and many new jobs.
There will still be service providers and technology companies. They may shift some work to areas of lower cost, but they will still desperately need people with local contacts and business knowledge.
There will still be infrastructure and operations jobs, both in end user organisations and service providers. Some jobs, such as virtualization specialists, will be in greater demand as we shift to new delivery approaches.
Within end user organisations, there will still be a role for analysts who understand how business works, and new roles managing the relationships between the organisation and their service providers.
IT has for may years been a tool for business change and efficiency, and we could be accused of profiting at the expense of others. Now it is our turn to be more flexible and to understand the new opportunities rather than dwell on the past.
© Copyright 2010 Minimal IT Ltd. See the Minimal IT website for the original newsletter and copyright information.
Tuesday, 26 October 2010
Tuesday, 19 October 2010
Twilight of the technologists
Will IT jobs as we know them cease to exist?
Here in the UK, autumn is in full swing. We like to fool ourselves that we will have some more warm sunny days, but really we know that winter is on its way.
Probably because of this, I find myself worrying about the future, particularly the future of our chosen profession as information technologists.
Two things worry me.
The first is outsourcing. In theory, there should be nothing to worry about outsourcing. If jobs move to service companies, then the people can move too.
But it is not that simple. The reason service companies can provide services more cheaply is that they have economies of scale, and that means doing the same work with fewer people.
Outsourcing to other countries is another worry. I think it is good, both economically and morally, that work flows to parts of the world where labour costs are lower. But in relatively rich countries like the UK, on a personal level, it is concerning to see so many jobs move elsewhere.
The second thing that worries me is that we are finally seeing some of the promised efficiencies of IT, in the form of packaged software and everything-as-a-service. Although these have been around in some form for many years, they are now taking hold. Twenty years ago large organisations would write their own software as a matter of course. Now that is a rarity. Now you really can rent your infrastructure, or your applications, for a monthly fee. All this efficiency means fewer jobs.
Business continues to change, and IT is often a casualty. I live about 50 miles North West of London, where local IT jobs have been dominated by large retail groups and banks. Aggressive outsourcing and mergers have taken their toll. Many, perhaps most, of the IT professionals I know locally have experienced redundancy, and a large number of these still have not found permanent positions elsewhere.
On top of these general industry trends, the political and economic situation is difficult here in the UK. The reduction in public spending, which personally I think is long overdue, will reduce the lucrative public sector contracts that many of us (me included) have benefited from.
All this paints a bleak picture for IT. There do not seem to be as many IT jobs as there were, particularly in end user organisations, and we do not enjoy the sort of rarity premium that we used to. There is still a lot of IT work within service providers, but if you have been working in an end user organisation for some years you may find you have not got the technical and business skills they demand. The income expectations and career security we used to take for granted have gone.
Has IT had its day?
I don't think it has. Things will change, and I do not think we will go back to what we used to have. But I think there will still be rewarding careers. Next week, I will look forward a few years to where I think these trends will take us, and how we, as information technologists, will fit into that picture.
© Copyright 2010 Minimal IT Ltd. See the Minimal IT website for the original newsletter and copyright information.
Here in the UK, autumn is in full swing. We like to fool ourselves that we will have some more warm sunny days, but really we know that winter is on its way.
Probably because of this, I find myself worrying about the future, particularly the future of our chosen profession as information technologists.
Two things worry me.
The first is outsourcing. In theory, there should be nothing to worry about outsourcing. If jobs move to service companies, then the people can move too.
But it is not that simple. The reason service companies can provide services more cheaply is that they have economies of scale, and that means doing the same work with fewer people.
Outsourcing to other countries is another worry. I think it is good, both economically and morally, that work flows to parts of the world where labour costs are lower. But in relatively rich countries like the UK, on a personal level, it is concerning to see so many jobs move elsewhere.
The second thing that worries me is that we are finally seeing some of the promised efficiencies of IT, in the form of packaged software and everything-as-a-service. Although these have been around in some form for many years, they are now taking hold. Twenty years ago large organisations would write their own software as a matter of course. Now that is a rarity. Now you really can rent your infrastructure, or your applications, for a monthly fee. All this efficiency means fewer jobs.
Business continues to change, and IT is often a casualty. I live about 50 miles North West of London, where local IT jobs have been dominated by large retail groups and banks. Aggressive outsourcing and mergers have taken their toll. Many, perhaps most, of the IT professionals I know locally have experienced redundancy, and a large number of these still have not found permanent positions elsewhere.
On top of these general industry trends, the political and economic situation is difficult here in the UK. The reduction in public spending, which personally I think is long overdue, will reduce the lucrative public sector contracts that many of us (me included) have benefited from.
All this paints a bleak picture for IT. There do not seem to be as many IT jobs as there were, particularly in end user organisations, and we do not enjoy the sort of rarity premium that we used to. There is still a lot of IT work within service providers, but if you have been working in an end user organisation for some years you may find you have not got the technical and business skills they demand. The income expectations and career security we used to take for granted have gone.
Has IT had its day?
I don't think it has. Things will change, and I do not think we will go back to what we used to have. But I think there will still be rewarding careers. Next week, I will look forward a few years to where I think these trends will take us, and how we, as information technologists, will fit into that picture.
© Copyright 2010 Minimal IT Ltd. See the Minimal IT website for the original newsletter and copyright information.
Tuesday, 12 October 2010
Knowing when to change
One of the big challenges for the long-term management of systems is deciding when to adopt new technologies.
If you want systems to be long-lived, you need to pick technologies that are technically and commercially viable. You need to use technologies in a standard way, to make sure that you keep on the upgrade path and that you can swap to other technologies if suppliers fail.
You also need to make sure that the original technology decisions are respected. There will be a constant pressure to adopt this or that new technology. Adding a component that then fails technically or commercially can undermine the entire system and force expensive redevelopment.
However, if you defend your original decisions too enthusiastically, you might not adopt new technologies when you should. You might condemn your system to premature death.
We faced this problem with our Metrici Advisor software. Because it is the basis of our business, we have to make sure that is is long-lived. Also, since Metrici Advisor helps people manage their systems for the long term, we have to show that we know what we are doing.
When we started development in 2005 we made some choices. The system is Java based, running in Apache Tomcat. We use the MySQL database, but do not use any non-standard features. The web pages use only standard HTML and CSS.
We decided not to use any JavaScript on the web pages. JavaScript is easy to get wrong, particularly with the browsers of five years ago. There were no generally accepted frameworks or standards for JavaScript. It was a skill that we did not have. Using JavaScript would have undermined our attempts to make the application simple and standard. Rightly or wrongly, we decided that our system would be better without it.
Over the past five years, I have defended the absence of JavaScript. During that time, though, web applications have improved, and ours now seems rather clunky. We lack the visual effects, gadgetry and dynamism that people now expect. We risk falling behind.
Over the same period, JavaScript has evolved. A lot of JavaScript is now developed using the jQuery library, which is becoming a de facto standard. Without going into the details, jQuery provides a much easier and more standard way of using JavaScript to add visual effects, gadgetry and dynamism without disrupting the overall design. It overcomes many of our original objections to JavaScript.
We have therefore decided that the time is right to adopt JavaScript and jQuery.
Was I wrong to defend our original decisions for so long? That is a difficult question. We could have adopted jQuery a couple of years ago, but if we had not defended our original decision robustly, we would have been just as likely to have picked a different library or developed our own framework, which would have left the system in a mess.
Managing systems to be long-lived is hard. You have to defend the system from the vagaries of fashion, and you have to disappoint constantly those who want you to adopt the latest and greatest technology. Conversely, you must adopt new technology when the time is right. It is a difficult balancing act.
© Copyright 2010 Minimal IT Ltd. See the Minimal IT website for the original newsletter and copyright information.
If you want systems to be long-lived, you need to pick technologies that are technically and commercially viable. You need to use technologies in a standard way, to make sure that you keep on the upgrade path and that you can swap to other technologies if suppliers fail.
You also need to make sure that the original technology decisions are respected. There will be a constant pressure to adopt this or that new technology. Adding a component that then fails technically or commercially can undermine the entire system and force expensive redevelopment.
However, if you defend your original decisions too enthusiastically, you might not adopt new technologies when you should. You might condemn your system to premature death.
We faced this problem with our Metrici Advisor software. Because it is the basis of our business, we have to make sure that is is long-lived. Also, since Metrici Advisor helps people manage their systems for the long term, we have to show that we know what we are doing.
When we started development in 2005 we made some choices. The system is Java based, running in Apache Tomcat. We use the MySQL database, but do not use any non-standard features. The web pages use only standard HTML and CSS.
We decided not to use any JavaScript on the web pages. JavaScript is easy to get wrong, particularly with the browsers of five years ago. There were no generally accepted frameworks or standards for JavaScript. It was a skill that we did not have. Using JavaScript would have undermined our attempts to make the application simple and standard. Rightly or wrongly, we decided that our system would be better without it.
Over the past five years, I have defended the absence of JavaScript. During that time, though, web applications have improved, and ours now seems rather clunky. We lack the visual effects, gadgetry and dynamism that people now expect. We risk falling behind.
Over the same period, JavaScript has evolved. A lot of JavaScript is now developed using the jQuery library, which is becoming a de facto standard. Without going into the details, jQuery provides a much easier and more standard way of using JavaScript to add visual effects, gadgetry and dynamism without disrupting the overall design. It overcomes many of our original objections to JavaScript.
We have therefore decided that the time is right to adopt JavaScript and jQuery.
Was I wrong to defend our original decisions for so long? That is a difficult question. We could have adopted jQuery a couple of years ago, but if we had not defended our original decision robustly, we would have been just as likely to have picked a different library or developed our own framework, which would have left the system in a mess.
Managing systems to be long-lived is hard. You have to defend the system from the vagaries of fashion, and you have to disappoint constantly those who want you to adopt the latest and greatest technology. Conversely, you must adopt new technology when the time is right. It is a difficult balancing act.
© Copyright 2010 Minimal IT Ltd. See the Minimal IT website for the original newsletter and copyright information.
Tuesday, 5 October 2010
Aristotle and project management
The Greek philosopher Aristotle (384-322 BC) has been one of the major contributors to the development of Western thinking, covering areas as diverse as logic, biology, philosophy and IT project management.
Yes, that's right. Aristotle was an expert on IT project management, or would have been if IT had been invented then.
Aristotle's great contribution to project management was to explain causality, the reasons why things come about.
Aristotle explained that every thing can have four causes:
You can use it to check whether your project is properly balanced.
In IT, we tend to stick to what we know. For many IT projects, we know the technology and design, and can cope with the development and project management. We are good at bringing the first three causes together. However, we often forget the final cause. We have a rather sketchy idea of how the solution will deliver business value. But without the final cause, the project is purposeless.
You can use this approach to build better teams, to make sure that you have the right balance of skills. Each of us has preferences. My order of preference is formal, material, final and then efficient. I like design, I can cope with technology, I am interested in business value, but I do not find day-to-day project management particularly engaging. If I am on a team, I like to work with good project managers and with people who are good at capturing and analysing business needs.
You can also use this approach to assess existing IT systems. You can consider the technology (material cause), design (formal cause), the human and system process flows (efficient cause) and then the value that it brings (final cause). From my experience of assessing IT systems, many people can articulate the material causes of their IT, but have only a sketchy idea of the other three.
Although it is not a detailed analysis, Aristotle's four causes is a useful reminder that IT is not simply about technology or design or process or value, but the skilful combination of all of these.
© Copyright 2010 Minimal IT Ltd. See the Minimal IT website for the original newsletter and copyright information.
Yes, that's right. Aristotle was an expert on IT project management, or would have been if IT had been invented then.
Aristotle's great contribution to project management was to explain causality, the reasons why things come about.
Aristotle explained that every thing can have four causes:
- Material cause. This describes the parts or materials that make up the thing.
- Formal cause. This describes the pattern of the thing, the way that the parts are arranged and come together.
- Efficient cause. This describes the tasks and skills that are used to create the thing.
- Final cause. This describes the purpose or aim of the thing.
- Material cause. This is the hardware, software, equipment and components that must be combined to produce the solution.
- Formal cause. This is the architecture or design of the solution.
- Efficient cause. This is the project management and development activities that must be applied to build the solution.
- Final cause. This is the business purpose, value and requirements that the solution must meet.
You can use it to check whether your project is properly balanced.
In IT, we tend to stick to what we know. For many IT projects, we know the technology and design, and can cope with the development and project management. We are good at bringing the first three causes together. However, we often forget the final cause. We have a rather sketchy idea of how the solution will deliver business value. But without the final cause, the project is purposeless.
You can use this approach to build better teams, to make sure that you have the right balance of skills. Each of us has preferences. My order of preference is formal, material, final and then efficient. I like design, I can cope with technology, I am interested in business value, but I do not find day-to-day project management particularly engaging. If I am on a team, I like to work with good project managers and with people who are good at capturing and analysing business needs.
You can also use this approach to assess existing IT systems. You can consider the technology (material cause), design (formal cause), the human and system process flows (efficient cause) and then the value that it brings (final cause). From my experience of assessing IT systems, many people can articulate the material causes of their IT, but have only a sketchy idea of the other three.
Although it is not a detailed analysis, Aristotle's four causes is a useful reminder that IT is not simply about technology or design or process or value, but the skilful combination of all of these.
© Copyright 2010 Minimal IT Ltd. See the Minimal IT website for the original newsletter and copyright information.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)