Recently in Federation Category

Yesterday was a big day for the myCMDB team. We launched our initial code drop for the myCMDB Early Evaluation Program. The team is eager to get some feedback from our participants.

Overall the launch has gone very well. We had very few problems with user account setup, DNS problems, or any other technical issues. In fact, we have been surprised (and pleased) by the number of people that are already using the application.

We are eating our own dog food for this program so we can easily monitor statistics and auditing of the system: we can watch as people login, logout, and perform other activities. This was vital to our program so that we can monitor usage accordingly as part of our feedback.

We also setup myMO -- our  Web-based portal framework -- as the front end web site for all communication to the participants of the myCMDB EEP program. The site contains an overview of the program, instructional movies, beta documentation, a Blog site, calendar of events and other cool stuff to provide an easy means of communication between the participants and the myCMDB team. Personally, as the project manager, I am interested in hearing feedback on both the product as well as the Early Evaluation Program in general.

So far, my favorite thing about this program has been watching the community feeds as people register CI’s, update attributes, join communities, etc. In fact, it looks like a bit of competition may be brewing between the participants to see who can register CI’s the fastest. Interesting thought for those wanting to foster usage and coverage with a CMDB.

- Adam

We’re thrilled to see the buzz gathering around our newest announcement - analysts and media alike seem to agree that we’ve added something new and noteworthy to the market. We think this kind of innovation is especially welcome in a market that has little confidence in those larger competitors.

With myCMDB, we’ve really unleashed the power of the CMDB by adding the community features that should logically be part of any project that requires the input from so many different people within an organization. Heck, using email and voicemail for CMDB communication is like using a rotary dial for a smartphone.

Instead, we’ve brought CMDB communications and process into the 21st century, by adding a combination of Facebook interactivity, Wikipedia information quality management, and Google’s searching model. Basically, these features make it easier to get more users involved in its creation and maintenance, which means the CMDB quickly becomes a more accurate representation of the infrastructure, relationships, and services. This allows organizations to use the CMDB to better control the impact of change and move it into a decision support role.

Stay tuned as the buzz continues to build!

The power and pitfalls of knowing every side of the story

As a manager, your company’s ability to execute effectively cannot and does not depend on your ability to scale your own execution across superhuman multiples.

Instead, it depends on two things – first, it requires a refined ability to assimilate data from a number of different sources to formulate an accurate and complete picture of the business as it stands today – and then, leveraging that picture to formulate a clear and concise blueprint and course of action for where the business needs to be in the future.

Secondly, it depends upon your ability to gain buy-in and participation across a number of different constituents – both within your team and across the company.

The challenge of building a blueprint, gaining buy-in, and then orchestrating work across a broad spectrum of resources, is what business management excellence is all about.

Interestingly, there are a number of similarities between effective business management and effective IT management – particularly, as it relates to the CMDB. From data assimilation, to blueprint, to plan of action – the CMDB provides a central focal point -- an accurate and complete view of the IT infrastructure.

And yet, CMDB data inaccuracy is the number one cause for CMDB project failures -- followed closely by a lack of broad adoption of the CMDB across a broad set of constituents within both IT and the business.

Going forward, the CMDB must be an absolutely accurate, trusted source of IT infrastructure information. In addition, the CMDB must be widely accepted and adopted across a broad set of IT and business users within the enterprise. IT organizations will each need to address both of these challenges for CMDB projects to be successful over the long-haul.

Don’t think Managed Objects hasn’t noticed.

-- Siki

In many ways technologists are fighting for the same ideals – just on different levels. The single source of truth is one of those ideals and I find it fascinating to know that other members of the IT community are tacking a similar problem in parallel. Consider the following:

ERP: CEOs look to enterprise resource planning software to provide a single version of the truth with regard to a company’s finances. According to CIO.com, “Finance has its own set of revenue numbers, sales has another version, and the different business units may each have their own version of how much they contributed to revenues. ERP creates a single version of the truth that cannot be questioned because everyone is using the same system.”

MDM: A March 2008 report from Gartner describes how master data management “can help enterprises achieve a single view of the product.” For example, a consumer goods manufacturer that produces wigits in different countries tends to maintain different versions of the same product specification data for governmental or regulatory reporting requirements. Over time the quality of these different versions changes or erodes leaving the business with multiple versions of the truth.

CMDB: Many IT departments have embarked on configuration management system (CMS) projects to synchronize and reconcile multiple federated data sources from performance, asset and system management tools. To provide a single source of truth about the health, availability and quality of the service provided to the business.

As a BSM vendor, my experience with CMDB customers tells me that the most suitable approach for this type of project it to leverage data directly from the trusted sources through integration, rather than attempting to copy, duplicate or otherwise centralize the data with methods such as ETL. In other words, build a centralized view, not a centralize repository, which of course is a key reason why calling it a configuration management system is more appropriate than calling it a configuration management database.

Still the fact that other areas of IT are seeking to find solutions to the similar challenges is interesting – and we’ll be on the look out for best practices. It’s also reminiscent of the idea that those who don’t read history are bound to repeat it.

- Jim

In 2001, when the tech bubble burst, I had just graduated with a Computer Science degree, and was looking for work. To say that things weren’t exactly peachy back then is an understatement. Luckily for me I happened on an interview with a company that was privately funded and which understood that in times of recession some excess fat needs to be trimmed – but not the muscle that drives a company. That company went on to produce very strong results less than a year later due to a superior product – a direct result of continuing to invest in hiring exceptional talent while avoiding the overindulgent tendencies of richer times.

Unfortunately in times of economic uncertainty such wisdom is uncommon. With all the recent talk about a recession being around the corner there is a lot of fear in the tech industry, especially among startups which are struggling to compete with new attractants for venture capital such as the likes of alternative energy exploration. The problem with this approach is that when the economy slows or stalls, some corporations think only of near-term. This usually leads to cost cutting across the board, but most prevalently in initiatives such as technology, software and IT staff that are not perceived as necessarily contributing directly to the bottom line.

This is a mistake for the simple reason that these cuts inevitably lead to a less motivated workforce that finds it self stretched beyond its means as a result of trying to maintain the same level of service, less budget and therefore with less tools and less people.

Technology is a key driver of business these days, so dramatically cutting IT budgets can actually cost more in the long-term than the benefit of savings achieved in the short-term. This long term loss manifests itself in many ways, but most immediately in the loss of knowledgeable IT staff and the shaky infrastructure that accompanies a departure from IT maintenance.

This takes us back to the title of this post. In times of financial uncertainty it is necessary to tighten belts and trim some fat off an organization. This can be achieved by cutting back on unnecessary items like kickoff meetings in exotic locations, business class travel when coach suffices and so on. But to trim the muscle that drives an organization by failing to maintain infrastructure and letting go qualified staff that will only need to be rehired and retrained once the economy turns around is a long term mistake.

If we have learned anything from the first tech bubble, it is that these are the times to consider projects like automation, integration and federation, as some of the highest costs of running an IT reliant company are in the high levels of obsolescence that accompany the good times. Corporations need to use a slowdown in the economy to their advantage and build a stronger, more resilient, infrastructure that will help them overtake the competition when the economy turns around.

-- Jonathan