IT Decision Maker

Blog archive

Clearing the Cloud Part 1: Embrace or Die

I think it's a good time for IT Decision Makers to face some stark realities. This "cloud" thing is creeping up on us, and many analysts claim that 2012 will be the year that cloud computing and cloud services really take off. That means, like it or not, you're going to be dealing with something "in the cloud," if you're not already. What's that mean?

Within a couple of years, every single business with more than a couple of employees will, in some fashion, be using "the cloud." Whatever "the cloud" means. Smaller businesses will likely be using cloud-based e-mail services like Gmail or Office 365; many are already beginning to do so. Some businesses will get their cloud-based services -- like e-mail and collaboration -- from a Managed Service Provider (MSP), whose datacenter can now officially be called a "cloud." Even massive enterprises with huge infrastructure investments will, in some way or another, be using something from "the cloud," even if that's nothing more than the cloud-based Web site analytics called "Google Analytics."

I'm seeing an awful lot of IT professionals beginning to live in Cloud Denial. They've spent years honing their skills as Exchange admins, SharePoint admins, SQL Server admins and so forth, and they're full of reasons why this "cloud thing" shouldn't be used in their environments. In some cases, they're correct: For some businesses, certain functions should be in-sourced and not out-sourced. That reason, however, should never revolve around an IT person who fears their job will go away. The decision to in-source or out-source a given service or function should be a 100 percent business-related decision, based upon costs, benefit, control, security, and more.

I recently got an e-mail from a fellow who had recently lost his job as an Exchange administrator. His company had been using Exchange Server 2003 (!!!), and when faced with the costs of upgrading to 2010 -- new servers, new software, new training, new architecture and more -- decided it was easier and more financially efficient to outsource its 5,000 mailboxes to someone else. It still had a degree of administration, such as mailbox adds/changes/deletes, that need to be done, and so it retained the portion of the Exchange admin staff that was needed to perform those tasks. My correspondent, however, had been in denial about the coming of the cloud, and didn't have up-to-date skills (or an interest in obtaining them, from what I could read). So he was let go.

It's unfortunately, but it's going to happen. There may be a zillion legitimate reasons why your company can't outsource some particular function to the cloud, and you should be prepared to make that argument in business terminology. You should absolutely help your company do the right thing. However, you should also be prepared for the "right thing" to include outsourcing, and make sure you're positioned to still have a job if that happens. Frankly, I think it's only practical to also assume that your organization might outsource something even if it's the wrong decision. Companies do make bad decisions, after all, often when looking only at short-term goals. That being the case, make sure you're well-positioned to be retained even if your company does make a bad decision about outsourcing. Don't just fight the tide – be prepared to swim with it.

In case you missed it:

Posted by Don Jones on 02/06/2012 at 1:14 PM


comments powered by Disqus

Reader Comments:

Tue, Mar 27, 2012 John Canberra Australia

"Don't just fight the tide – be prepared to swim with it."? But what happens if the tide is taking you out to sea or towards sharks (read IT salespeople)? The large organisations pushing the move to the cloud are sometimes the same organisations that are currently harvesting our personal information (sometimes using dodgy applications currently being challenged in court) and also extrapolating it without our permission. Are you really suggesting we simply give them charge of all of our data? You have got to be kidding.

Tue, Feb 14, 2012

This author is the most negative toned blogger I've run across.

Mon, Feb 6, 2012 John Howard Greenwood SC

I live in Greenwood SC, in the past three years I have seen this entire town go, 24 hours 2 times with no internet. No internet because the fiber was cut. Do you hear THE fiber, as in the one and only fiber. I know that means multiple strands, but still. I do not beleive the backbone exists for the dependency that is needed to truly take advantage of "The Cloud", or Services on Demand, or Pay to play, or whatever they want to call it now. I agree somethings are good in the cloud but that means same service, same reliability but cheaper. If the cloud service can not be all three than I don't think it is a good decision. Most cloud services fail on all three, however business size, type, and model plays a lot into it. Most poor decision in IT are made because someone tries to use the wrong tool, I see the cloud as a useful tool, but it should not be used for everything.

Add Your Comment Now:

Your Name:(optional)
Your Email:(optional)
Your Location:(optional)
Comment:
Please type the letters/numbers you see above

Redmond Tech Watch

Sign up for our newsletter.

I agree to this site's Privacy Policy.