thecapacity

Working as an Enterprise Architect, you will frequently hear how technology must support a business need. It’s a cliché, yet accurate, reminder that technologists often deploy something that doesn’t best satisfy the problem.

Although play and creativity has a place, even in business, no IT environment can long survive without supplying the business with the means to meet its objectives. There is surly no better route to bankruptcy then wasting time and money, which is what happens when IT divorces itself from the business.

However, often overlooked is the reciprocal need for the business to support IT.

This doesn’t happen when a CIO or CTO is relegated to the back office and denied a seat at the executive table and the effects are more insidious though no less disastrous in the end. Or imagine being asked to run a massive IT department with the wrong skills, or responding to a mandate for change without the ability to make the proper investments.

For any organization to succeed it’s important to realize that all offices must be imbued with the same driving passion and resources for success.

Working at a large technology company I’m familiar with the “graying” of IT. While often public perspective on “technology” is skewed by the Kevin Rose’s of the world in enterprise situations it’s often much different.

It’s not uncommon to start a job as the only “new hire” around, surrounded by people who’ve been working in their respective fields for 20-30 years. It’s an intimidating position to be in, necessitating a certain type of individual, and I’ve seen many people make that transition (or transition out).

I’ve heard that you can live a thousand lifetimes through books, but I’ve lived at least that many years through the stories of my colleagues. My first officemate could disassemble HEX in his head faster then I could look up mnemonics and I’ve learned about life, as well as IT, from him and many since.

The phrase “There’s a lot of history here” has a particular place in my field and those who don’t learn from the history of others are doomed to repeat it.

However, I have felt at times that the “oldsters” could afford to let some of us “young’ens” have a chance. I don’t mean to imply they should “step aside”, simply provide better opportunities for “us” to learn and try. Learning involves making mistakes but often there’s not enough of a “penalty free” environment in day to day office politics. Slate has a business perspective on this situation though their view of age-ism is the inverse of mine.

I sometimes worry we’re creating a void, where those “too young” won’t be qualified (i.e. have the same opportunities and experience of their predecessors) to take over from those who will be retired in 5-10 years. I think the rise of the “still going” businessperson is probably one of the factors driving the shifts in innovation and entrepreneurship we’re seeing today.

A few weeks ago, during dinner, I expressed this feeling to a colleague who’s been in the business a long time, predominantly on the sales side. What I got was one of those tidbits of history and insight that makes me appreciate the wisdom of the years. He looked at me and in effect said “you’ll be fine” but what convinced me the most was what he said next;

We’ve had some rough years and back when it got really rough and all the talent had left, they threw us green guys out in the field. And you know what? You learn, you learn real fast.

Sink or swim, trial by fire… sometimes I wish life didn’t have to be so binary, but the reminder that no true opportunity can every really be cushioned is priceless.

Just a quick post, but I’m in a meeting and we’ve spent over an hour discussion how Team A needs information about Team B’s usage numbers, i.e. how many hours they’ve worked and for whom.

As an engineer it seems straightforward, but if we have our business glasses on (or sometimes called reality) we learn that Team B is using a tool that’s going end of life. I also suspect that it’s a SWAG metric that Team B’s been using for an order of magnitude estimate and they know that Team A is going to be using it as gospel!

So that seems like enough ambiguity with maybe 20-30 minutes of circular discussions, but because of the vacuity what happens is that we enter a downward spiral of “what if”, “why”, “why not”, “what are we going to do”, “who should do what” and this is multiplied many times over by multiple people inserting their own viewpoint of a facet.

Take a breath, take a break and take note;

If you don’t have a hard answer for something then write it down! Make a note to tell people you’ll investigate it and get back to them.

The most important thing you can do is Move On!

Don’t loose the battle of progress because of a single nail!

PS. I’m also sure I could use this experience to make a great case on how continuous partial attention enforces a marginalized standard of excellence. Of course I could also point out that at least I got a blog post written!

This past weekend I had the privilege of watching my wife run a marathon. This makes the third one we’ve done, and while the first two were a little overwhelming I feel like this time we “knew what we were doing”.

If you ever get a chance to go watch a marathon do it! Don’t make an excuse, if it’s cold bundle up, take a thermos and go, because I doubt you’ll find any event more inspiring. As children we have a constant sense of wonder and our social nature makes even ordinary things like kickball inspirational dramas, but as adults I find we often have to reacquaint ourselves with this intensity.

Even if you feel running a marathon is beyond you, everyone can spectate, and trust me this is spectating at it’s finest. As runners approach many have names on their shirts and watching their effort gives you something to cheer about.

Almost constantly your cheering is acknowledged and many times I’ve been told “Thank you, it helps”. As my friend said during our first race; “They need us!” and I challenge you to find another venue with as lower barrier to participation, where so many people need you so much.

After such a fun and intense weekend it was a challenge to go back to work these few days before our U.S . holiday and see such a blatant lack of intensity. In a race, the conclusion is such a singular result, yet passion and support abounds. One would expect a similar attitude in business with so much “on the line” for so many.

Yet often, the only passion we see in business is the drive to get ahead or “to win”. In a marathon, with time such a singular indication of “success”, I’ve watched runners “loose time” helping one another. Whether it’s a moment after a fall or running the entire course at a slower pace there’s a sense of “community accomplishment” in running that’s absent in business.

In business “We get what we reward” or so the saying goes. Yet in a marathon, with no real reward for a faster race or for helping someone out, we witness the type of behavior I believe we all should drive for.

Perhaps it’s an intrinsic motivation that we can not teach of cultivate in our workforce, but even if that’s so I believe it’s something we must all strive to represent. It’s a level of constant neivity that hearkens back to our childhood. It’s the attitude embodied in the opensource movement, both by code and by open knowledge.

I hope a generation of success, fostered by that open spirit, will teach us we can all run the marathon of business knowing someone will be there to pick us up if we fall and pace us without guilt, and all with thousands of fans cheering their guts out.

Again, Adam from Monk at Work raises our awareness that no one walks alone. I believe one of the pervasive “myths” of the “man month” is the attitude that tasks can be reduced to an individual unit.

Nowhere in business does someone operate as an individual, or rather I suppose we operate as individuals but never without the impact from, and in turn impacting, others.

I have been both a technical resource and a project manager and the assumptions of a “heroic soloist” seem inescapable in the workforce. Management tends to expect planning and declaration to resolve all action. There seems to be strong trends to manage by spreadsheet and remain disconnected from the perpetual interactions of employees.

I believe the explicit and overt embrace of the social is what makes the opensource momentum so powerful. Contributors exhibit a tendency to “let it all hang out” and because of the nature of most distributed opensource projects i.e. digital interactions, there’s a perpetual self documenting ecosystem of those interactions.

Its a collection of belief and behaviors I’ve attempted to represent and embody as I contribute in my corporate career. However, it often works in direct contrast to traditional behaviors. Sometimes disappointing, often frustrating it can be hard to believe in the path.

However, I’m fortunate to work with peers who share the expectations of open collaboration and ignore the artificial boundaries of convention. Adam seems to be another such soul and I hope his work in the enterprise continues to spread the message.

Monk at work has another great post about the CrossFit motto; “General Physical Preparedness”. It’s a style of physical training that Adam relates to work, and continual improvement. Something he terms “General Work Preparedness” with admonishment to “Generalize, not specialize” because “specialization has its price”.
I think it’s similar to a discussion I had with a college of mine regarding the difference between “specialists” and “generalists”. Even though I’m not a fan of the terms, when I saw the graphic it was actually inspiring to me.

In my work we have “IT Architects” and “IT Specialists” and it’s tempting to equate Architect to Generalist and draw a similar connection for Specialist. However, I think that’s more a fallacy enforced by English rather then a realistic comparison.

It seems entirely realistic to be that there might be someone who specializes in Linux but who can architect a complex multi-platform solution. Or if that seems too contrived consider an architect who’s entire world has been the mainframe.

A better conclusion from this discussion, but by no means the end of the discussion, would be to consider the different approaches that a Generalist and Specialist bring toward problem solving, and not the specific subject matter depth.

When you talk with a colleague do they speak in “high level” abstract concepts, or do they attempt to convey vagaries with with tangible, though perhaps not entirely accurate, examples. I believe a generalist approach tends to paint in broad brush strokes, where as specialists attempt to make things more tangible.

We all have strengths and affinities but as Adam says, “specialization” (in this case too much of one approach) has a price. I read somewhere today that successful entrepreneurs are individuals who can be both creative (sales, marketing, innovation, design…) and disciplined (operations, finance, paying bills, …).

Maybe one of those behaviors comes more readily then the other and maybe you don’t aspire to run your own business, but you must still represent this personal growth in your career.

So what are you training for in your career? Currently in my life I can design, implement and manage IT Infrastructure. Just like with GPP I don’t know what I’ll need those skills for but if I need them at least I know I won’t throw out my back.