Skip to main content

It's Easier to Fail at DevOps than it is to Succeed

Slippery when wet
Since the term DevOps was coined in Belgium back in 2009, it is impossible to avoid the term whether in discussions with colleagues or in professional trade magazines.  And during the years while this movement has gained momentum, many things have been written to describe what elements of a DevOps strategy are required for it to be successful.

Yet in spite of this, there is an interesting data point worth noting: not many organizations feel there is a need for DevOps.  In a Gartner report entitled DevOps Adoption Survey Results (published in September 2015), 40% of respondents said they had no plans to implement DevOps and 31% of respondents said they hadn't implemented it but planned to start in the 12 months after the survey was conducted.

That left only 29% who had implemented DevOps in a pilot project or in production systems, which isn't a lot.

"Maybe it's because there truly isn't a need for DevOps," you say.  While that may have been true if DevOps were around in the beginning of last decade, the consumerization of IT and other types of "instant gratification" technology advances would dictate otherwise.  In fact, in a 2014 presentation entitled CEO Resolutions for 2014 — Time to Act on Digital Business, Gartner analyst Mark Raskino told a group of CxOs in various industries that (paraphrased) they need to either constantly innovate, or they will rapidly become irrelevant.  All it takes is one stumble to be overtaken by their competitors who recognize the need to think like a technology company whether or not they are one.

Let's drill down a bit.  Even though DevOps means far more than application release processes, Agile development methodologies have changed the landscape of software development such that the promote and release functions are now often the bottleneck.  It is here that automation can have the biggest impact, yet many organizations haven't addressed this to its fullest extent.  In a report by IDG Research entitled Market Pulse Research: The State of DevOps (published in August 2013), 36% of respondents said that their release processes were completely manual and 53% said they were only partially automated.  The kicker is that they all recognized that automated application release is a key enabler to the successful implementation of a DevOps strategy.

What is the real problem here?  It would seem that many organizations are looking for ways to successful achieve the nirvana of DevOps when they should instead focus on how to avoid failure.  They are charging forward without protecting the flanks, and as a result they are getting hamstrung.

What are some of the reasons why DevOps can fail to take hold?  While there is hardly the same quantity on the pitfalls to avoid as there is on what it takes to be successful, Cognizant published a great whitepaper containing six key things to watch out for when embarking on your DevOps journey.  These items are on pages 2 and 3, and are a "must read" even if you're already immersed in implementing DevOps at your organization.  Another great article published in Computer Weekly discusses the business and technology challenges when implementing DevOps.  From the article, "for enterprises entrenched in the old way of software development, adopting a DevOps style of working isn't going to be easy for CIOs without buy-in from the whole IT department."

I could not agree more.  Focusing on the goal is fine, but for something that requires such a huge shift in the way multiple departments work it needs to be recognized that there are many more ways to fail than there are to succeed.

Popular posts from this blog

"Ni jiang yi yang de hua ma?"

Last week, I wrote about the necessity of having a clear message . Because this topic is so important I decided to follow-up with another entry on this general subject. This week we will approach it from another angle. (For the curious, the title says " Do you speak the same language? " in pinyin, which is a transliterated Mandarin Chinese.) Recently, a good friend of mine (who is Chinese, ironically) and I were playing pool. He had to bank the 8-ball in the pocket to win the game, and since it was an informal game and bank shots are my area of expertise, he asked me for advice. I told him, "you just need to strike the cue ball with medium speed so that it hits the 8-ball right in the middle." He didn't believe me so we marked the positions of the balls, and then he took his shot only to watch the 8-ball sail past the pocket. "A-ha!" he exclaimed. "I told you it wasn't that easy." But when we reset the positions and I made an attemp

Is No/Low-Code the Key to IT Nirvana?

 Unless you've had your head in the sand for the past year or so, you've seen the phrases low-code  and no-code  bandied about quite frequently everywhere you look.  You've probably wondered if this is something new that's here to stay or just a "flash in the pan."  Although the terms have been in the fore of the IT trade publications recently, Low Code Development Platforms (LCDP) (and the corresponding No Code Development Platforms) have been in existence since 2011.  Their roots can be traced to the 90's with 4th generation programming languages and GUI-assisted programming paradigms, e.g. IBM VisualAge for Basic, which was discontinued in 1998. For those of you who aren't familiar with either, the premise is that these platforms allow someone to quickly build applications using a WYSIWYG interface and a "click and configure" paradigm to Isn't this the source code to Roblox? rapidly build full applications with little or no coding requ