As all areas of business move into digital technology, Ramesh Subramanian explains why the digital transformation requires infrastructure engineers to expand their software skills.
Several years ago I started my career as a C++ programmer but to be relevant as a software engineer today would require many more software engineering skills. The same logic holds for Infrastructure engineers.
About 94% of enterprises (and 50% of Governments) use some form of cloud (private/public) today. And as per an estimate from Forbes, 83% of workloads will be in the cloud by the end of this year. These stats imply that infrastructure teams should be ready to:
Meet expectations of faster release cycles, with several releases per day becoming the norm
Provide application access at scale (millions of concurrent sessions, potentially across the globe) with 24×7 availability
However, only 30% of all infrastructure teams are using DevOp. This is even lower at 12% for Financial Services firms.
Points covered in this article include:
- Business enabling applications
- Business critical applications
- Infrastructure team training
Read the full article, Why Infrastructure engineers should start thinking like software developers, on LinkedIn.
Jesse Jacoby shares a timeless post that explains how leaders can overcome overt and covert resistance to change.
In your role as a leader, you will likely encounter resistance to change at some point from one or more of your own team members. Resistance may come from a variety of sources:
- An individual with a difficult personality
- Someone anxious about impending change
- A person who disagrees with your vision
Resistance is usually demonstrated in one of four ways, each with the potential to create roadblocks for you:
- Lack of Communication – Leaving you out of the loop in terms of key information or not discussing issues openly
- Lack of Support – Foot-dragging on key initiatives you try to implement
- Counterproductive Criticism – Being overly critical of you and your ideas
- Passive Aggressive Behavior – Agreeing to do something, but then not doing anything
The steps to overcome resistance include:
- Being alert to the signs of resistance
- How to gain an understanding of the employee’s perspective
- Defining the positive behaviors you want to see, and be clear about your expectations
- What to do if the resistance becomes habitual
Read the full article, How Leaders Can Manage Team Member Change Resistance, on the Emergent Journal website.
This timeless post from Andy Sheppard identifies the strengths and weaknesses of the six most common approaches leaders adopt when instituting change.
A leader has many options when determining what can be improved in their organisation (or organisational unit). The options for determining how to mobilise their organisation to successfully deliver the improvements are more limited. This question of how to change is also often an afterthought: leaders can find themselves well down one of these paths without considering the relative strengths and weaknesses of alternative approaches. Yet without considering how to deliver improvements, even the best of ideas may remain as just ideas: ideas that can leave the majority of an organisation bruised, bewildered but otherwise little-changed. The hope of this article is therefore to broaden awareness of practical options, so that different delivery methods can be evaluated as to how well they promise to meet an organisation’s needs. I believe that any change programme should only be chosen after evaluating the potential impact of different combinations of what and how. Although aspects of different approaches can be blended, I would suggest that improvement initiatives commonly follow one of these six patterns:
The six approaches are:
- The squeeze
- The action list
- The change events
- The vision deployment
- The narrow and deep redesign
- The skills deployment
Read the full article, Six Patterns for Leading Change: Which Ones Do You Recognise?, on LinkedIn.
Jesse Jacoby identifies a few of the core issues that can arise when bringing a new manager into the workplace.
Good things are possible when new managerial blood is brought into an organization. For one thing, there are often fresh ideas. You know yourself how easy it is to get so close to something that you can’t see the forest for the trees. You can’t see a solution that’s obvious to someone from the outside. And, of course, if you don’t grow, then the status quo will feel normal. It will be the thing that you sub-consciously pursue. If you were asked point blank if this was your goal, then you’d deny it outright; nevertheless, it wouldn’t change the fact that you were in a rut and loving it.
This article covers:
-Changes to an organization’s culture, or that of a department or unit
-The dangers of bringing in new blood
-Recognising and dealing with repercussions
Read the full article, A Managerial Transfusion: The Danger of New Blood, on the Emergent Consultant’s website.