* A look at the risks associated with architecture
It has been a long time since we wrote about one of our favorite topics – that being WAN architecture. We want to use the next few newsletters to expand upon why we think creating a WAN architecture is risky but necessary.
It has been a long time since we wrote about one of our favorite topics – that being WAN architecture (see: How to know whether a network architecture would be effective in your company) We want to use the next few newsletters to expand upon why we think creating a WAN architecture is risky but necessary.
About two years ago, Jim was hired by the IT organization of a Fortune 500 company. The goal of the project was to have Jim review their network architecture. When Jim requested that the IT organization forward him a copy of their architecture documents he was somewhat surprised to find out that they did not have any. After spending a day with the organization it became quite clear that not only did they not have any WAN architecture documents, they did not have a well-understood WAN architecture. As part of Jim’s recommendation to the client, Jim suggested they create an architecture organization to focus on a number of components of IT, including the WAN.
A few months later, Jim talked with the IT director who had hired him to review his organization’s WAN architecture. Jim was pleased when the IT director told him that when he brought forward to the organization’s CIO Jim’s recommendation that they create an architecture function, the CIO enthusiastically endorsed the recommendation.
Jim was also pleased that the IT director was offered the position of heading up the new architecture organization. Jim was somewhat surprised when the IT director told him that he had turned down the offer. When Jim asked why, the IT director explained that the current CIO strongly believes in the value of architecture and hence was a supporter of creating an architecture function within the IT organization.
However, the IT director speculated that if past history at his company was any indicator, that within two or three years the CIO would be gone. The IT director stated that there was no reason to believe that the new CIO would support having an architecture function and that to the contrary, he might be the type of CIO who does not see much value in architecture. The IT director then speculated if that was the case, and if the company experienced any downturn in business, that the entire architecture group was vulnerable to being let go.
The next couple of newsletters will continue the discussion of the risks associated with architecture and will also discuss why we think that in spite of those risks that this is an important time for IT organizations to create a WAN architecture. In the meantime, we would like to hear from you. Does your IT organization have an architecture group? Is their work effective at driving decisions?
