Here I am in Chicagoland for my third ChefConf. I caught the keynotes today with Nathan Harvey, Barry Crist, Adam Jacob, Corie Scobie and more. The big news at this year’s event is that Chef is focused on more than just infrastructure and compliance—Chef is bringing automation to apps and the entire software delivery life cycle.
I spoke with Chef CEO Barry Crist about this and he said there is a sea change taking place with software is delivered. Chef has seen this wave coming and, over the last few years, has been retooling its offerings to match this. Today, Chef Automate and Chef Habitat represent the heart of Chef’s arsenal in its mission to offer the premier platform to automate the software development, deployment and security life cycle.
I personally have seen this shift over the last few years. I think back to when we launched devopsy.kinsta.cloud. Chef was already a popular solution within the DevOps community; however, most people will tell you that they used Chef for configuration management. It was great to be able to make sure that as you spun up new instances in the cloud, your infrastructure was configured exactly as you wanted. By automating and using a Chef-type of solution, you could spin up new instances at-will and their configuration would be exactly the same or exactly as you desired.
At the time, that was pretty cutting-edge. People were writing Chef recipes for all kinds of tasks—again, usually around configuring infrastructure. With the advent of microservices, containers, Docker and Kubernetes, this type of automated deployment has become commonplace. But the need to automate, especially with security and compliance and app deployment, is perhaps an even bigger mission.
Crist acknowledged these facts during his keynote. In speaking about Habitat, Crist noted that not only did many of Chef’s customers not understand the real story behind Habitat, but that half of Chef’s own employees didn’t, either. One person who did was Julian Dunn, director of product marketing, who I interviewed on DevOps Chats about Habitat when it first launched. Tony Bradley wrote that it could be a game changer back then, as well.
Habitat has come a long way since then and still has a ways to go to grow into its ambitious potential, but it is very functional right now. Chef has several clients here at ChefConf talking about their Habitat deployments and plans. Chef now tags Habitat with Automate Any App Anywhere – Build, Deploy, Manage.
Perhaps further along than Habitat, however, is Chef Automate. In fact, Chef Automate 2.0 was announced ChefConf, and it seems to be an almost complete rewrite of the program, as it is now built on Microsoft Go. Here is Chef’s take on Automate 2.0:
Chef Automate has been rebuilt from the ground up to provide performance, scale and advanced analytics required by enterprises using DevOps at scale to meet the demands of post-digital transformation. Chef Automate now provides a single control plane for infrastructure and compliance automation to enable a closed-loop ‘detect, correct, automate’ process to make infrastructure effortless.
New features include:
Enhanced operational visibility and debugging – New tools and visualizations, including a streaming event feed, trend graphs and a rich query language, help users analyze infrastructure and compliance automation data from a unified dashboard.
Compliance scanning and reporting in any environment – Integration with cloud compliance capabilities of InSpec 2 enhances scanning, which can now be used to evaluate cloud configurations (AWS, Azure, Google Cloud) via APIs for compliance on either an ad-hoc or ongoing basis. Chef Automate 2 also supports scanning of Cisco IOS equipment as a significant start on extending modern compliance capabilities to network devices.
Re-architected for speed and flexibility – A Go-based microservices architecture, with a modern, performant web UI atop a REST API, enables Automate 2 to support tens of thousands of nodes from a single installation. In-place upgrades with automatic data migration from Chef Automate 1 ensure that customers retain all historical information.
Additionally, Chef has released something called Chef Workstation. From the release:
Chef Workstation enables DevOps teams and practitioners to complete ad-hoc DevOps tasks using all of the familiar Chef capabilities, without agents. This provides a simple and effective way to use Chef to complete tasks and then seamlessly scale those tasks through Chef Automate.
Capabilities include:
New standard desktop/laptop experience for Chef – Includes a new ‘target mode’ for executing Chef recipes or entire cookbooks remotely and Introduces ‘chef’ command as the single point of entry.
Foundation for a better workstation experience – Bundling all the tooling previously included in the ChefDK provides an improved user experience and cohesion between tools to deliver a seamless experience for any infrastructure automation task.
Finally, new enhancements to Inspec, Chef’s compliance and security solution, were announced. Besides security and compliance being built into most everything Chef does, Inspec now sports:
Cloud configuration compliance – Verify AWS and Microsoft Azure policies, with Google Cloud Platform support in beta. More than 10 new AWS resources bring it to CIS Level 1 benchmark completeness.
Improved out-of-the-box experience – More than 30 new resources, including support for Cisco IOS network devices as agentless targets, are built in.
Drastically improved performance – Users now see up to 90 percent performance gains on Windows and 30 percent on Linux/Unix.
I will report more as it comes here in Chicago and ChefConf 2018.
There may be nothing more difficult in a DevOps transformation than aligning the business with its technology organization—and vice versa. Dealing with skills gaps and information gaps, while addressing communication breakdowns and cultural hurdles can keep even the most seasoned practitioners and leaders up at night. How do we align disparate business units accordingly? What practical tips can people take and implement along their journey?
These are topics we immersed ourselves in during a live video podcast ahead of the DevOps Enterprise Summit (#DOES18) in London. I was able to sit down with Carmen DeArdo of Nationwide and Jayne Groll of DevOps Institute to take a deeper dive into the DevOps transformation patterns and practices. This discussion centered on a major theme of DOES18 this year: business and technology alignment for the modern enterprise.
We hit on many important issues that I think we can all learn from and apply in our organizations respectively. One of the things we’ve learned over the course of the years is that, in DevOps, the focus is heavily cultural, but it has to be squarely on nurturing and getting buy-in across the organization. But at the same time, we need to be orchestrating our strategic alignment initiatives between the disparate functions and organizations within the business. That’s a tall task.
Watch the full video replay below, and/or read through the full transcript to see what key points were made and how we can adopt best practices to move our businesses forward.
Carmen and Jayne will both be speaking at DOES18 London this year and I will be leading video panels that you can see exclusively on DevOps TV / devopsy.kinsta.cloud. Hope to see you there!
Alan Shimel: Hey, good day, everyone. Thanks for joining us. This is Alan Shimel of devopsy.kinsta.cloud. And I’m here to talk to you all today with a few friends of mine about the upcoming DevOps Enterprise Summit in London. This will be a live panel discussion ahead of the London DOES event, which, by the way, is June 25th to the 26th at the Intercontinental Hotel, sometimes called The O2. Our panel today, I’m happy to say, are two really good friends of mine. Well, one is one of my business partners at the DevOps Institute: Co-founder and CEO of DevOps Institute Jayne Groll, and a speaker at DevOps Enterprise Summit London. Jayne, welcome to our hangout today.
Jayne Groll: Hi, Alan. Hi, Carmen. Thanks a lot. Really looking forward to it.
Shimel: Okay. So Jayne has already sort of introduced our next guest there, another good friend of mine, a recognized DevOps leader for many years. He really kind of kicked off a lot of the kind of groundbreaking DevOps work that we’ve seen at Nationwide over the years. Also a great Pittsburgh Steelers and Pittsburgh sports fan, Carmen DeArdo. Carmen, welcome.
Carmen DeArdo: Welcome Alan. Welcome. Hi, Jayne. It’s always great talking to you.
Shimel: Thank you. So all kidding aside, both of you are kind of experts and leaders within the DevOps Enterprise community, and you’re both presenting at DOES London this year. You’ve actually both presented at previous DOES events as well. So thank you for coming here. You know what? When you guys first started kind of preaching in the wilderness about DevOps and so forth, it was a bit of the wilderness, but it’s becoming commonplace in businesses and organizations throughout the world now. Our goal on this chat, guys, is to learn about the patterns and practices that leaders have identified for business and technology alignment, and really what we’d hope is just to share your experience and thoughts with our audience so that maybe they can learn something and they could integrate or assimilate that into their own transformational journeys and escapades.
And just again a reminder, this is about DevOps Enterprise Summit London, June 25th to 26th, and you can get more information on the event at events.itrevolution.com. You’ll find on there, by the way, the entire conference agenda, and beyond Carmen and Jayne, it is a gangbuster lineup of speakers. If you’re interested in DevOps and any kind of related type of technologies and frameworks, etc., it’s really a can’t-miss one for those of us, you know, who follow this space, or even for those of us just getting involved in it.
That being said, though, I’ve spoken enough. Let’s get started. I’ve given a little bit of your background, but maybe I haven’t said everything that needs to be said. So, Carmen, since I see your lovely face on the screen ahead of me here, why don’t you go first? Give us your background, your company role, etc., professional accomplishments.
DeArdo: Okay. Thanks, Alan. So I actually spent most of my career in telecom working for Bell Labs. Thought I would retire from Bell Labs like everyone else at the time, and then the telecom bust happened, and we all had to figure out what we were gonna do with the rest of our careers. But it served me well, because I think a lot of those concepts, even though we didn’t call them DevOps, but, you know, certainly, creating high-availability, high-reliability capacity systems, you know, those concepts are still, I think, pertinent obviously today. I moved into Nationwide to really help with trying to get Agile set up about 12 years ago, and then, you know, as I think you see the case with a lot of companies, they start somewhere in their value stream. They may not even think of it at that point like an end-to-end value stream, but they’re starting somewhere. They start with Agile.
You know, we were very successful getting all our work done there, but then realized, okay, that’s only part of the story. The cards getting into the backlog through iterations is great, but we aren’t getting flow of work from the business into the teams, and we certainly aren’t releasing into production frequently. So about, I’d say, five years ago, you know, somewhat in affiliation, some of the work I was doing with, as you know, Rosalind Radcliffe, Hayden Lindsey, you know, started to talk about what’s this DevOps thing. Was lucky enough to end up at the first Gene (Kim) conference speaking with Hayden. Wasn’t sure what I was getting myself into, but it’s been a wonderful experience. You know, got to meet you, Jayne, and lots of great folks from Gene’s community.
In Nationwide, we’re just continuing to work, how do we make that end-to-end flow and lead time, you know, what do we do to make it better? What DevOps practices can we bring? But as you noted at the beginning, how do you get the business more online? How do you get work to flow? And how do you address culture, which we know is probably more important than technology?
Shimel: Excellent, dead on. Jayne, how about you? You have more hair than both Carmen and I. You’re the lovely face we should see on the screen here. Give us a little background and accomplishments.
Groll: So I call myself an accidental technologist. So I started my career, got out of school, ended up in the legal field for about 15 years working on the business side. So I wasn’t a lawyer, but I was one of the early paralegals for a big Wall Street law firm that adopted UNIX a long, long time ago. I don’t even want to say when, but screens were black and green back then. And so everybody had to learn UNIX. And so I was very fortunate to be given an opportunity to accidentally become a technologist, and I know even with my technical skills, I’m a little self-taught. Was able to move up into some senior management roles across several different verticals, leaving the legal space.
And then in 2004, kind of fell on ITIL and really started to see a paradigm shift in IT that technology is important, but your practices, your principles, your processes are important as well. And people, process and technology became a mantra. And so co-founded ITSM Academy with Lisa Schwartz and really saw the growth of maturity in IT. You know, I always say we love our frameworks. IT, we love our frameworks more than any other business unit, and really started to see that percolate. Met Gene and some others through that experience, but really, landing where we are today. In 2012, I was able to attend an early DevOps day, frankly, at Gene’s invitation and really saw something percolating there that was pretty much common sense, but not common practice.
So we started to see, you know, should Dev and Ops collaborate better? Should there be a faster flow? Should there be less silos? Yes. Should we use automation more? Yes. We automate the rest of the world, we don’t automate ourselves as much. And really started to see something grow there, and, Alan, as you know, in 2015, we launched the DevOps Institute primarily because the practices around DevOps unlike other frameworks were really emerging in the wild. You know, you said it before. They were emerging in the wild and making some sense out of that, you know, as it crossed over into the enterprise space was important and requires a lot of research.
So, you know, we don’t have a single body of knowledge in DevOps. Thankfully, we have a collective body of knowledge in DevOps. So for me, I think part of my, you know, pride is my journey has not been a linear path. Really blessed to be, you know, where I am today, and, you know, DevOps Institute right now is, what, 32 countries that are talking about in doing DevOps. I mean, that’s really kind of surprising and remarkable all at the same time.
Shimel: Yep. And just to excuse, I don’t know if you guys can hear. We have a train, the 11-08 Cannonball Express, going via the office here.
DeArdo: Just like my cousin Vinnie here, Alan? Is that like …?
Shimel: That’s “two yutes.” The way I talk, we’re not far off. Anyway, though, guys, let us move along here. You know, one of the things that I’ve learned in my own exploration of DevOps and digital transformation, etc., is that a lot of businesses, large enterprises, they may think they do, but on the whole, they don’t really understand technology. Yeah, some of the guys in IT understand some of it or what have you, but do you think most businesses understand technology? Carmen?
DeArdo: I think it’s … Obviously, people are exposed to technology. In fact, I talk about this all the time, that sometimes we’re still in the book writing business or book production that we still feel like we got to produce manuals of paper material … The disconnect comes as, How we can effectively utilize the technology that we have to meet the business needs? And I think that’s maybe where the disconnect goes. It’s not that, you know, people certainly are … they have Alexas. They have stuff in their home. They may be even, you know, great at programming their home devices, but how are we actually taking advantage of that to serve our customers? And I still think thinking about things kind of in this … you know, Jayne talked about silos, but I actually think the last frontier really of DevOps is in the left part of the value stream, not the right part.
I think they code the cloud. There’s patterns, maybe not everybody’s done it. I know it’s not easy to do. That’s pretty well-defined from a pattern. The front part is not, and I think understanding that, you know, you have to basically be an IT business. We hear this all the time. If you’re not an … consider yourself an IT business, someone who is good at IT is gonna disrupt you. So it’s not that I don’t think they understand technology. They’re certainly capable of it. It’s just, do we really understand how we can use it the best way in order to meet business needs? And, you know, things like the system of engagement. Well, the system of engagement is gonna change. We’ve already seen it change. It changed from web to mobile. It’s going to voice. It’s gonna go to different engagement models.
That’s fine, but you still have to have the back-end technology, and the microservices, and the APIs, and the ability to deliver more quickly, and I think that’s the part of it, the gap we still haven’t bridged. And how can we actually get …? You know, one of the things that Nicole and I are talking about at the conference is the project-to-product model. And I think large companies like ourselves are kind of flailing at what … you know, that makes sense. It makes sense to align around a value stream, but how do you really define what those value streams represent so that you can actually get that flow and then use technology to help get that quick deployment and, you know, feedback? So I think that’s where we see a lot of the gaps, you know, from that perspective.
Shimel: Sure. Jayne, before I have you answer on that, you know, I got an email of pitch. I get a lot of pitches as you can imagine, but I got one the other day that, to me, really nailed the issue. The issue was they pitched me about how great their solutions and their services are, and they said it makes IT costs less. Instead of … so they’re still thinking of the IT department as a cost center instead of a profit generator. And to me, when you say that, that means you really don’t understand technology, you don’t understand the role of IT in the modern enterprise, and you’re just not doing it right. Jayne, your thoughts.
Groll: So I think you’re right. I think, you know, the modern enterprise has a few challenges ahead of it. Carmen, I absolutely agree with you. I think every business knows they need technology and they need to accelerate their use of technology. I think they don’t understand how to apply that, and more importantly, I think the big paradigm shift, and, Carmen, you said it, is that most companies don’t realize that they are now technology companies. It isn’t even just IT does for you, is the core company as a technology company. And those that kind of recognize that, I think, are those that move ahead. Those that are still kind of hanging on to a legacy … Now, you know, I’ll add kind of something into that recipe that’s a little scary.
With the way technology is moving and how fast it’s going, I mean, the acceleration is remarkable, and, you know, Carmen, you said it. It was cloud. It was mobile. Now it’s voice. That it feels like, you know, this kind of moving target that if I’m a business leader, not a technology leader, although Lord knows that, I think, has a plan here, you know, where do you put the dart? You know, do you invest in mobile? Do you invest in voice? Do you invest …? So it’s such a moving target, and it’s going so fast that I think it can be very daunting to figure out, okay, where do we make our play, and, you know, where do we use our technology spend? And I would say something funny, Alan, because you’re right.
You know, in my years in senior IT management, I almost always reported to the CFO, because I was a call center. And so it was nobody understood quite what I was spending money on, but they figured if I reported to the finance guy, that somewhere along the way the cost would be controlled as opposed to let’s optimize the capability. Let’s look at this in investment. So I really think organizations are trying to figure out, first of all, are we a technology company? And I would say unequivocally the answer is yes regardless of what vertical you’re in. And then where do I invest? What technology do I start looking at? And if what I do today is gonna be obsolete tomorrow, how do I make that investment for my company further?
Shimel: Excellent. So, guys, you both have a little bit of a background, more than a little bit, in training and so forth. Do we train people outside of the IT organizations on what technology can do for you? Do we put up sort of Uncle Sam’s “We want you. What can I do for you?” posters? How do we get the business to understand the technology aspects, the technology side of things? Go ahead.
Groll: I mean, you know, the “we want you …” unless you can promote something that says what’s in it for me, me as an organization, me as an individual, me as a leader, I think that’s difficult. You know, doing road shows on here’s what technology can do for you isn’t something that you can tell. I think it’s something that you have to prove. And I think IT sometimes runs into an uphill battle trying to prove that, because it is costly and it does change a lot of the way people perform on a daily basis. I know what I did today, and tomorrow you want me to do something differently, and I may not be as successful as I was yesterday.
So there’s a little bit of a proof of concept usually, you know, done through piloting, whatever, but I think the, “How do we tell them?” I don’t think we tell them. I think we have to show them.
Shimel: Fair enough. Carmen?
DeArdo: Yeah. I mean, I think we’ve gotten a lot of appreciation. I mean, I’ve told … you know, and Cindy Payne and Jim Grafmeyer told the story at the last conference about Hurricane Harvey and how the business was able to respond within a day to what was a wind event and came a rain event with all our flooded cars and how we got the website optimized to handle those, to take the load off of our customer service center. They’re starting to get that, “Gee, having this capability to deliver things more frequently …” We now have some of us who deliver daily whereas before everything was going into a monthly release. So that’s a great accomplishment.
On the other hand, we’re running into the things that, you know, Topos talked about with compliance, with legal, with … and just, you know, how do we … Most of our time now on lead time is going from the idea to the backlog of the team, not from going from the … you know, the team getting the work to deployment. So I think going into, you know, that view of how do we start to think more about, you know, the other things that are getting in our way of lead time, because it’s not just the IT part of it. It’s now the business part of it, and we have a couple areas now who actually have true product owners sitting with their lines and are almost at the point now where they can deliver, you know, stories and storyboard them and move them all the way through production, you know, much more quickly.
So I think that’s an example, and I think that’s what you need. I always talk about you need stories, you need examples of how this can actually be done at your company, because reading about it, hearing about it is great, but then when you see the team next to you doing it, and even if it’s not perfect and even if you know it can be improved, that’s where really you start to change the culture of not just IT but of the business. You want something like that. And then, you know, I think you got something going that you can really build on top of. Jayne.
Groll: Yeah. I mean, I think that conferences like DevOps Enterprise London, Las Vegas, other events, local events, I think, also let individuals and organizations know they’re not alone in this journey. You know, part of the challenge in DevOps right now, I think, is we’re going from what is DevOps to how do we do this. And it’s not finite. It’s not, you know, you open a recipe book and it says, “Start here. Add these ingredients. You know, stir, bake for 350 degrees, and you have DevOps.” It requires a lot of higher-level thinking, requires some experimentation. And so I think that, you know, access to what have other people or organizations done … Carmen, I think you’re absolutely right, what have other teams done, really kind of making it a community of enablement is very, very important in this space, because everybody’s trying to figure out where do they start. And unfortunately or fortunately, the answer is it depends. It depends where you are, it depends what you’re trying to achieve. So I think that’s part of it as well.
Shimel: Yep. So, guys, let me try to tie a bow on this section before we move on. The reason I asked about the technology and technology education issue is I think it’s imperative for organizations to understand that in order for us to get what I call business and tech alignment, and what I mean by business and tech alignment is that we’re all pulling in the same directions for the same reasons with the same goals, and we’re following hopefully a road that we have agreed upon, and we all know the road we’re traveling, because, again, you get back to DevOps, guys. You know, when you guys are out there talking about it and we were covering it at devopsy.kinsta.cloud, what do we always hear? What exactly is DevOps?
There’s no real definition. What does it mean? You know, how do we define DevOps and so forth? And I think one of the things we’ve learned over the course of the years is that, you know, in DevOps, the focus is, you know, heavily cultural, but it has to be squarely on nurturing, buying across the organization for this “DevOps initiatives,” you know, that we’re starting. But at the same time, we need to be orchestrating our strategic alignment initiatives between the disparate functions and organizations within the business. And that to me is business and tech alignment. If you guys don’t agree with that, speak up, but if you do, let’s move on to our next part, but can we wrap up, Carmen, Jayne? Are you fair to say that what we’re really talking about here is business and tech alignment?
Groll: So I’m gonna jump in just for a second, because … So you know I come from the ITIL space. And so in the ITIL space, they were coining the term BITA, business IT alignment. And so for years and years and years, there was a lot of conversation about BITA and its semantics. But alignment means that we’re kind of standing side by side in lanes next to each other. The reality is it isn’t alignment. It’s really unification. It’s really we don’t need to align with the business, we need to become the business. And, again, I know it’s semantics, but that word alignment gets tossed around a lot, and it implies something like, “Well, I’ll drive my car next to yours, and we’ll travel at the same pace, and we’ll get to the same journey,” as opposed to, “Let’s be in the same car.” And so you understand what I’m saying?
Shimel: Yeah.
Groll: And I said the term BITA is sort of falling away a little bit, but it was thrown around a lot during the years when ITIL in particular, you know, was kind of front and center.
Shimel: Yap. Carmen, any thoughts on that before we move on?
DeArdo: No, that was great points. And, you know, I refer back to Mark Schwartz’ last book, “The Seat at the Table,” and where he really talks about IT really should move beyond trying to get a seat at the table and move towards, you know, as Jayne said, you’re actually moving together, and you have to merge really these concepts of what the business wants, you know, has to be very much aligned, more than aligned. It’s part of what IT need to be doing. So that merging has to take a fact, and I think as much as we’ve seen the culture issues in Dev and Ops, that’s gonna be an interesting culture issue. But we’re seeing the companies who are successful are already doing it. They are working together. And, you know, if you walked up to some of the teams I just talked about, you wouldn’t be able to say, “Oh, well, such-and-such is a business person, and, you know, Jayne’s a business person, and John’s an IT person.” No, they’re a team working together to achieve something for the good of the company, and that’s the way it has to be.
Shimel: Yep. Guys, let me broach another subject then, because I think we’ve covered this one. You know, I read an article yesterday about AI, and automation, machine learning, and we’ve all seen these before, and, you know, how it’s changing. But automation really is changing the job market, especially for people younger than the three of us. I mean, we’ve both seen our … all three of us have seen our 21st birthday recently and …
Groll: Just recently.
Shimel: Recently, but really the folks coming up behind us, and we’re talking about our children and so forth, automation and the job market that they’ll grow into is paramount. And one of the reasons is that we have a tremendous skill gap. You know, my background is obviously in infosec, and now we call it cybersecurity. I hate the term. But there’s a tremendous gap in the security space. There’s also a tremendous gap in the DevOps space, obviously, and that’s one of the reasons we see such a high demand, even for people who may not be certified or classically trained in DevOps, I mean, take some sort of DevOps class. If they’ve learned to work Puppet or Chef or Jenkins, you know, they’re in high demand here.
And so with this skills gap, it doesn’t hinder our DevOps transformation. Is it a drag on the entire DevOps industry or community? Jayne, I’m gonna ask you to take first crack at that. I mean, you must see this with DOI stuff.
Groll: I do, and, you know, it’s kind of like good news, bad news. So the great news is, where else do you get to work in an industry or an environment where you are now encouraged to learn something other than what you’re essentially good at? I mean, you’re now encouraged to grow new skills to evolve. Organizations are funding skills modernization programs. So, you know, we groomed … and Carmen referenced that. You know, we groomed an IT based on silos. And in every silo, you were a developer, or you were a QA person, or you were a security person, and you lived in your silo with other people who had the same skills as you did. And now, cross-functional skills and, you know, what they call T-shaped people where you need to still have a specialty but you’re absolutely required to have very large breadth of different skills means that organizations are supporting and funding that.
So the continuous learner is more the norm today than it was before where you will be a developer … experience, and I think it’s a great day to be in technology truthfully, because you are encouraged to think, and learn, and practice, and train, and do, you know, all sorts of other things. And I think companies are starting to see that. I hear the term “skilling” a lot. We not only talk about training, we talk about skilling. We need to skill our force. We need to skill our teams. We need to reskill or upskill. You know, those are really terms that are starting to enter our common vocabulary. And the day of the generic, “I’m a master, I’m an expert, I’m a practitioner,” and I’ve got a few of those credentials as well, those are so ambiguous that now the skills are very, very tangible, and organizations are hiring, I think, hiring and funding individuals to develop not only technical skills but practice and principal skills, too. So we’re all gonna be upskilled, maybe outskilled.
Shimel: Perhaps both. Carmen, how about you on this one?
DeArdo: Yeah. I mean, automation is obviously nothing new. I mean, I’m really dating myself, but I can remember when people didn’t trust the output of compilers. Like, are we sure the compilers are producing the right machine language or assembly language? I don’t know. I can bring the assembly language better than this compiler. I mean, I think automation and learning is just … obviously, you know, if you spent, you know, four decades like I have, and, you know, none of us are spring chickens, but you’ve got to learn a lot and keep learning. Now, I think the great thing, and I agree with you and Jayne, the great thing about Nationwide is they have invested in learning and upskilling their people. We had this thing called Teaching Thursdays where twice a month we have two hours which is set aside for peer-to-peer learning, and it’s really not … and it’s peers teaching people, and people love to be the teacher.
I mean, at the last forum, Jason Cox was talking about … We had a subgroup focused on operations, and Jayne was there. And talk about … you know, he had some folks on his team, that they have to become engineers. They have to become coders. And one of the guys who initially maybe wasn’t so crazy about it, once they became kind of the expert in their area and they were teaching other people, well, you know, they were really engaged then, because, you know, they were involved and they were the one now from a peer-to-peer learning perspective.
So companies, I think, like Nationwide, Disney, other companies that are leaders in this space need obviously to invest in that. And then, you know, it also means that the associate themselves, you know, needs to take advantage of that. I mean, we can offer those capabilities. We know the jobs are gonna change. We can make those skills available, and then folks need to take advantage of them, but yes, I mean, people have to become more broadly skilled and be able to become more of what I would call problem-solving engineering mindset as we move forward.
Shimel: Sure. So, guys, though, you know, so we have skills over here. And on this side, there’s another thing that creates a tension with the skills, and that’s what I call the information gap. So we have a skills gap, and you guys have both addressed that really well, but we also have an information gap. And I alluded to it when I talked about training. If an employer or an organization thinks that someone who can write a recipe in Chef or has heard of Jenkins is a DevOps engineer, if there’s such a thing as a DevOps engineer, or is someone who, you know, is gonna really help build their DevOps team, to me, that’s not a skills gap, that’s an information gap. How do we understand … How do we make organizations … How do we fill that gap on information so that organizations recognize, A, that there may, in fact, be a skills gap, B, how to fill that skills gap and bring the organization up to it?
I mean, this tension, this chicken-and-egg, if you don’t know it, you don’t know. How are you supposed to know? And so I’ll put it to you. What do you think is more important? The information gap, the skills gap? Are they equally important? Do we tackle them concurrently, individually? Carmen, how do you guys do it at Nationwide?
DeArdo: I mean, I think one of the things that IT hasn’t been good at is treating IT as … we’ve been a very bad customer to ourselves. So if you look at our pipeline, we don’t treat it as a product. If you actually want to get faster at delivering a capability from idea through deployment, you need to consider that as a product, not a bunch of different tools. It’s not Jenkins, and New Relic, and UrbanCode or, you know, the AWS. It’s not that. It’s a pipeline that’s gonna enable you, and it doesn’t start at code, it starts at idea to get you all the way through that deployment. So then what … do you have a team? Are you doing thinking across the pipeline? Are you doing architecture? We don’t do things like value stream architecture or architecting the pipeline as a product. We want to buy a bunch of technologies. We can hire people good in those technologies, but as you said, that’s not really gonna get us where we need to go.
So I think the first thing is, do you really treat your product … One of the first things, do you treat your pipeline as a product? Do you have a team that can actually support that product all the way? Do you have a product owner who can drive continuous improvement across that with funding and prioritization? And do you have one of your best architects, if not the best, to actually create the architecture and do value stream architecture, which is something, you know, that Mik Kersten and I have been talking a lot about. I think that’s one side of it that we don’t get, is teams could … if you ask a team, they can kind of figure out, tell you like a Deming quality circle, how they can go faster. And you can experiment, but then if you’re gonna operationalize that, you don’t want 200 teams doing things in 200 different ways. You can then take that and say, “How do I address that as part of my delivery capability?”
And then I think what you need your leadership to do is apply systems thinking, and that’s a whole another subject we could get into, but I don’t think executives and leaders know how to really address the, “How do I optimize this as a whole?” They want to get into the weeds. They want to get into the tool selections. There’s people that can figure that out. You need to really focus on the strategy and how you can optimize all this great information you’re getting to make sure you’re removing barriers and allowing teams, you know, doing the learning, making sure they can be upskilled, investing in their ability, and allowing them, you know, to be able to innovate and improve your delivery capability. And I think that’s what I just said quickly. It’s easier said than done. And I think that’s where I see a lot of the struggles, and I think where we’re trying to address this is how do we start to put some of those pieces in place so it’s not just a bunch of, you know, divergent disparate technologies we’re trying to bring in and hope that that’s gonna make us get better. Because those things and having skills just around those things is not gonna actually get us to where we need to go.
Shimel: Fair enough. Jayne, I’m gonna give you a chance to comment on the DevOps skills versus information gap.
Groll: So I think the two are really related, and I think Carmen brings up some good points. You know, I think it all comes down to silos. So let’s look at our silos. Well, within our silos, we speak the same language. We use the same acronyms. We use the same tools. We live in a common community where everybody kind of understands what’s going on and what’s happening. And then when we leave our silo and we try to talk to a different silo, we don’t speak the same language. We don’t use the same tools. We don’t have the same processes. So I think the skills gap doesn’t fully overcome the issues with the information gap, but, certainly, there’s help there that if we’re looking to share information, we have to share it in a way that everybody kind of has some type of uncommon understanding.
The other thing with information is, you know, information is really interesting to me, because everyone thinks they communicate a lot. People generally think that they communicate well. You know, teams generally think they communicate … like I told you that. You told it to me maybe in language I don’t understand or it wasn’t clear. It was some report that, you know, I don’t even know where it is. So I think, you know, kind of the flow of information and from a vocabulary perspective, from an understanding perspective, from a “Did you understand what I shared?” is something we all need to overcome. And I think, you know, again, they’re so interrelated to each other that if we start to create a broader set of skills, hopefully, that helps to improve the communication. I think the other side of it is we talk a lot about collaboration, and there’s a really fundamental difference between communication and collaboration.
And so information flows through communication, but communication is pretty much one way. I tell you, you tell me, and somewhere along the way. Collaboration is I start to ask your opinion, and that’s a really big, big difference. And so when we’re starting to share information, there’s a respect that comes across the skills gap. There’s a lot of things that go across that that, again, there’s separate gaps, but hopefully, the long term, and as Carmen said, not easy to fix, is by overcoming some of the skills gaps as well.
Shimel: Fair enough. I think we’ve covered that one well. Let’s move on to another area if we can. We have 20 minutes or so. You know, one of the things that really does my heart good is this concept of DevOps everywhere as far as the eye can see, like the meme with Buzz and Woody. We have seen DevOps move from just Dev and Ops to QA, DevSecOps exploding on the scene where, you know, a couple days, the 28th, a day or two after DOES London, John Willis and team are rolling out our second DevSecOps Days, which I’m involved in, and devsecopsdays.com for those interested. But even beyond IT, we’re seeing what I call DevBizOps, where DevOps’ Agile sort of practices are starting to take hold in HR, in sales, in finance, in, you know, accounting, etc.
And let’s be fair. This is not unique. The fact of the matter is a lot of the lean terminology, a lot of the lean stuff that was built into DevOps didn’t come from IT, it came from manufacturing. And so, you know, it’s like pay it forward. Now we’re seeing these kinds of DevOps principles move into other areas of the business. First of all, is that a good thing? I think it is. I can’t imagine it’s not, but I’ll defer to the both of you. And then, secondly, you know, hey, at the end of the day, remember, it’s all about the culture, stupid. And so what human factors, cultural factors should we be thinking of when we talk about a broader DevBizOps opportunity? And, Jayne, you’re on my screen, so I’m gonna tell you to go first on this one if you can.
Groll: You know, it’s business transformation. You know, it’s not really DevOps transformation. Digital transformation is not limited to IT. It’s really business transformation. And so it goes back to, you know, we talked about a little while ago, where, you know, every organization has to recognize that technology is their business, and so some of the practices from the business start to assimilate into IT and beyond. I saw this in service management where there’s now movement towards enterprise service management, where you’re gonna make changes, you do it the same way.
I think when we start to look … I mean, I can tell you from the content perspective, you know, we use tools in content development, even though it’s not software development, that are very, very similar to that. So I think it’s fantastic. I was talking to a gentleman from an organization on the Netherlands recently, and they actually took the Spotify squad model and applied it to their entire business, and not a small company, by the way. And so they applied it to their entire business where their business is now broken into squads. And, you know, some think that that’s only for a tech company, and by the way, this is not a tech company. It’s a large financial organization.
So I think that’s great. I do think there’s some … I think there’s good news, bad news. I think there’s a little bit of risk that, you know, with DevOps and some of DevOps practice is still emerging that it becomes, “This week, we do it this way, and this week, we do it another way.” And, you know, “Oh, that didn’t work because …” You know, fill in the blanks, but I do think that kind of having a one business and getting away from this we love our frameworks and IT, and every year, we have a new framework that supposedly supersedes the other framework, you know, that’s a maturity issue. And I think if the business embraces it … you’re right, Alan. Lean Six Sigma. That was a business initiative that a lot of organizations underwent that weren’t necessarily manufacturing organizations. So, you know, as we get closer to that, I think the unification becomes stronger.
Shimel: Great. Carmen, how about you?
DeArdo: Yeah. So I think of things like … It is a great thing. So I think of things like lean concepts. We have leaders across the company that we have gone through lean education and lean concepts. So when you talk about value streams, when you talk about lead time, when you talk about wait states, people understand those concepts, whether they be on business or IT. I mean, this whole idea that Dominica, I’m sure, would have talked about, about making work visible, Kanbans. I mean, we actually had an explosion of people who wanted to use some of our tools that initially were brought in for work out of management because they wanted … you know, it’s like, “Gee, who knew, you know, this Kanban stuff would work for us and WIP.” WIP limits. And so people certainly want to apply those kind of concepts.
So I do agree that, you know, the basic concepts, you know, really can spread everywhere, and the whole concepts of even the things, like we talked about it, the three ways. The three ways don’t just apply to IT. The three ways apply to anything that you’re trying to do and get better at. I think when it comes to information sometimes, though, you know, it’s kind of like the robot story and the goal. We have lots of KPIs, but are we actually focused on the goal? So the goal is not around keeping this person utilized or that team utilized. The goal is about, can I get faster from one end of my value stream to the other? And do we have data that shows flow? And that’s why I’m excited with some of the things that I’ve been … you know, that Mik’s talking about. You know, he has a book coming out that is gonna show actual flow of work, because up until now, we have not been able to actually see work flow all the way through that delivery pipeline. And so we guess a lot of times. We think, “Oh, well, if we just add more developers. Oh, we’ll add more testers.”
Well, how do we know? We don’t really know, because we’re making maybe educated guesses, but we’re really not all focused on understanding where the work is and those concepts that can shine a light on it. So I think it all does come back to a lot of those concepts that, growing up in Bell Labs, I was lucky enough to experience with Deming, even going back to Shewhart, around doing those experiments, getting better, seeing the entire end-to-end value stream, but these concepts apply. I mean, “The Phoenix Project” is really not a book about IT even though I teach part of it. It’s a book about how do you get better at doing whatever business you’re in and trying to, you know, stay in business and improve what you’re doing for your customer. So I think those concepts will continue to go, and I think, again, as we’ve talked about today, there’s a thread here of everybody needs to be on board with these concepts: legal, compliance, the business, everybody, because they all play a role in allowing you to do a better job, delivering more quickly to your customers.
Shimel: Fair enough. Guys, let me … You know, Carmen, you hit on some great things there. The Kanban board or even here at devopsy.kinsta.cloud, frankly, we run our entire customer engagement, not practice, but now into farming, on Trello cards, which is sort of an electronic Kanban. And it’s a great project manager. I’ll give you another thing. You know, there’s the cultural aspect of this of taking that sort of DevOps culture and expanding it throughout the organization, but there’s also the bits and bytes and tools aspect of it. Kanban’s a great example. I’ll throw another one out at you. Get up. Why does it have to be source code for programs? Why can’t it be source code for contracts or any kind of digital document or, you know, things that we work on?
So I think we’re just starting to scratch the surface on how we can take that DevOps can do or Kanban and, you know, move it out across the entire organization. And we’ll all … I think we’ll have better organizations as a result, but let me now turn it back around. How can we take some of the business culture positives, some of the things that have worked in other parts of our business, and reflect it back into our DevOps and IT processes? How can we enhance our DevOps by adopting broader business principles and practices that seem to work? Carmen, I’ll let you take first crack at that.
DeArdo: So I think, actually, a lot of our test and learn activities started with the business who had actually hypotheses around, “Well, if we offered a policy in a different way or if we made a tweak to something, would we be able to sell more of those things?” So we had people who … and there’s a lot of statistical rigor that you have to bring to that. So we actually had people on the business side who had these ideas about, “I have a hypothesis. You know, is there a way you can allow me to test that hypothesis to see if it, in fact, will yield some positive result in terms of actual policies being sold?” So it was a very scientific-type experiment that they actually wanted to run, and at the time, we really didn’t have a way to support that from an IT perspective. And it kind of forced us to do some things to support, you know, how could we actually get this out and offer it to only a subset of people, which we now might call canary launch or some other terms that are DevOp-ish terms, but really nobody was reading a DevOps book at this point. They were just trying to figure out, “How can we support the business’s need here to try to adapt more quickly and have a high plan around?”
And that started, I think, some of the things that actually were successful that then led into once we started to get into DevOps, like, “Okay, what we actually did there was DevOps.” We didn’t call it DevOps, but those are principles that really we need to support not just in this one’s case, but for all kinds of business hypotheses that we want to get out and turn around real quickly. And doing that really does bring everybody together, because it’s exciting. It’s exciting if you can sit at a business and you can think up, “I have ideas for this product or that capability. You know, how can we more quickly try to see if that would be a good idea?” rather than writing a 12-month business case and trying to do, you know, a protracted study.
So the whole idea of experiments and gain things out quickly, I mean, everybody will resonate and get behind that if you talk about it in that way. If you start talking about Puppet and Chef and things like that, that’s not gonna cut it. But if you talk about it in terms of business and what it can mean for the business, then that resonates and gets a lot of people excited.
Shimel: Excellent. Jayne, how about you?
Groll: I mean, I think Carmen is right on point. And, Carmen, you said something I think that was … you’ve said a lot of very insightful things, but I think in particular that the experiment came down to, “How can we sell more policies? How can we make our business more successful?” And I think if you look at kind of the past in IT, sometimes, we didn’t know how we were contributing to the bottom line. So we were introducing a lot of technology, and we were doing all this cool stuff. But how did that convert into an increase in revenue, an increase in market share, increase in competitive advantage, things like that? And so I think that this unification with the business becomes more significant when IT sees themselves as an enabler of the goal. The goal of every business is to make money. And so sees themselves, and it goes back to information and communication as well, that they understand that what they’re doing is actually helping to sell more policies or increase market share or stand above the herd or anything along those lines.
Now, again, if you’re the CIO, you probably know that. If you’re in senior management, you probably know that. If you’re a developer and you’re one of a few hundred developers, you may not know that. And so I think that it is that kind of bottom-up top-down approach where understanding that what you do every day is contributing in a very, very substantial and tangible way. And then I think the other part of it, and, Carmen, I think you said it really well, is encouraging those experiments where the business and IT work together. And maybe it is that 1 in 100 coder that’s working as part of that team to say, “You know what? I have an idea.” Everything starts with a great idea. It could be from the business. Hopefully, from the business, that says, “I have an idea. Let’s see if we can, you know, bring that to life and what it will do to our bottom line.” And then there’s really a great collaboration between IT and the business.
Shimel: Agreed. Agreed. So, guys, we’re coming up to the top of the hour here, and I guess we need to wrap up. Otherwise, we’ll just be on air all day, and I know Jayne has a show in Vegas and so forth, and Carmen has stuff to do. But first of all, Carmen DeArdo, Jayne Groll, thanks for being our guests here on this hangout as we, you know, continue to build up to DevOps Enterprise London, DevOps Enterprise Summit London. Just a reminder for anyone watching, it is June 25th and 26th in London. There are still some tickets left, I think. I don’t know how many. I wouldn’t wait. You can get updates about the event as well as get tickets at events.itrevolution.com. It’s obviously on the web.
By the way, this year, as in past DevOps summits, devopsy.kinsta.cloud is a media sponsor. We’re partners. We’ve partnered with Gene from the beginning. We will be doing videos again this year at DevOps Enterprise Summit. I think it’s gonna be a little different this year. We’re doing some interesting roundtables. You’ll see them on our YouTube channel, DevOps TV. So stay tuned for that. All right. Guys and lady, or guy and lady, I had a great time today. I’ve learned a whole bunch. I hope our folks listening and watching this have learned as well. You know, you guys have done, not just today, but, Carmen and Jayne, you’ve been instrumental in helping to bring the gospel of DevOps to the world, if you may, or at least maybe not the gospel, but at least some really good learning and understanding.
So thanks again, guys, for being with us. We’re gonna call it a wrap. Carmen, any last word? Three words.
DeArdo: Three words. Project to product.
Shimel: Okay. Jayne? Last words from you.
Groll: Pittsburgh Steelers. I don’t know.
Shimel: We finally got her. Carmen, we converted her.
DeArdo: I should have said, “Let’s go Tens.” That’s three words.
Shimel: Okay. Hey, everyone. I will see you both in London June 25th and 26th. Hope to see many of you listening or watching this in London as well. If you’re there, stop by, say hello. I always like to meet people who have watched us online. But until then, this is Alan Shimel for devopsy.kinsta.cloud and IT Revolution. Thanks for watching, everyone, and hope to see you soon. Bye-bye.
This DevOps Chat features Scott Willson of CA Automic talking about CD pipelines and the modern software factory. The concept of a software factory may be new to some, while others may have heard the term but not really thought about what it means and still others may be very familiar with the term and practice it at their own job. But the idea of a software factory utilizing a pipeline for continuous delivery is at the heart of DevOps.
This is a really great chat that I enjoyed participating in with Scott. I hope you find it as such too.
As usual, the streaming audio of our conversation is below, followed by the transcript of our conversation.
Audio
Transcript
Alan Shimel: Hey, everyone, it’s Alan Shimel, devopsy.kinsta.cloud, and you’re listening to another episode of DevOps Chat. Today’s chat features my friend, Scott Willson, of CA Automic. Scott has been a frequent guest on DevOps Chat and the reason is he actually has real, usually, good stuff to say and he’s an interesting fellow to speak with. Scott, welcome again to DevOps Chats.
Scott Willson: Thank you, Alan. As always, glad to be here.
Shimel: Pleasure to have you here, my friend. So, Scott, we are going to delve into something today that maybe a lot of people in our audience are really familiar with and will like the drill-down, but there may be people who hear the terms but they’re not quite sure what it means. And so what I wanna talk about today are pipelines and especially when in terms of continuous delivery pipelines and how this fits into a concept – really, CA has coined it and led with it, but it’s the modern software factory, right, for enterprises. It’s a factory methodology, almost like an assembly line, if you will, of developing and deploying software and all that that entails.
So why don’t we start with basics, Scott, if it’s okay. What is – when we talk about the CI/CD pipeline, how would you explain that to someone?
Willson: Excellent. So the CI/CD pipeline is basically just the concept or the metaphor of taking any change, right, and this is any change that a developer has coded – a configuration change, a change to the data, and, currently, any change to an environment configuration – needs to go back to a starting point and then kind of run the gauntlet, as it were, where it is vetted, it’s tested, warranted, and then made available in production environments. And there’s a whole sequence of things that need to occur, and that sequence is referred to as the “pipeline.” And pipelines are often broken up into stages, from a logical perspective, but in those stages are specific tasks that have to occur in sequence, to have your software, ultimately, be ready to be safely deployed and delivered to production environments.
Shimel: Yep. It sounds great. Now, Scott, one of the things we’ve seen is, for instance, with Jenkins 2.0, the concept of pipelines and CD pipelines has really, I think, taken on a new gravitas, if you will, within the market. People are now getting serious about it. What about at Automic? And, beyond Automic, the rest of CA even? Where does this whole pipeline thing fit in?
Willson: Excellent. So, you know, Jenkins really is a continuous integration tool. It’s meant to run a sequential set of all-or-nothing tasks – I mean, “all-or-nothing,” that if step three of five were to fail, then the idea is the whole build would be marked as having failed. And they realized that, “Well, you know, maybe we ought to extend this to a continuous delivery thing, ie. move ourselves out of just building software and trying to push it to other environments. Now, of course, there are some challenges with this, so lots of vendors, including CA Automic’s ONE automation platform – and there’re several other vendors – have jumped in the space to help orchestrate the continuous delivery pipeline, continuous delivery kinda picking up where CI ends.
And that’s really where the CA Automic release automation comes in, where it is set to orchestrate and automate that pipeline from where CI stops, where the build basically ends and deposits thing in a secure repository, and then it helps move it all the way through to production. And the thing that CA, as well as other vendors who have entered this space and provide tooling for release automation, is that you’re trying to focus on having the same automation mechanics run in every environment, from dev all the way to production.
And, indeed, that is one of the formal tenets of continuous delivery – to use the same automation mechanics. If you don’t do that, you’re still throwing things over the wall, right? And you’re missing an opportunity to test and QA and vet the automation mechanics themselves so that you can have high level of confidence that they will work in production because they themselves have been tested out dozens of times prior to that new release or that new change that’s being published.
Shimel: Fair enough. Fair enough. Now, Scott, I guess this sort of begs the question, in order to understand, right, how powerful this concept is, can you give us kind of a little historical perspective? You know, what happens before pipelines? Before this concept of a software factory?
Willson: Well, right. Things were kind of done manually. You would use Jenkins to run your builds, not just to compile your little change, but to recompile all the other pieces that it integrates with. You know, integration. The integration part of continuous integration. And make sure that changes that have been made aren’t going to break the aggregate app. And so, once that was done, it was really handed off to QA, and QA would do their thing. There were all these manual handoffs. Spreadsheets were being used to track the progress or charts. Microsoft Project and other PM tools were used to help migrate and manage, rather, the path to production, with a lot of manual instruction sets.
I, previously, worked in a previous life, where production environments or staging environments would be handed a set of instructions that operations team had to follow. As you can imagine, there were always problems. There was always some little step, some little configuration thing, that was missed in those instructions. And so there would inevitably be errors. And so it was just very error-prone and failure-prone, actually, I would say, so CD is the evolution of this, of trying to move things in an automated, repeatable, predictable way, and a safe and secure way as well. And that’s kind of what brings us into this market.
And I would say, you know, I was going through some of my old notes. A lot of people don’t know this, but, prior to Automic being acquired by CA, Automic was the one who really started this ARA market. And we had approached Gartner and Forrester, trying to explain to ’em that there was actually a need for this market, and I won’t reveal which analyst, but, you know, a conversation like, “Well, what is this thing you’re talking about? This need to automate?” And we said, “Well, we like to call it ‘application release automation,’ ” and the term stuck with the analysts. So what the analyst call “application release automation,” funny enough, actually came from us, as we were starting down this journey. And, in fact, when I started, I had – with Automic, and I was part of the group that helped build this whole thing out, is that – it was funny – you’d go to do meetings and I heard, again and again, all over the world, literally globally, Alan, I’d hear this comment – “Wow, we didn’t know anything like that existed.” So this is kinda where we started.
Now, within two years, that changed. Within two years, there were several competitors, Nolio, UrbanCode, which both, like Automic, were acquired. And the world just kind of understands this whole concept nowadays, of continuous delivery automation. But, when we started out, this was new. And, you know, Automic actually was at the forefront and named this market, so I thought that was – that’s kind of cool to know.
Shimel: Absolutely. Absolutely. You know, Scott, I was just sitting here, thinking, you know, we’re both around in this business a long time, and so, in the late ’90s, dot-com days, I helped start a company called “Interliant,” and we were one of the early ASPs. Right? And we did Lotus Notes hosting and PeopleSoft hosting, Oracle apps, some other defunct software that’s not around anymore, but this was before cloud. And we had to customize every installation, every – you know, ’cause the apps needed to be customized. And I’m just thinking back to how we were developing and deploying back then. And, you know, it seems like 100 years ago, not 20 years ago, first of all, but it’s amazing when you think about the changes we’ve seen in such a short time.
Willson: Yeah, but you know what? It’s funny, Alan. So I remember those days as well, the pain of working weekends and doing massive deployments, but what’s funny now – we see all the things that have changed, but a lot of things are still remaining the same. In a lot of the large enterprises I visit, Alan, they’re doing this DevOps thing, the continuous delivery thing, with their new cloud-native-based apps or even they’re taking a big app, like their online banking app for a bank I won’t name, and they’re rewriting it in Node.js. Okay? Great. They do this since it’s in the cloud. They’re able to do all these new things – Agile, DevOps, continuous delivery – but they still have all this infrastructure in apps in the background, what I call “classically architected,” right? Your IIS, JBoss, WebSphere, WebLogic, so forth, client servers. You then also have your legacy – your mainframes and maybe large, packaged systems, like Sable and so forth.
So, even though they’re doing a lot of things – we’re hearing a lot of messaging towards the new ways to do stuff – a lot of enterprises I visit still haven’t gone on that journey ’cause they haven’t quite moved so many things in the cloud and they’re still doing the way things, Alan, you and I saw done in the ’90s.
Shimel: Mm-hmm.
Willson: In some ways, a lot of it’s kind of this panic. This fear of like, “Well, you just never know, man. If this thing goes down, there’s so much money at risk and at stake,” that they’re slow to change. And I would tell you that, in the years since I first started my journey during all the stuff, some eight or so years ago, that it’s – even just last year, it was kind of – I don’t wanna say refreshing, I don’t wanna say surprising, but it was certainly eye-opening to see how many large enterprises fundamentally still do things the same way they did in the late ’90s.
Shimel: Yep.
Willson: And they’re asking, “How do we go forward? How do we do this?”
Shimel: Agreed.
Willson: So it’s not a given, all this new stuff, Alan, is what, I guess, what I’m trying to say.
Shimel: No, it’s not a given. It’s not a given. But you also have to ask yourselves, Scott, right, fundamentally, is it a survival threat or threat to the survival of these companies who don’t kinda get with it, right? And what you see with that, Scott, is, look, there may be some industries and some companies and some businesses who, frankly, it’s just not that important. Right? Important. And they could do what they want and if they don’t get with it, they don’t get with it – that’s okay. And you need to – you know, and they may never adopt these ways of doing things and it may not really be a huge effect, but I think, for the overwhelming majority of these organizations, I mean, they really start falling behind the eight ball here, if they don’t get with it, and I think that’s what we’re seeing play itself out in the market today.
Willson: Absolutely. It’s a danger if you don’t adapt. If they don’t improve their customer experiences, they could absolutely find themselves going out of business. I remember reading a lot about Bill Gates in the mid-90s and how he was just really maniacally focused and concerned with the concept that he could be out of business within just a couple to three years. And, when I was much younger and reading this, I thought, “Wow, that’s a good lesson to learn, one, but, two, I think he’s a bit over-exaggerating things.” Well, he wasn’t. Turns out, big companies, as we’ve seen since the year 2000, have vanished, and it’s very important that organizations who haven’t begun this move begin to modernize their way of delivering software. They just have to.
Shimel: Got it. Got it. And I think we’re seeing that play out, right? Where it’s kind of “DevOps or die” or whatever you wanna call it. Anyway, Scott, we’re just about out of time. Before we close up, anything news coming out of Automic you can share with us?
Willson: Well, obviously, we’ve got new stuff coming out, but I really think the new thing – it’s not that new, but one of the things I’m very excited about in joining CA is just this whole concept of a modern software factory, where – and joining CA, the Automic team is an integral part of this strategy and what they’re trying to help these large enterprises do, right? ‘Cause the enterprises, as I said, it’s just not the cloud-native stuff. They have all the classical and legacy stuff that they want to onboard for continuous delivery too and they’re struggling.
And this whole thing about this modern software factory, I think it’s a bit more of a focus on the tooling, right? It’s another layer to DevOps and to continuous delivery, is looking at assembling and organizing the tooling to get all of your platforms moving at continuous delivery speeds. And it’s definitely possible, but I’m very excited and passionate about this modern software factory and where we can help CA take it. And I think that’s really a good mindset to have, is, yeah, this whole idea of you just plug in your inputs in one end, where your destination’s on the other end, and have things just happen and get you to the promise land.
Shimel: Yep. I hear ya. All right. Well, Scott Willson, thanks for being this episode’s guest on DevOps Chat. Hope to have you back soon. I know you’re working on some stuff, Scott, and, at the right time, we’ll have you on here to brief the world on it, but, until then, it’s always great catching up with you. Lots of success over at CA and Automic and we’ll talk to you soon.
Willson: Sounds good, Alan, and, at this time of the year, I will just say, good luck on your bracket. [Laughs]
Shimel: Yes to everyone out there. Okay. Hey, Scott Willson, CA Automic Software, your guest today on DevOps Chat. This is Alan Shimel and you’ve just listened to DevOps Chat. Have a great day, everyone. We’ll see you soon.
Here I am at the Fontainebleau Miami Beach for Appian World 2018, where the theme is “Transform.” The event, which is the biggest one yet with 1,500 registered attendees, is all about low code, and in his keynote address, CEO Matt Calkins emphasized that low code app-building isn’t for unsophisticated, simple apps—we don’t need powerful tools such as Appian for those. Rather, low code is for sophisticated apps to set free the renaissance that will happen with easier app-building.
This is the first Appian World since the company went public last year, and the event has a public-company feel. I didn’t see a lot of people in jeans and t-shirts—most attendees were fairly well-dressed in business-casual, the mark of enterprises.
One of the touch points in Calkins’ keynote was reliance on open standards. Another was to make use of artificial intelligence (AI). I know AI and machine learning (ML) seem to be everywhere. It was interesting the company announced AI integrations with Amazon, Microsoft and Google, but no Apple or IBM Watson. I will ask Calkins about this when I interview him for DevOps TV later today.
Calkins inherently believes that low code will set off a revolution as software continues to disrupt and empower the digital transformation revolution. The logic behind it is simple: “Making applications easier to make because you don’t have to code as much.” But Calkins emphasizes that does not mean you are making unsophisticated applications. The world doesn’t need low-code tools to make unsophisticated applications. It is the higher calling for sophisticated apps that Appian is all about.
Another mantra from the keynote was, “Host anywhere, run anywhere, data anywhere.” The idea here is a true hybrid reality where data can be on-prem or apps hosted on public cloud, on containers or not. In fact, Calkins was very bullish on containers (who isn’t?). Docker integration is already available and he hinted at announcements regarding Kubernetes as well.
Appian seems to have succeeded by becoming the low-code platform. With lots of integration and focus on making application development, management and deployment easier, the company has risen to the top of its market.
Stay tuned for more updates from Appian World today and tomorrow.
In this DevOps Chat we spoke with Prem Chandraskearan, VP of Software Engineering at Barclaycard. Prem led the DevOps transformation there. He sums up his learning thusly:
The best way for an organization to approach DevOps is from a collaborative angle. When development and operations experts actively work together in a cohesive effort, solutions are well designed, efficient and smart from both a development and maintenance perspective. When operations is viewed as a software problem, Dev and Ops can work in tandem to implement a tool that is holistically a part of the process from start to finish.
DevOps is always a work in progress, but the initiative can only improve with quality resources that implement a variety of backgrounds and perspectives on both Dev and Ops working together. Barclaycard has had some interesting challenges with DevOps due to being in the credit card/banking industry, so for example, the “you build it, you run it” mantra doesn’t work as well for us as it would for other enterprises implementing DevOps. It is definitely a learning curve, and our goals and best practices are still coming to fruition, but we are continuing to find ways to automate.
The best way to get teams to work together is to simply ensure that they are not in silos, meaning that if there are distinct dev and ops teams, they must spend time in each other’s sectors to understand the pains, how the functions work, what makes it tick, etc. When the development and maintenance perspective are strategized in tandem, it automatically makes for a better, more streamlined workflow.
The best way to ensure a DevOps initiative’s long-term success is to ensure that the foundation of the program is collaborative and understanding of how each function works. With this, automation testing for failure is imperative to discover problems that are typically only otherwise found in production. If all the bases are covered and the process is streamlined and collaborative, the overall quality of your DevOps function will be much higher.
As usual, the streaming audio of our conversation is immediately below, followed by the transcript of our conversation
Audio
Transcript
Alan Shimel: Hi, everyone, it’s Alan Shimel, devopsy.kinsta.cloud, and you’re listening to another DevOps Chat. Got a great chat scheduled for today. We’ve got a real, live DevOps practitioner. I’d like you to welcome to the show Mr. Prem Chandrasekaran—and I mangled that terribly—Prem, why don’t you give us proper pronunciation?
Prem Chandrasekaran: The name goes “Prem Chandrasekaran.”
Shimel: Fair enough. I don’t think I did that bad then. So, Prem, you are a software group leader at Barclaycard US, correct?
Chandrasekaran: That’s correct.
Shimel: Okay. And, well, before we get into it, let’s make sure that, in case people aren’t familiar with Barclaycard, who they are and what they do, if you wouldn’t mind just giving us maybe a quick little background on that.
Chandrasekaran: Yeah. So Barclaycard in the US is a credit card provider. Our primary business is co-branded credit cards, so, for example, when you’ve got an Apple credit card, if you look carefully, it actually says “Barclaycard” on it, in the background somewhere, but we’ve got a whole bunch of partners like that and we provide credit card services for our partners and customers through the co-brand. We also have a consumer lending business, which is a lot recent, but the credit card business is what is our primary revenue _____ _____, if you wanna look at it that way.
Shimel: Very good. And, Prem, in your role as software leader, what exactly does that mean? ‘Cause it means different things in different orgs.
Chandrasekaran: Yeah, yeah. So my actual title is that of a vice president, but, you know, what I was hired to do was to incept this new line of business. We were coming up with a new line of business called “consumer lending.” And our infrastructure, both hardware, software practices, all of those were on a pretty old legacy system, and we had two choices. One was that we would build on top of the legacy system or create a new platform, as we wanna call it, have all of the modern techniques that we use, including CI/CD, a lot of XP factors, and so on.
And I was brought in as a consultant first when I took the role on full time, two years ago, to lead the launch of that new consumer lending business. And I’ve been doing that. And now we’re trying to apply the same processes, software, hardware, all of those solutions, onto the credit card business, as well as we try to migrate.
Shimel: Excellent. And how long has this project been ongoing?
Chandrasekaran: Consumer lending started somewhere in 2015 and we launched at the end of 2016. It’s been live for the last 18 months or so. And what I’ve been doing after that is, again, I’m still in charge of making sure that consumer lending runs in production, but we’re also building what we call a “global platform” – basically, a set of design patterns and application templates and CI/CD pipelines to allow us to create new services, migrate existing ones, and develop what we call the platform –
Shimel: Oh, sorry. Go ahead.
Chandrasekaran: Yeah, so what I’ve been doing is we’ve been defining the learnings from what we did for consumer lending and making it available to development teams here, so that they can focus more on the business-logic portion of things, solving real problems, as opposed to grappling with a whole bunch of the surrounding stuff, nonfunctional stuff like log-in monitoring, CI/CD pipelines, tracing, and authentication authorization, and so on and so forth.
Shimel: Correct. So, Prem, I didn’t hear you mention security or cyber security, though, and that’s obviously something that’s important anytime we talk about financial services. Where did that play in, in the program here?
Chandrasekaran: I mean, we like to think that it’s something that starts with the code that you write, you know, so we make sure that all of our developers and teams think about security right from the ground up. And we have tests, both static and dynamic and penetration test frameworks, which check the state of the code that you’re developing from a security perspective, right through the CI/CD pipelines. And you’ve got a whole bunch of automation and a bunch of manual penetration tests that the teams do, to make sure that we are producing things that are secure not only for ourselves but also for our customers.
Shimel: Got it. So, Prem, let me ask you a question then. What I think is interesting is this was a project that, as you said, started in 2015, and here we are, 2018, talking about some successes you’ve had. And now rolling some of the lessons and learnings and success from that throughout other parts of the organization. And that actually – no two DevOps transformations, no two experiences, are exactly the same, but that’s right in sort of the sweet spot of how we see DevOps expanding within an organization. You get a project and many people are surprised that, in spite of the speed and automation that we think about in DevOps, it actually takes time. It takes time to launch a project. It takes time to bring a project to market like this.
But, once that’s done and you have good results, part of that DevOps way, if you will, is to take the feedback loops, take the learning, take the lessons learned, and apply them in other places within the organization. Prem, what about executives sponsorship of this, if you will? I mean, you’re a group leader, but, above you, what kind of buy-in or sponsorship did you have from your exec team
Chandrasekaran: Oh, absolutely. I mean, without exec sponsorship, I don’t think we would have progressed to where we are. I mean, we’re by no means done, but, you know, we are still in this journey and we’ve got a very solid leadership team which basically said that we need to operate not as a traditional bank, but as an IT organization, rivaling the best in the world, right? And that’s where we want to be. And it starts from there. And it percolates pretty much every single facet of our organization, starting form hiring to the way that we think. Basically, you know, DevOps is really a means of shortening the cycle of getting a product out of the door reliably and repeatedly, right?
Shimel: Yep
Chandrasekaran: So it does take a huge amount of effort in terms of the automation and the processes that we need to put in place, but, yeah, I mean, we’ve got very strong support from our leaders to help us transform the organization that way.
Shimel: Okay. So, Prem, let me put you on the spot here a little bit. We have listeners out there saying, “Wow, this guy’s done a project where they did this,” right? If you could – and we didn’t discuss it, so I apologize for putting you on the spot – can you give our listeners sorta three things they should avoid? What were the three biggest lessons you learned in the course of this project?
Chandrasekaran: Yeah, so, okay, I’m gonna try to look for three things, right? Okay, so the first thing that comes to mind is that, at least at a place like where we are, in a bank, right, buy-in is very important. So you might have buy-in from the top, but you need to have buy-in from pretty much every facet of the organization, that automation isn’t a threat to their jobs and existence, right?
Shimel: Mm-hmm.
Chandrasekaran: Where, you know, it’s normal that now our time and operations person – “Oh, my job can be automated and now I’m out of a job.” Right? That’s one thing that it’s largely a psychology thing, where you have to address that and give people the confidence that that’s not the motive here. The motive here is to churn out software fast and enable both DevOps, business, QA, information security – I mean, you name a whole bunch of these groups – it’s about collaborating and working closely together to achieve the end, which is putting out software solutions for our customers and our stakeholders repeatedly and reliably, like I said before. That’s one. It’s more of a mental shift that needs to happen. And, unless you do that, you’re going to meet with a lot of resistance.
The second thing is in terms of who you hire, right? Like I said, it’s a mental thing. It’s a philosophy where you need to have likeminded people who want to do the automation, as opposed to doing something that’s manual and error-prone, right? So hiring the right kind of people definitely is second.
And, third, it also needs your business folks to be patient while these transformations happen, where you might not see the benefits of it on day two, right? It takes a while for the benefits to start appearing because it does take a lot of practice. And we’re not there yet in terms of saying that we’ve achieved perfection – I guess nobody can say that – but it does take a few patient stakeholders as well. I mean, those are my three things.
Shimel: Excellent. So, you know, Prem, when we started, I said the 15 minutes go quick – we’re wrapping up here – but, again, for our listeners who maybe are contemplating or in the throes of their own DevOps journeys, I mean, this is certainly a success story to date. What else – I mean, what’s next here, though? Beyond what you’ve already mentioned to us?
Chandrasekaran: Yeah, you know, so, right now – I mean, our next step is to scale this out, right? I mean, we’ve got one product line that is using all of these, and a bunch of the rest of the organization, at least here in the US, has drawn a lot of inspiration from the successes that we’ve gained here. You know, we still operate in a private-cloud environment. We’re targeting going to the public cloud, which basically means that we now allow ourselves to scale a lot more quicker and a lot more faster. So, yeah, I mean, that’s probably the next step, where we’re targeting the public cloud and provide value to our business and customers a lot more quicker that way.
Shimel: Excellent. Excellent. Well, Prem, thanks so much for giving us a little bit of insight into how Barclaycard US has leveraged DevOps here and has started out on their own DevOps journey. We’d love to hear more about it in the future; maybe we can check in.
Chandrasekaran: Yeah. Thank you very much, Alan, for having us.
Shimel: Okay. Prem—and I’m not even gonna mess it up or attempt ’cause I will mess it up—Prem, thanks so much for joining us here on DevOps Chat. This is Alan Shimel for DevOps Chat and we hope to see you soon on another DevOps Chat. Have a great day, everyone.
This DevOps Chat features “the CEO’s view” as seen by XebiaLabs CEO, Derek Langone. Derek is one of my personal favorite CEOs in the DevOps space because he is very articulate, to the point and sharp. I think all of these characteristics come through in this DevOps Chat. As CEO of XebiaLabs, Derek is leading one of the leading companies helping transformations in enterprise DevOps. In this chat, Derek talks about with us about cloud and cloud migration.
As usual, the streaming media of our conversation is below. The transcript of our conversation follows below that.
Audio
Transcript
[su_pullquote align=”right”][su_custom_gallery source=”media: 122032″ link=”post” target=”blank” width=”200″ height=”200″ title=”never”]Derek Langone
Derek Langone has been the Chief Executive Officer of XebiaLabs, Inc. since April 21, 2015. Mr. Langone served an Executive Vice President of Global Sales at Telerik, Inc. since February 2014. Prior to Telerik, he served as the Chief Executive Officer of 5nine Software where, in less than a year, he significantly increased revenue, lead generation and conversion rates. He served as the Chief Executive Officer, President and Chief Operating Officer of SmartBear Software, Inc. (also known as AutomatedQA Corporation). He served as the President and Chief Operating Officer of SmartBear, Inc. He began his career on Wall Street focused on technology investing. For over 15 years, he has focused on building and scaling Technical Sales Organizations. Prior to SmartBear, he served as Vice President of Sales at Quest Software and IMCEDA Software. He held senior Sales Positions at Vality Technology, (now IBM), Embarcadero and SAP America. He is an Industry Veteran, has more than 15 years of expertise in cultivating enterprise IT and application development adoption. He has been a Director at XebiaLabs, Inc. since April 21, 2015. Mr. Langone holds a Bachelor’s Degree in Business Management from Boston University.[/su_pullquote]Alan Shimel: Hey, everyone, this is Alan Shimel, devopsy.kinsta.cloud, and you’re listening to another DevOps chat. Happy to be joined today on DevOps chat by Derek Langone, CEO of Xebia Labs. Hey Derek, how are you
Derek Langone: Alan, I’m excellent, thanks very much for having me today.
Shimel: Thank you. Just a heads-up to our audience, I had been working on this for a long time. Derek’s agreed to be sort of a regular guest here on DevOps Chat and we’re looking forward to hearing from him, oh, maybe once a month or so on topics that are of interest to hopefully our whole audience so you know they’ll be around DevOps and related to technologies.
So, this is the first one we’re doing and we were going to talk today a little bit about cloud and whether you already are a cloud customer or new to the cloud, how can DevOps and related technologies help you.
But before we do, Derek, in case there’s anyone out there who maybe is not familiar with Xebia Labs, you want to give them a real quick kind of pitch on Xebia Labs and what you guys are doing?
Langone: Sure, here’s the 30-second commercial. So, Xebia Labs is entirely focused on enterprise DevOps. We provide a software platform for large enterprises that encompasses three primary components, released orchestration so basically create your pipelines in our technology that are templated, repeatable, standardized, use our automated deployment engine which is a model-based agentless engine.
And then lastly, we have a machine-learning and AI-oriented reporting engine that collects all the data associated with your journey from development to production. It allows you to report on that for things like compliance purposes, regulatory purposes, security, and just a good old-fashioned scorecard – am I going faster? Is my quality up? Are my customers happier?
Shimel: Couldn’t have asked for more than that in 30 seconds, Derek, thanks. So, here’s the deal, we are approaching I think this year a threshold in cloud adoption where it’s something like 50 percent of enterprises will have significant infrastructure in the cloud, not just a toe in the water or an R&D project, but significant infrastructure in the cloud.
And that’s big, right?That means half of all enterprises have a large investment in cloud. But it also means half, don’t, right? And that’s always the flip side of the coin. I want to talk today to both of these audiences but let’s first start with the half that already has, right?
They’ve invested a lot time, a lot of money, probably a lot software or tools and personnel, but maybe they’re not getting everything they need out of their cloud deployment? How can DevOps help?
Langone: Well, DevOps by principle is sort of an accelerate opportunity, right? And if you look at a cloud investment, it’s a similar value proposition that you don’t have the requirement to manage this infrastructure, you’ve got less administrative overhead, you’ve just got on-demand, scalable infrastructure. So, that’s all oriented around speed.
The challenges we see with our customers that are generally large enterprises, the biggest banks, insurance companies, airlines, in the world represent our customer base. They’re moving aggressively to the cloud because it’s just generally less expensive and certainly much less administrative overhead.
But the consequences, the applications they’re trying to get there are very complex and don’t necessarily lend themselves to moving to the cloud very neatly. And what I mean by that is if you use an example like a large bank might have a money transfer application, core to every business that’s a big financial institution.
That application lives in many places; the back-end horsepower may be a mainframe, there’s referential databases that do some validation every time there’s a query. You’ve got distributed architecture, maybe a containerized front end that gives you your mobile banking access and things like that.
Moving all of that to the cloud is not simple, it really requires an incredible amount of orchestration, some very sophisticated deployment functionality. And we see most of our customers when we get engaged, them trying to do that with either the simple tools that come with the cloud platform providers, you know, the out-of-the-box Amazon or Azure tool portfolio.
Or in most cases, just using the good old- fashioned, using extremely talented valuable developers to write tons of scripts to try to move these components around and shift them to the cloud. Neither of those initiatives are generally successful.
Shimel: And I think you just hit it, Derek. Those are the two ends of the dumbbell if you will, right? One is to use the vanilla tools that the cloud providers give you and not to bang anyone but AWS is notorious for this, right?
They give you 60 percent of the functionality at a really low, low price of some of the best __ tools but it comes bundled. Or you go the other way, right, just totally customize the heck out of things, which is not scalable usually, nor repeatable.
Langone: No, it’s not, that’s the challenge. And just to hit those two ends of the dumb-bell as you said, the tools that come with the cloud providers, I mean, look, they’re sort of minimalistic by nature because it’s not the core business that they’re trying to provide. They’re infrastructure providers, they’re really not deployment technologists, right?
So they’re gonna give you a little bit to get some basic applications there but anything complex is really gonna fall down. And like you said, the other side of it is, and the more traditional approach, is just using your engineering assets to write a ton of scripts to provision infrastructure, to migrate applications, to request instances.
You know, it’s just an incredible amount of plumbing code that gets written that is super low-value and basically comes at the expense of much higher value activities that those engineers could be participating in, things like building new features and fixing bugs and just basically delivering more customer value.
Shimel: And with that approach, Derek, to me it’s always been, well, what happens next month when I have to do this again? I’m gonna rewrite all the scripts, waste all that time? It just doesn’t make sense. But you hit on this with your opening, the reality is that most of these organizations who may already have significant infrastructure in the cloud are not totally in the public cloud certainly.
They still do have mainframes, they have stuff in the closet, they have stuff in the data center. They’re living in a hybrid world, right, Derek? And so for whatever reason, and I’ve heard this from numerous, they hate the idea of using one tool for their public cloud stuff, one tool for their on-print stuff, one tool for their private cloud. They want one throat to choke, right? They want one tool.
Langone: Well, I think they want one platform that can kind of account for the migration and IT landscape that they are going through, right?
Shimel: Yes.
Derek Langone:And that’s sort of what we’ve tried to build at Xebia Labs. We work with the legacy infrastructure and give you velocity, repeatability, standardization for your mainframe deployments in the exact same way that we will accelerate your journey to containers and leveraging Kubernetes and Docker as well as, you know, getting onto what is generally hybrid cloud infrastructure.
We definitely see large organizations leveraging things like Amazon but in most cases, they’ve got some combination of a data-center cloud that they’ve got under their own control, as well as the sort of less mission-critical applications or the things that don’t represent the family jewels if you will in true public cloud infrastructure.
And when I talked to CIOs in these organizations about their aggressive shift to the cloud, they look at me and say, look, we’re moving to the cloud with a lot of new development and some of the less mission-critical applications but the five apps that we run the bank on are gonna be running on mainframes five years from now.
That’s not changing. We can’t break them up into micro-services and they don’t lend themselves to refactoring. We’re gonna continue to just add, you know, additional workload front ends but for the most part, they’re gonna stay intact. And that just represents I think the reality in enterprises.
Shimel: And that is dead on the reality. And I just want to make sure we’re talking about tools like Xebia actually give these organizations the ability to use one platform across these multiple infrastructures.
Langone: Yeah, I mean, look, I don’t want to just plug our platform because there’s others out there, there’s others out there, but at the end of the day, yes, what we’ve tried to do is basically build the technology that can accommodate the mission-critical requirements of a large enterprise. So, not only have we baked in the ability to deploy any technology from any starting point to any destination including public cloud, private cloud, hybrid, containers, you name it, right?
We’ve also baked in all of the things that enterprises need to account for, like the compliance steps, the security steps, the who did what and when to the software reporting, so that all of these standards are met if you’re migrating to infrastructure that’s off of your own premises.
None of those business requirements go away. In fact, in most cases, they get a little bit more stringent as the security team start to understand that if you’re gonna move applications outside of the firewall of the organization, then we need to put even more validation steps and security procedures in place.
And again, if you’re doing this manually with engineers, they need to script for all of that activity and maintain it every time there’s a slight change in the application.
It just becomes 50 percent of an engineer’s day managing these scripts that were built to move applications around when they could be using that 50 percent of their day to do things that are much, much more interesting for them and much more valuable to the organization.
Shimel: Sure, I mean, and again, we’re not tooting Xebia’s horn here but you know what, Derek, from a manager-executive point of view maybe listening to this, knowing that there are tools like that that will allow them to go across these different infrastructures, single platform, is important. I mean, that was always one of the big inhibitors.
Langone: No, you’re absolutely right, and look, what we’re tried to build into our platform is this templated approach. We have a model-based architecture, it’s agentless so you create templates and every single application that you have to move from development to production follows one of maybe three or four templates.
And we’re talking 3 to 4 templates account for 500 different applications, whereas the alternative is you’re basically hand-scripting 500 different paths to production. So it’s much easier to maintain, it’s centralized, it’s controlled, there’s reporting, there’s visibility, there’s sort of all the things that you need to be able to score your process for migrating applications, whether it be to the cloud, the containers, or just frankly, to an existing data center.
So, that’s really an important consideration. The other piece to consider, and again, a place where we’ve put a lot focus in our platform is leveraging what you’re doing already. So, we are a part of the process but you’ve got provisioning tools, like Puppet and Chef, you’ve got service ticketing, like Service Now or Gira, Jenkins on the CI side.
A lot of technologies are required to move applications from one destination to the next, so we integrate with all that infrastructure that’s already running right out of the box, and we basically allow you to pick best-of-breed components so that you’re not locked into one specific vendor. And that’s been a lot of the feedback that we get from our particularly big financial services customers.
They like the fact that if they want to switch cloud providers on the fly and move from Amazon to Rat Space or from Rat Space to Azure, they can do that with changing one configuration file in our product rather than having to rescript everything from scratch to reach a new destination.
So, it really comes down to you avoid vendor lock-in, but when you want to make a pivot, that pivot in our technology and our platform takes five minutes versus months of scripting.
Shimel: Months, exactly. So, Derek, let’s make our own pivot, let’s talk about the other 50 percent of companies that aren’t moving major infrastructure to the cloud, or big parts of their infrastructure to the cloud. Let’s first of all say should they? Should they feel they’re getting left behind? Is it fatal to their business? What’s your feeling?
Langone: You know, I think every IT organization makes choices that line up to the business objectives of their firm. I wouldn’t say that the shift to cloud is mandatory. There’s certainly a strong value proposition associated with it. It’s very, very expensive to keep technology infrastructure fresh. That’s always been the issue.
You could build the data center but then, you know, 18 months later, all the technology in there is sort of out of rev, right? So you’re forced to buy it over and over and over again versus the cloud providers. You’re certainly paying the rental fee and that rental fee can be steep but you’ve always got state-of-the-art infrastructure to work against, and that’s just a very compelling argument.
The other pieces, the administrative element goes away so there’s less people required to maintain it because it’s getting maintained for you. But the majority of our customers are moving to the cloud but for specific reasons and with specific applications, right? They’re not just wholesale-lifting their entire application portfolio to the cloud because it’s just not practical.
So in the cases of customers that are still on premise, and that’s still the majority of large enterprises, I am not at all a cloud-denier. People are moving there and moving there aggressively, but when you look at large enterprises, I think your number was 50 percent are using and 50 percent are not.
My on the ground sort of feeling is it’s less than 50 percent that are aggressively using the cloud for many different reasons, not the least of which are just security concern that still sort of haunt these large organizations. But the fact is anywhere your applications reside, right now DevOps is a good investment.
Being able to increase the velocity at which you can build technology and deliver value through software to your end users is sort of a fundamental requirement nowadays in order to stay competitive in your own given space.
So, we help with velocity, like I said earlier, on mainframes distributed technology, legacy systems, building a repeatable standardized release and deployment process with all the reporting that you’d expect to be able to identify where you’ve got areas of friction that can be remedied.
So, we sort of approach with the same – our approach is the exact same whether it’s a legacy application or a nimble application that’s being written in containers to run in cloud infrastructure.
The templates are the same, the mechanics of how you release and deploy those applications is the exact same.
So, the beauty of our platform becomes anybody can use it, it’s understood, it’s centrally managed and it scales infinitely versus writing code which just is difficult and impossible to maintain over time.
Shimel: Sure. So, Derek, you brought an interesting point up though and it was one that I wanted to hit on. And that is, look, for those who are just moving to cloud, right, there’s a choice to be made. Do I take my inherited legacy, not so much infrastructure as much as my legacy stack and just port this existing stuff to the cloud?
Or do I really just bite the bullet in Greenfield, right? Like, my stuff hasn’t been built on containers, maybe it wasn’t even built on hypervisors and virtualizations – who knows? But you know what, if I’m gonna move to the cloud, the heck with it, I might as well containerize and take advantage of micro-services and all of this.
But my goodness, that’s such a major, you know, throwing out babies with bathwater potential. What’s your advice to companies faced with do I just port my existing architecture, or do I go for broke in more ways than one and adopt the new stuff?
Langone: Yeah, I’ll tell you, in my experience, and I wouldn’t want to give advice ’cause every company sort of has to line up against their business objectives. But what I will tell you, what we see most often is people threading the needle, right? Basically taking these monolithic applications and starting to build components of those applications in containers on sort of more nimble infrastructure.
You know, a good example, as I mentioned earlier, a money transfer app, right? That’s a legacy application that’s been running in a big bank for 25 years. The horsepower on the back end that does all the computations is still a couple of IBM mainframes strung together. But you’ve got referential databases that are living in distributed architecture maybe onsite, maybe offsite in the cloud somewhere.
You’ve got containerized and mobile-centric front ends so you could do your mobile banking, web banking, things like that. So, that application lives in a lot of different places and you can, with some small investment in more nimble development platforms and infrastructure on the front end, really energize and give life to these legacy applications.
So, there isn’t a need to move the entire thing to the cloud. You can move components of it to the cloud, but again, when you do that, you get the benefit of the faster architecture and the ability to deliver value through your software more frequently for your end users.
But the consequences, getting those components to the cloud becomes really complex and that’s where our technology really lends a hand, where we understand those complexities, we’ve accounted for them already.
We do this sort of every day for the biggest banks in the world so you can take advantage of not having to reinvent the wheel and still get the benefit of the velocity that you’re looking for and the flexibility you’re looking for in these applications that need to live on.
Shimel: You know what, Derek, that was one of the best examples of hybrid cloud that I’ve heard. I think for too many people they think of hybrid cloud, they say, well, this application lives in the cloud, this application lives on my mainframe, this application lives in a data-center, my payroll system is here, my HR system is there, but that’s not really hybrid cloud.
Hybrid cloud is we have one application that different elements and components of it live in this hybrid world, right?
Langone: Yes, I think there’s a misunderstanding that you’re either in the cloud or you’re not, right? The fact is, I think, that in most cases, most of our clients, you’ve sort of got one leg in both places.
Shimel: Yeah, at the same time.
Langone: You’ve got I’m somewhat in the cloud, and they make decisions relative to where can I get the biggest bang for my buck? Some of this application needs to be in the cloud for a bunch of reasons so let’s do it, and then we’re just not gonna forklift up our mainframe apps and dump them on AWS. It’s a cost-ineffective strategy; we’d have to refactor them like crazy.
So, yeah, and I don’t think that trend is gonna change, right? There’s certainly a bunch of Greenfield development that’s going on, containerized apps micro-services, just cloud-centric development. And that’s great but that represents generally less than ten percent of the application portfolio in a large organization.
And that’s the fact is that 90 percent of the apps have been around for five years or longer, and those apps are critical to the business.
And they, over time, will migrate to the cloud and be refactored and rewritten.
But it’s just too big of an endeavor for any large company to take a 1000-application portfolio and say, hey, this year we’re going to rewrite all these for the cloud. I mean, I don’t know anybody that’s doing that.
Shimel: I would hope not. Hey, Derek, I think I told you before we started, time goes really quick here. We’re at maybe 25 minutes now, we were supposed to be 15, so we could probably talk about this all day, but we’ll continue the conversation on our next visit with you.
But, hey, this was great, Derek Langone, CEO, Xebia Labs. Thanks for being our guest on DevOps Chat today and we hope to have you back real soon here.
Langone: Thanks, Alan, talk to you soon.
Shimel: All right, this is Alan Shimel for devopsy.kinsta.cloud, we’ll see you soon on another DevOps Chat.
Interop China has been growing steadily since its inception in 2013. It is part of the Cloud Connect conference in Shanghai. This year the conference will feature both DevOps and DevSecOps tracks and talks. Jayne Groll of the DevOps Institute is the DevOps track chair and Alan Shimel of devopsy.kinsta.cloud and Security Boulevard is speaking at DevSecOps.com. We sat down with Molly Huang and Kelly Yao of UBM China to discuss this year’s event.
Molly and Kelly give us a little of the history of Interop & Cloud Connect China, as well as a behind-the-scenes look at what goes into selecting tracks and putting on a major event such as this. It is also a great look into the tech scene in China.
As usual, the streaming audio of our conversation is below followed by the transcript of our conversation.
Audio
Transcript
Alan Shimel: Hey, everyone. This is Alan Shimel.
Jayne Groll: And this is Jayne Groll.
Shimel: And you’re listening to a combined podcast tonight of DevOps Chat, along with Continuous Chit Chat, which is, of course, the podcast from The DevOps Institute and the Community of Continuous Learning.
Jayne, welcome!
Groll: Hi, Alan, how are you? I don’t think we’ve done a podcast together in a little bit, huh?
Shimel: Well, we—[Laughter] that’s what happens when you travel around the world.
Groll: [Laughter]
Shimel: And I’m traveling as well, but we have certainly been on opposite ends of the world, and that’s actually a great lead-in to tonight’s show, Jayne, where we talk about traveling around the world, because we’re happy and lucky to have two of our colleagues coming to us from China today. We have Kelly Yao, who’s a Project Manager at UBM in China, and Molly Wong, who works with UBM for Interop China, and it was a Cloud event, wasn’t it?
Kelly, Molly—welcome to our podcast.
Molly Wong: Hi! Hello, Jayne. Hello, Alan.
Kelly Yao: Hi, Jayne and Alan.
Shimel: Thank you.
Wong: It’s really nice to help out.
Shimel: Ladies, thank you. Molly, besides Interop China, what was the Cloud event you mentioned?
Wong: Okay. So, the whole name of our event is Interop and Cloud Connect China.
Shimel: Ah, I got it.
Groll: So, it’s one event?
Shimel: Yes, so—
Groll: It’s one single event.
Shimel: Got it.
Wong: Yeah, it’s one single event.
Shimel: Interop and Cloud Event China. Very good. Now, Molly, if you don’t mind me asking you, many people in our audience, I’m sure, are familiar with the Interop name. It’s been one of the top IT shows here in the United States for 20 plus years. But they may not be familiar that China has an Interop event. How long has Interop China been held? How many years?
Wong: So, as we all know, Interop is an international event focused on information technologies and the ecosystems of the cloud community. But when it was first introduced to China in 2013, however, only the deliberation of cloud computing was capped, because at that time, Chinese companies were just at the same point switching from hardware to cloud services for cost reduction.
So, that’s why, initially, the Interop China event is not called Interop, it was called Cloud Connect China.
Shimel: Ah, interesting!
Groll: And I was gonna ask, and it kind of makes some sense, if you think of Interop as an international event, which is really about operations, and Cloud Connect certainly is about operations. So, it sounds like, Molly, that the approach here was really to produce an event that spoke to not only cloud from an operational perspective, but also just IT operations in general. Is that correct?
Wong: Yes, because, you know, UBM, by its nature, is an event organizer. So, we have to keep up with the global trends and add different burning topics into the conference every year so as to make the event more compelling.
Shimel: Absolutely.
Wong: So, this year—and Alan, if you don’t mind, let me ask a little bit about DevOps. Because, as you know, I’m gonna be the track chair for the DevOps track. So, tell us why you decided to add a DevOps track to Interop, and even including DevSecOps, which is a security—obviously, DevOps and Security.
So, what are you hoping to come out of the DevOps track?
Wong: You are asking me, or Kelly?
Groll: Either one. We haven’t heard from Kelly, so maybe Kelly wants to answer.
Wong: Okay, I will answer that for Kelly, because I’m mainly responsible for the content.
Groll: Okay.
Wong: So, I think nowadays, the technological benefits of DevOps is very obvious, and organizations that successfully implement DevOps, implement DevOps tools and practices in general, they tend to be ahead of their competitors across key metrics like profitability and growth. So, that’s why the Chinese DevOps communities are growing so fast, as a lot of professionals are flocking into the DevOps ________ and to learn and adapt.
So, from our part, we think we would love to contribute to build up a platform for these lovers and learners to communicate, to collaborate, and to excel.
Shimel: Excellent. Jayne—so, Molly, if you don’t mind, I’d like to hear from Kelly a little bit. Kelly, in your role of Program Manager, how are you sourcing content? Where is the content for the DevOps and the DevSecOps and so forth? Is it internal to the Chinese community? Are you bringing in also people from around the international DevOps community? You know, I imagine it must be quite a job putting this all together.
Kelly Yao: Yes, yes. Exactly. Like, for us, it’s just a platform. We are an event organizer. So, we are not professionals who are familiar with this content. So, what we do is, we will have a—what is it? Like—
Wong: An advisory board.
Kelly Yao: – yeah, advisory board. So, we will have the board meeting like twice a year to put up all the content. So, this year, we decided to put this DevOps tracks, and so, it will benefit our event, it will benefit the whole content for this event. So, that’s when, but you recommended it to us—you and Jayne recommended it to us by Interop ITX, because it’s like—yeah. We’re like partners, so both Interop ITX and Interop China, we’re working together to deliver the content.
And so, when we decided to make the DevOps tracks and then that we reached out to you at devopsy.kinsta.cloud and also for Jayne—
Wong: Yes, for Jayne at the DevOps Institute.
Kelly Yao: – yeah, DevOps Institute. And, of course, you are the expertise that—you are the experts, that you will know how to make the content right and how to recruit speakers for, the most suitable speakers for this content, for this topic.
Shimel: Understood. Fantastic. And ladies, how has—you know, from what we understand, and of course, we’re on the other side of the world, but it’s a small world in today’s Internet, right? We’re all connected.
Wong: Uh huh, yeah.
Shimel: We know that the DevOps community in China is, as you said, Molly, is growing very fast. It’s already very large, and I’m wondering, what kind of have you gotten from the community about adding the DevOps tracks? Has it been a positive reaction?
Wong: I think everybody here are fully aware of the benefits of DevOps. But, you know, the challenges of actual adoption remain huge. Because, you know, for the DevOps design for the architecture, it’s all about the tradeoffs. The development of DevOps in China now stands between the early and middle age, because, for the DevOps professionals, they need to consider what they deem as the most important thing and what are they willing to sacrifice or give up for and, really, how to lower the costs when running in a public cloud.
So, I think there are a lot of concerns. There is a need to figure out the full implementation.
Shimel: Understood. And, you know, Molly, just—Interop ITX in Las Vegas is a large show, thousands and thousands of people. How big is Interop China? How many attendees do you expect?
Wong: I think the estimated number would be around 3,000.
Shimel: That’s a big, that’s a—
Wong: Yeah. Each year, like—
Groll: It’s a nice sized continent, you know?
Wong: – around 3,000 people are coming to—yes, 3,000.
Shimel: Very interesting. And, you know, DevOps is great, but give our listeners a sense—what are some of the other tracks about, besides DevOps?
Wong: Besides DevOps, this year, we also have AI—
Kelly Yao: Artificial intelligence—
Wong: – big data—
Kelly Yao: – big data, and data mining.
Wong: Yeah.
Kelly Yao: Yeah, as well as information security.
Wong: Information security, yes.
Shimel: Mm-hmm. So, I have to tell you ladies that listening to both of you talk about the challenges of DevOps and what other areas are of interest to the crowd, you know, to the community in China, it really is a very small world. Because these are the same issues, the same topics that we see here in the United States, it’s the same thing that we see in London and in the rest of Europe. Jayne, you can talk, you were just at a few conferences in Europe.
There are some things that just seem to be universal in today’s technology scene, and everyone is excited about artificial intelligence and machine learning. Cyber security information or InfoSec is top of mind; every day, we seem to hear of more breaches and hacking. And, of course, DevOps is very exciting.
Jayne, as Molly said, you are the DevOps chair for Interop China. I mean, that’s very exciting. Give us a little idea of what you’ve done in your role there.
Groll: So, I’m also the DevOps Track Chair for Interop ITX U.S. So, it’s been very fascinating working with both teams, because, you know, Alan, as you said, the challenges, the successes, the emerging practices in DevOps in particular are very, very universal. And some are starting to emerge differently. Some are, for example, to start, reliability engineering in the U.S. is starting to gain some momentum. I’m not sure, specifically, around the world, but I do know in Asia-PAC ________, there’s conferences like that as well. So, that’s an emerging practice.
Looking at continuous delivery and how it relates to operations is a theme that’s carrying through from both conferences. So, I’m particularly excited about really visiting with the Chinese community, as you know, DevOps Institute is a very, very global organization, and really having some face to face time, bringing content, bringing learning to Interop China and the Cloud Connect.
The other thing we’re gonna do at this event is, we’re gonna do some DevOps training. So, working with one of our Chinese partners, we’re going to do a half-day Essential DevOps workshop. So, for those that are not even so much, “What is DevOps?” but really, a visit to, “What are these practices?” like continuous integration, continuous delivery. I mentioned site reliability engineering. So, in addition to a traditional conference program, we’re going to also bring a half-day workshop to Interop China and Cloud Connect. So, I’m really very, very excited about that in particular. And we will have one of our Chinese colleagues, one of our Chinese partners deliver it so that it can be localized, and he’ll bring not only being able to deliver it in a native Chinese language, but also bring some very, very good local examples and case studies to the training as well.
Shimel: Excellent, excellent. You know what? We didn’t really get the details that, Kelly and Molly, if you can share with us, what are the dates for Interop China?
Wong: Yeah, it will kick off on May the 9th to 11th this year.
Shimel: Okay, and it’s in Shanghai.
Groll: In Shanghai—in Shanghai.
Shimel: Yes, it is, it’s in Shanghai.
Wong: Yeah, in Shanghai.
Shimel: And for people who may be listening to our podcast who are in the area or maybe would like to attend, where can they go on the web to get information about that?
Wong: Yeah, sure. They can register online through our official web portal, cloudconnectevent.com.
Shimel: Cloudconnectevent.com—excellent.
Wong: Yes.
Shimel: And that is for Interop China. So, this—if I’m understanding, this is the fifth year for the event.
Wong: Actually, it’s the sixth year, yeah.
Shimel: Sixth year—yes. So, Molly and Kelly, how many years have you been involved with the event?
Wong: Yeah, actually, we two are—we’re jumping into this platform, this event from last year, 2017.
Shimel: And so, from ’17 to ’18, do you see a big change?
Wong: Yes. I think the market is changing itself. Like, most of our exhibitors, sponsors, most of the cloud enterprises, they’re changing themselves and also their knowledge, their application on the technology. So, it’s changing themselves, and also ________, it’s like, we’re also changing our content to adapt to the market.
Shimel: Like any good event organizer should, correct? You’ve got to adapt to what the market is there.
Wong: Yes.
Shimel: Well, I have to tell you that I am personally very excited to be coming to Shanghai and delivering a presentation on DevSecOps and why security, it’s vital that security become part of the DevOps equation, we’ll talk more about it. And to be there with Jayne and Jayne will be delivering as well, as well as some DevOps Institute training. It promises to be a great event for the Chinese DevOps community as well.
Molly and Kelly, I want to thank you for joining us. We’re just about out of time, unfortunately. But—
Wong: Okay.
Shimel: – this was great. We’re looking forward to coming out to Shanghai in May, and we’re hoping that this will be a tremendous event, and we hope to see you there soon. Thanks very much for joining us tonight.
Groll: Really enjoyed it.
Wong: Thank you, Alan and Jayne.
Shimel: Thank you.
Groll: And maybe we could do a podcast from the event.
Shimel: That would be great!
Groll: So, let’s—you know, [Cross talk] maybe we can do a live podcast from the event.
Wong: Yeah, yeah. We’re really excited to see those in the event.
Shimel: Fantastic.
Wong: And I’m also looking forward to—yeah, looking forward to the podcast if we can have, on site, the Interop China.
Shimel: That would be fantastic. Jayne, I’m gonna give you the last word tonight.
Groll:[Laughter] Well, thank you. Molly, Kelly—it’s a pleasure to work with you. For those that are listening, if you do have the ability to attend, it really does promise to be not only a fantastic event, but an event where there’s lots of opportunities to learn and really track some of the emerging trends not only in DevOps, but particularly on the operational space. So, if you’re going to be in Shanghai, we all look forward to meeting with you. Molly, Kelly—see you in a few weeks. Alan, see you in a few weeks. And for everyone, thanks for listening.
Shimel: You’ve just listened to a Continuous Chit Chat and DevOps Chat. Have a great day, everyone! Bye bye.
With the onset of conference season I have been running a bit ragged. But something I noticed at the recent IBM Think 2018 Conference really needs to be called to attention: DevOps was still a prominent theme at IBM Think. But instead of having a dedicated DevOps theater or DevOps section of the show floor, DevOps was integrated into everything—all the various flavors of cloud (hybrid, Cloud Private, public), development, apps, even cognitive and AI … all were integrated with DevOps. I, for one, think this is as it should be.
It is a sign of DevOps maturity, I think, that instead of DevOps being called out as some special beast—a unicorn, even—it is more just the way things get done. I had a chance to talk to many different people on the show floor, attend several track sessions (which were also done on the show floor—much better than having to go into separate rooms) and, as usual, interviewed more than a few people for our DevOpsTV YouTube channel. While all of them were excited by various announcements and exhibits, it seemed as though DevOps was part of all of them.
DevOps integrated everywhere
Two great examples of this are my interview with DevOps Playbook author Sanjeev Sharma:
and my interview with Mark Howell and James McLeod of Lloyds
Another really interesting discussion was how DevOps plays into IBM’s Cloud Private offering. Cloud Private is a Kubernetes-based architecture. We spoke with Andy Gower, product marketing manager for Cloud Private. As you would expect with a Kubernetes-based offering, DevOps is right in the middle of things.
This was the theme time and time again at IBM Think 2018. DevOps was not concentrated in any one area; it was everywhere. Even in the quantum computing area, which I will admit was cool as can be.
Mainframes also were all about DevOps. This is not new for the IBM Enterprise Systems team. They have really led the way with DevOps and mainframes.
This was the first year for IBM Think 2018. It represents the merging of several different IBM conferences into one large one. I enjoyed the format and look forward to future IBM Think events.
Also a note on keynotes: The tone for IBM Think was set by IBM CEO Ginny Rometty. It was plain that IBM as a whole is focused on some key technologies and initiatives. Among these were cognitive and AI, cloud and disruptive technologies on the near horizon such as quantum computing.
There was a lot going on at IBM Think 2018, check out the YouTube channel to get more of our coverage.
In this DevOps Chat we speak with Jim Gochee, Chief Product Officer, New Relic. In his role at New Relic, Jim has seen years and years of evolution in digital transformations. Jim and I spoke about a number of topics including about how to succeed with DevOps, the rise of SRE and APM. Great discussion all around.
As usual, the streaming audio of our conversation is below, the transcript follows that. Enjoy.
Audio
Transcript
[su_pullquote align=”right”][su_custom_gallery source=”media: 122025″ link=”post” target=”blank” width=”200″ height=”200″ title=”never”]Jim Gochee
Jim is New Relic’s Chief Product Officer, overseeing the teams that design, build, and deliver New Relic’s products. He has a passion for building world-class products and loves technology – especially when it’s well architected, scalable, and fast. He takes great pleasure in helping New Relic’s customers analyze their technology and build great digital experiences. Prior to New Relic, Jim was the Chief Architect for the Wily Technology division of CA, where he was the technical lead for Introscope, an industry-leading web application performance monitoring solution. Prior to that, he was Chief Technology Officer for an internet-based trading system for the wholesale food industry. Jim also spent four years at Apple, Inc. and three years at Connectix Corporation working on VirtualPC. He holds an A.B. in Computer Science from Dartmouth College.[/su_pullquote]Alan Shimel: Hey, everyone, it’s Alan Shimel, devopsy.kinsta.cloud and you’re listening to another DevOps chat. Today’s DevOps chat features Jim Goci of New Relic. Jim, welcome to DevOps chat
Jim Gochee: Hey, Alan, how are you? It’s good to be here.
Shimel: Thank you, it’s good to have you here. So, Jim, let’s get some stuff out of the way here, a little housekeeping. What exactly is your role at new relic?
Gochee: Yeah, Alan, so I oversee all of product development and that includes engineering, product management, design as well as operations. So pretty much the whole shooting match.
Shimel: Fantastic. And Jim, I was talking to you off-mic before we started today, we haven’t done a good job frankly of covering New Relic at devopsy.kinsta.cloud but when we first launched, which is going on five years ago, New Relic was already a well-established player in the DevOps market and is certainly even more established now.
But why don’t you give our audience maybe just a quick little history to bring us up to where New Relic is today.
Gochee: Yeah, absolutely. We’ve been around actually for ten years, Alan. So we just had our tenth-year anniversary party just a couple of weeks ago if you can believe that. So, 2008, and when we started, we were focused on Ribyon Rails, monitoring the backend services, grew the product portfolio over time to include other languages.
But mostly sold to small companies, startups, companies that got bigger like Air B&B. But really, it was a couple years ago we started to pivot more into the enterprise and that was a very exciting time for us.
We were already getting pulled into bigger and bigger companies at a project level and then we found ourselves being kind of drawn in organically to more and more groups to the point where these big companies were wanting to have more of a formal relationship with us, from a sales perspective.
So we built out an enterprise sales team and have been really focused there. So maybe, in one way, while you haven’t seen a lot of us in the last couple of years as we’ve been pretty heads down, focusing on the needs of the enterprise market. But what I’ll also say is we’ve been releasing a lot of product as well in the last a couple of years and the biggest thing that we did is we rounded out our offering to include an infrastructure monitoring component.
And that really complicates, not complicates, but it complements our offering at the application layer as well as the end user layer. So at this point, we have a pretty comprehensive portfolio of offerings that cover that full stack.
Shimel: Very cool, very cool indeed. So Jim, I would imagine in your role around product and everything you’re doing at New Relic, you get to talk to more than a few customers, yeah?
Gochee: Well, I do and I just feel so blessed, Alan, because this is an incredible time to be in technology. So I’ve seen a few really interesting times in tech. I think the first was when the Internet really started to get mainstream, back in the mid-’90s, but what’s really interesting now is this thing that you hear a lot about which is digital transformation.
And we all feel it, which is we want a relationship with the companies that we do business with, we want a relationship via our mobile phones or the web browser. And so a lot of companies are trying to figure out how do they have that new customer relationship, right? And how do they come up with new ways of engaging with their customer?
And then, of course, again, companies like Air B&B completely rethinking business models, companies like Uber, and so it’s just a really fascinating time to be in the tooling space that supports and assists a lot of these digital transformations that are going on. So, yeah, we definitely see a lot of interesting things.
Shimel: Excellent. So, Jim, one of the themes that we have run into here recently at devopsy.kinsta.cloud is this idea that somehow people thought digital transformation and DevOps transformation was gonna be easy. And they’re a little bit taken aback.
You know, you speak to them, the first kind of foray into it it’s like, you know, this is hard. And I feel like saying no one promised you a rose garden, right? If it was that easy everyone would be doing it already. Are you seeing any of that?
Gochee: Well, you know, Alan, in fact, we do see a lot of that but I would say is this, I guess I see the full continuum. I see the early adopters and the enterprise to DevOps. I mean, DevOps, you guys have been around for five years and we’ve been doing it for 10 and it’s early to do when you start a company that way.
In other words, when you start a company and you have a DevOps organization already, it’s easy to grow and keep doing that. But when you’re a traditional enterprise and your operations team is very siloed from your development teams, to bring those two together is a pretty big task, right? And you hear a lot about the cultural challenge involved, and that’s very real.
The thing I’d like to ask, the question I ask when I go into one of our customers and I’m not familiar yet with really where they’re at in the journey, I ask them one simple question. Who takes pager call? And if it’s still the operations team that’s taking pager call, then normally they’re still complaining that the developers don’t care, the developers are very isolated, and you see those silos still in place.
And it’s really not until a development team, then with the help of operations, people like SREs embedded on that team, it’s really not until that happens where I would really see the crossing of the chasm into more of a true DevOps model.
Shimel: Absolutely. You know, you mentioned SREs, Jim, and that’s another area where we’re just seeing it, man, it’s blowing up, right, in terms of companies hiring SREs, incorporating SREs on to their ops team. Many people have gone as far to say SRE puts the ops in DevOps. What are your feelings around the SREs and that?
Gochee: Well, what I like about the SRE role is Google wrote a book about what they believe it is. And so while that probably just applies to Google and nothing’s ever as perfect as it seems, they clearly define these are the things that this role does.
And this is why these things are important, and it’s a real philosophy and it’s a real mindset, and they wrote it down and these are all things that other people had been doing in various ways. But I think the SRE role, it got really clarified what exactly it is.
And so I am starting to see this more and more as well, and it’s not like SRE is a new concept; again, Google’s been doing it for a very, very a long time but I just feel like it’s kind of catching on.
I can tell you ourselves we’ve been doing DevOps for a long time but just in the last year, we’ve really formalized around SREs as well and we got a vice president of site reliability engineering, we converted people’s titles over, we got really crisp about exactly what are you doing.
We’re trying to figure out right now whether central versus embedded or a hybrid of the two approaches, so you know, how to organize SREs and how do they really attach into development teams? There’s still plenty of work to do even that we’re looking at, but I think this is helping the industry really figure out a model that they can work with.
Because that’s the biggest thing I see, Alan, is people want to transform to be more agile into DevOps and to use the Cloud, but they don’t really know how to do it, right? They don’t really have a good playbook for it yet.
Shimel: I agree with you 100 percent. It’s interesting you guys are eating your own dog food with that.
So, Jim, in many ways, New Relic, sort of, if you will, pioneered what we call APM, you know, and we recently did—it got too big but it was a DevOps tools primer, just trying to at least draw it so that the taxonomy of categories—and certainly APM, but APM itself has become so intertangled in this whole software development life cycle. Is that still where New Relics thinks they play?
Gochee: Yeah, so it’s a great question. We like to say that we’ve democratized APM; in that, we created a service that anybody could subscribe to, download our agent, install it into an application code, relaunch your application and now you’ve got your data showing up on our screens.
The technology around APM, though, has been around a lot longer but we were the first to bring it to everybody in a very transparent selling model, right, and again try it before you buy it. And we have by far, in a way, the most users in this APM category. These categories are funny things though, yeah, applications here but there’s also end user, there’s synthetics, now there’s infrastructure tier.
It’s all kind of collapsing and probably the markets sort of get renamed after a while. One of the things that we like to say that we think we have is a digital intelligence platform, digital intelligence just means data about everything that’s part of your digital system, all the code running, all the infrastructure that’s running.
And so at the end of the day, if you want to be agile and deploy a lot code and make a lot production change, you need to have data that tells you that things are still working correctly about all the different pieces of your infrastructure, right?
And without that data, you’re flying blind and so, flying blind, it’s okay if you deploy code once every six months, you can fly blind for a little bit while you sort out any issues. But if you’re deploying code every day, you’ve got to have real-time data about what’s happening in order for that to be successful.
Shimel: Sure do, sure do. And Jim, when we talk about the move to the enterprise, I think that’s one of—not that startups or non-enterprise customers don’t use data or that they do fly blind. They don’t. That’s not the case at all. But when you go to the enterprise and you start thinking about enterprise-class functionality, right, is when you start realizing what—really, things have got to be locked down, right?
There’s got to be sort of—I mean, sometimes it can be overprocessed and overcomplicated but you can’t just fly by the seat of your pants as much. And I think products like New Relic, they can’t help but bring some of that regimentation to a company.
Gochee: Absolutely, no, I mean your point’s really well-taken. When you’re a smaller company, you can take more risk, you don’t have to do things the right way, you know. That’s common. When you’re bigger company, you have a lot more experienced people who are used to having better tooling, better processes, better governance, right?
Because there’s a lot at stake. I mean, these are some of the largest companies in the world who are betting their future on their digital projects, and those projects have to function and they have to work. So, I don’t know, can I tell you one story, Alan?
Shimel: Sure.
Gochee: It’s a few years old now but do you remember when healthcare.gov first launched?
Shimel: Yes, I do.
Gochee: It first launched and the thing didn’t really work. It was hung and broken and the president was like apologizing to the nation, right? This is an example of we looked at each other and we’re like this is the highest-profile example of a web project gone awry.
Shimel:[Laughs]
Gochee: Yeah, right, I mean the president has to apologize for poor web performance and –
Shimel: At least we had a president who apologized then, but go ahead.
Gochee: That’s another story altogether.
Shimel: That’s a whole other story.
Gochee: The president brought in a team from Silicon Valley to help fix that site. I forget Mikey’s last name from Google. Anyways, they brought New Relic in and then we gave them the data to help sort that out, and then from now on, we have been the tool of record for how that system has been performing. And they’re just 1 of 15,000 customers that we have.
Shimel: Interesting. But that’s a classic example of it, too. That was done probably, frankly, without the necessary requirements in laying it all out there. Jim, let me ask you a question. From your catbird seat, what do you see at the future of the market here?
Gochee: Yeah, so just in terms of digital transformation and digital customer experience, that’s absolutely gonna be powering the whole economy and tech sector in particular for the next five to ten years. Cloud, the move to Cloud, the opportunities you can get by some of the Cloud services.
In particular, Amazon is really blazing the trail in just the sheer number of services they offer the market, changing how people can build and deploy software, it’s incredible. So we see a continued explosion in software and digital experiences, and then that drives companies like us, we offer tooling in this area that really helps companies move more quickly, have a better customer experience. And so I mean, I think the whole category of tech and DevOps and Agile and tooling, observability is a trend, SREs, all of this is gonna continue to have a lot of strength and a lot growing over the next five or ten years. I just absolutely believe that.
Shimel: Excellent, Jim, as I mentioned to you, when we first got started here, 15 minutes goes really quick. I think we’re probably closer to 20 at this point but it’s okay. Maybe we can have you back on here at New Relic and a DevOps chat because we would like to stay on board with everything that’s going on there. But in the meantime, thanks for being a guest on this episode of DevOps chat, Jim.
Gochee: Alan, it’s been enjoyable, thank you so much for having me. I’m happy to come back on as well
Shimel: Absolutely, we’ll make you a regular. Hey, that was Jim Gochee, Jim runs products and a bunch of other things over at New Relic and this was another episode of DevOps Chat. This is Alan Shimel for devopsy.kinsta.cloud. I hope to see you soon on another chat soon, everyone. Take care.
Hackathons are a great way to demonstrate the value of a platform. I had the chance to speak with Malcolm Ross, vice president, Product at Appian to share a bit more about Appian’s virtual hackathon to correspond with its upcoming user conference.
Full disclosure: I’ll be one of the judges attending Appian World to judge the finalists, so hope to see you all there!
Alan Shimel: Can you share a high-level overview of the Hackathon?
Malcolm Ross: Appian is holding its first online hackathon in conjunction with DevPost to correspond with our upcoming Appian World conference in late April. We’re looking forward to seeing how participants are able to build and deploy powerful enterprise apps with Appian’s low-code cloud development platform.
Shimel: Who could apply for the Hackathon?
Ross: Whether they’re an existing Appian customer or not, we challenged anyone to build a new app on the Appian platform that enables their business to do more. There’s no specific theme—just show us something that improves their team’s performance and drives enterprise innovation! We asked all participants to submit their applications by March 27 along with a demo video (hosted on YouTube, Vimeo or Youku). This should incorporate a step-by-step visual demo, and additionally, a way to access the working application for judging and testing. Anyone interested in participating received a free 60-day instance of the full Appian Cloud platform to support their development efforts.
Shimel: Who judges the winners?
Ross: A panel from Appian will score all eligible submissions to determine the top three finalists. Finalists will be notified by April 13 and given the opportunity to demo in-person or remotely to an all-star panel of judges, including Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak, Forrester analyst John Rymer and yourself, Alan! We’ll also have some Appian executives involved in the process including Senior Vice President for Strategy Lang Ly, Chief Technology Officer Michael Beckley, Director of Product Strategy Jorge Sanchez and myself.
Shimel: What are the evaluation criteria for the selection of the winning team?
Ross: It’s pretty open-ended for participants to come up with their own innovations. The main requirement was that the users must build a functioning app on the platform by March 27. More about the criteria can be found here.
Shimel: What are the awards?
Ross: There are three cash prizes ($5,000, $3,000 and $2,000) along with admission to Appian World 2019 and promotional of the submissions by Appian on the Appian AppMarket.
First place will receive $5,000 cash and four free passes to Appian World 2019, and the Appian Deluxe Promotion, which includes a featured promo on Appian.com, Appian AppMarket (if the app is in the market) and Appian Community, joint webinar and collateral, a blog post on Appian.com and a press release.
Second place will be awarded $3,000 cash and two free passes to Appian World 2019, and the Appian Promotion, which includes a featured promo on Appian AppMarket (if app is in the market) and Appian Community and a blog post on Appian.com.
The third-place prize is $2,000 cash and one free pass to Appian World 2019, and the Appian Promotion, which includes a featured promo on Appian AppMarket (if app is in the market) and a blog post on Appian.com.
Shimel: What is the timeline for the Hackathon?
Ross: As mentioned, the deadline for entry was March 27. We’ll make sure to notify finalists by April 13 so they have some time to book travel if they would like to meet our all-star panel of judges for the conference. Final judging will be held on April 25 at the Fontainebleau Hotel in Miami Beach, Florida.
Shimel: Where can people find more information about the Hackathon?
Ross: Anyone who’s interested can find more information about Hackathon at Appian.devpost.com or learn more about our Appian World conference at appianworld.com.