Looking again at server patching, there are plenty of ways
to reallocate funds in this area. Rather than patching serv-
ers regularly, an organization can build “hydration” into the
process – essentially draining old servers and rehydrating
with new patch servers every 30 days or so. Or they can just
leverage serverless technology. This replaces processes
with the outsourced automation of a platform-as-a-service
(PaaS) program. In other words, someone else will be man-
aging the process.
Sometimes executives are too wedded to the old processes.
In these situations, leaders have to act to figure out a way to
usher in new sets of automated procedures to move the
organization forward.
There are ways to deftly solve situations where executives
are blocking automation in their own individual ports. Lead-
ers can swap roles: take a middle manager and give them a
different group to run. They can shuffle groups around,
blending cloud-focused teams with old-line teams, and in
the process, force the change in the way the whole extended
group operates. They can retrain executives and encourage
Technologies exist to set
up automated processes
that can approve, route,
block and/or manage
tasks throughout an
organization.
them to get on board with the new procedures. Of course, if
a light touch does not work, a heavier touch might be
required.
Conclusion
To generate value from the cloud, organizations do not
need to create whole new processes. Classic IT change
management functions are not going to go away entirely. In
many cases, auditors and regulators require that proce-
dures be locked down and tracked. What we will see more
and more is the need for process automation, not wholes-
cale process re-engineering.
The one thing organizations cannot do is underestimate
the effort process automation requires. They need to com-
mit to it and institutionalize it, in order to wring the value
out of the cloud that they are expecting.
WINTER 2019 | THE DOPPLER | 27