Tribal Knowledge - First in an ongoing series

"New technology renders existing products, services and training obsolete on a daily basis. Some will tell you that this wipes the slate clean - well, think again. I'm here to tell you that all that you know - you need to remember. This is a monthly column dedicated to dispelling hi tech myths and sharing life's lessons."

Hello world.

When most people think genius, they think Einstein. The Special Theory of Relativity was published nearly 100 years ago, had no references (unprecedented in physics) and is still substantially incomprehensible to the vast majority of highly educated adults. Not to take anything away from The Great One, but I would like to propose a second class of genius - one inspired not by Einstein, but by the spirit of Marco Polo.

Imagine his wonderment when he first came face to face with Chinese culture -15,000 years of religion, philosophy, science, fashion, cuisine, etc. Most would have been overwhelmed, but not Polo - I imagine him thinking, "hmmm, paper money - my friends in Venice could do something with this" or "gee, gunpowder - not just for fireworks." Polo did not invent paper money, understand the principles behind gunpowder, or even appreciate the value that the Chinese placed on these items - Polo's genius was to cherry pick specific artifacts like needles in a haystack and dramatically increase their value by transferring them across cultures. I would argue that Polo's impact on Western culture has been far greater than Einstein's and that the ability to pluck concepts out of their original context and into new contexts resulting in new and improved value propositions is truly a special kind of genius.

This second class of genius is woefully absent in the commercial software industry. New technology renders existing products, services and training obsolete on a daily basis. Some will tell you that this wipes the slate clean - well, think again. I'm here to tell you that all that you know - you need to remember. Now, I am no Marco Polo, but I am going to charter this monthly column to dispelling hi tech myths and sharing life's lessons to provide some clarity and insight into each "next new thing" that comes along.

With all of this in mind, let's zoom in on the ageless panacea - "the end-to-end solution" and the perennially evil "island of automation" or "silo."

Everyone knows that silos are bad and complete end-to-end solutions are good. Silos isolate communities of users, reduce accountability across an organization, encode bad business practices and stand in the way of enterprise initiatives promising far greater rewards. end-to-end solutions are of course an entirely different story. They bring together groups that struggle to cooperate and enforce best practices. Integration costs associated with connecting disparate systems and writing custom applications are all eliminated.

Guess what Ladies and Gents? There's no difference! An island of automation is for all practical purposes a complete solution as long as you stay on the island. Island life can be good and silos are not always bad - they can pay for themselves in cost savings, productivity enhancements and all of the other ways good technology justifies its right to exist. But let's call a spade a spade - true end-to-end solutions do not exist - anywhere.

So, let's look at this from the outside in - when software vendors pitch their latest "complete end-to-end solution" - recognize that "end-to-end" is a code word for silo. So beyond the obvious Zen-like quality to this identity between opposites, why should we care that there is nothing to license but silos, more silos and/or pieces of silos? We need to care because islands get crowded and silos often need to grow. Minimally, they need to expand and to cooperate as "silo archipelagoes". More often than not, silos need to merge and grow into larger silos. How does one end-to-end solution merge with its neighbor?

Standards! Evolution is inevitable - the question is whether this evolution is incremental or radical - standards like XML and Java provide viable data and communication bridges between previously independent systems. The result is preservation of existing investments in software and training and minimized disruption in existing processes. These are good things.

So, in a nutshell…

• Silos look good from the inside - and as long as you don't lose site of the fact that your business goes beyond its horizon - that's OK.
• Silos without a foundation based upon standards make evolution expensive and painful. This is why silos have a bad rep.
• End-to-end is code for silo.
• Beware of vendors that don't get this because, in the words of the great singer songwriter, Michelle Shocked, "They run in circles so small, they think they've seen it all."

There is no end to end all.

Next month: ROI - IT savior or corporate fool's gold?

Care to share some of your tribal knowledge? We'd love to hear it - send comments and insights to sebastian@gilbane.com.