What a wonderful day, I can see the Alps and their snow-capped peaks, I have a neat list of tasks to work on and I know how to complete them.
Wake Up...
Neo
we left system up & running , we drive our servers to the new data center, fighting the DEV Horde, sing and cry, Kubernates I'm coming
This post is based on my experiences (past and present) and is similar to a multitude of IT departments involved in DevOps adoption roadmap. There is no silver bullet to defeat the "Horde" of users on the one hand and the board of directors on the other side
Skill Paradox:
You have Time & Money; your company is big and structured. The CIO introduced consultants and delegated Everything as a service. Sometimes this is the worst situation, where the platform engineer is totally committed and his role is that of a "witness".
You have Money & Skill; what else? Every morning, the CIO is booking a stand-up meeting and asking for the exact date, hour, and minute of the production migration.
You have Skill & Time; "My name is Maximus Decimus Meridius, Commander of the HashiCorp Armies. General of the Ansible Legion. Loyal servant to the true admin, /root. Father to a murdered merge request, husband to a murdered branch" there is no budget, you exhausted Azure Free Tier, your CIO spent 99% resource for LTO Tape Archival for Novel Netware 7.0 Server.
In this case, having time to devote is even worse because you spend more time on planning and scripting you work in a more sophisticated way and creating an over-engineered infrastructure whose budget you will never get
Key Points:
Time & Money, but Everything as a Service:
Platform Engineer as a "Witness": This is a common issue in large, structured companies where consultants and outsourcing dominate. The internal engineer’s role might be reduced to just managing or witnessing the work of external providers or automated services rather than engaging in real value-adding tasks. It’s a frustrating position because even though the resources (Time, Money) are available, they’re misallocated or not being used in a way that adds meaningful value.
In this case, even with the right skills and the resources to make impactful changes, you're essentially just "observing" a process rather than actively shaping it.
Money & Skill, but Under Scrutiny (CIO's Daily Stand-ups):
The pressure from the CIO for precise timelines, like the exact minute of a production migration, points to a reactive rather than proactive culture. In environments where you have the skill and financial backing, you’re often expected to provide unrealistic precision, which leads to rushed, over-optimized, or overly cautious decisions.
This micro-management aspect takes away the potential for a more thoughtful or flexible approach to planning. Instead, you're under constant scrutiny, asked to produce a perfect plan for a complex task that might require more time, refinement, or discovery.
Skill & Time, but No Budget (The Maximus Scenario):
In this scenario, you have the skills and time to execute but are hampered by a lack of budget and resource allocation. The metaphor of Maximus Decimus Meridius reflects the idea of being caught in an impossible situation. You have the right expertise (like a general) and can plan and execute a migration or task, but with no resources or funding, every effort becomes a fight against the odds. This situation is typical when a company is strongly coupled with Legacy systems and backward compatibility to the point of paroxysm.
Here, more time and planning could lead to over-engineering. This is a trap where the more you dig into details, the more complex and unnecessarily intricate your solution becomes, instead of focusing on just delivering the most functional, efficient solution within your constraints.
The Core of the Paradox:
Resource Misalignment: Even if you have Time, Money, and Skill, the way these resources are allocated, managed, or expected to function doesn't align with the reality of delivering impactful results.
Mismanagement and Over-Engineering: In a situation where you’re constantly adjusting plans, attempting to meet high expectations with limited resources, or overly scrutinizing processes, the result is often over-engineering or inefficiencies.
Stagnation through Structure: A large, structured organization can sometimes create an environment where skill is stifled by process, time is wasted in bureaucracy, and money is spent in ways that don’t actually help the end goal.
Solution Ideas:
Re-align Expectations: Work on having clearer and more flexible expectations from leadership, emphasizing the need for iterative delivery or pragmatic solutions instead of expecting absolute perfection.
Cut Through the Over-Engineering: Focus on delivering Minimum Viable Products (MVPs) or streamlined solutions that meet the core needs without going too deep into unnecessary complexity.
Find Efficiency in the "Witness" Role: Even if you are a “witness” to services or consultants, use your time to focus on optimization, streamlining workflows, and identifying areas where true automation or improvement could take place.
In summary, the Skill Paradox is all about navigating organizational constraints and resource allocations that undermine your potential to deliver impactful, efficient outcomes. The key is to find balance between skill, time, and resources and steer the ship toward value-driven work rather than getting bogged down by structure or unyielding expectations.
We are Immigrants DevOps
Let the journey begin.
"Travel is never a matter of money but of courage"
There is no destination, there is no target architecture, no definitive application framework, each step is a valuable improvement of your ICT infrastructure
Author Of article : Diego Scaravaggi Read full article
