So, it isn’t a surprise that in IT, a constant drive over the last decennia has been the drive to reduce complexity. ‘Reducing complexity’ sells. Especially managers in IT are sensitive to it as complexity generally is their biggest headache. Hence, in IT, people are in a perennial fight to make the complexity bearable. One method that has been popular for decennia has been standardisation and rationalisation of the digital tools we use, a basic “let’s minimise the number of applications we use”. This was actually part 1 of this story: A tale of application rationalisation (not). That story from 2015 explains how many rationalisation efforts were partly lies. (And while we’re at it: enjoy this Dilbert cartoon that is referenced therein.) Most of the time multiple applications were replaced by a single platform (in short: a platform is software that can run other software) and the applications had to be ‘rewritten’ to work ‘inside’ that platform. So you ended up with one extra platform, the same number of applications and generally a few new extra ways of ‘programming’, specific for that platform. That doesn’t mean it is all lies. The new platform is generally dedicated to a certain type of application, which makes programming these applications simpler. But the situation is not as simple as the platform vendors argue.
The reason why I chose to highlight this here is because cloud computing is marketed as a one stop solution for all the needs. It isn’t. I have heard tales from the support; especially those users who are clueless about the complex underpinnings. As the hospitals migrate towards “cloud” as a catchall phrase and if you see the CEO spouting some inane “efficiency matrix” around this scenario, it would be instructive to understand why it is difficult to ensure a seamless transition.
Behind every cloud migration, there’s a team that’s tore it’s hair apart.