28 June 2013

Systemic impacts of information technology (IT) infrastructure investment

Just yesterday (June 26 2013), the UK chancellor announced plans for investment in the UK infrastructure.  Roads, trains and some flagship projects (on energy also) will finally be given a go-ahead or a positive nod in terms of funding.

There are already some critics, citing that there is a missed opportunity to revitalise the construction industry by borrowing cheaply and making available much more funding.  Lack of long term vision is also cited and above all, serious commitment.

Just imagine if this 'lack' of vision and commitment is applied to an organisation's IT infrastructure.  

To many this is unthinkable. Reducing IT infrastructure investment is out of the question.  We teach our students that  when you invest in IT you are investing in a strategic asset.  True, it is expensive and painful, but ere are very good examples to show that IT can provide a long term return on investment, plus better customer service, new business opportunities, rapid product development, etc. e infrastructure is the backbone over which your applications and communications reside.   Networks, hardware, data centres, they are all part of the infrastructure.   Investing in infrastructure is investing in  the organisation's future health.

This is what IT professionals hold as true.  And many managers also do it. 

But let us go back to the criticisms to the UK chancellor.  If we are to believe that there is a short mentality in investment, I am afraid to say that is is also the case for IT. And more specifically with the new cloud computing fashion. 

For an organisation, Cloud computing is becoming the antithesis of IT infrastructure investment.  It is sold as "Pay as. You use" IT service. No more expensive infrastructure.  It is up to the cloud computing providers to invest. Your focus is on your business, let the IT providers care about theirs. 

Sounds nice, but we are relinquishing control of the IT infrastructure to a third party. They are obliged by contract to make sure that the service that they provide is of high quality, and to do that they should invest in their IT infrastructure.  We just but the front end part of the infrastructure (tablets, pcs and the like). 

So what could be the systemic effects of investing or not investing in the IT infrastructure?

I do not have the full answer to this as I am not a visionary or a prophet.  But I could say that these effects are related to the assumptions that will guide the decisions of those that will (not) invest in the infrastructure.  

If these assumptions are guided by short economic gains, or economies of scale (and you can ask cloud computing providers about this), I find it difficult they would fully cater for something that has to be there but might not report the expected benefits.  Cloud providers would surely plan their infrastructure capacity but will think twice in investing beyond what they need; it is hard to predict growth in IT services as it is has been the case before.  Like a property landlord that lets the property to tenants, the cloud computing provider might not buy the most expensive furniture.  Or if they do, they will charge a premium.  Just to make sure they balance the numbers.

Like every other business. 

Even if cloud computing providers invest in infrastructure, they will have to work together with others who would have a different perspective on investment.  We need to remember that cloud computing is a mixture if services from different companies.  And even if there is consensus, there is another issue at needs to be looked at.

It is the infrastructure of energy that is required to supply computing grids with the electricity they need. Who is going to invest in energy infrastructure ? The government?

I really hope the UK chancellor thinks about this last point, because roads and trains need energy.  

And I hope that IT managers think of who is doing what in new ecosystem of cloud computing services worldwide.  We need to think systemically on the consequences of (not) investing appropriately in infrastructure. 











No comments: