Direct Database Updates – A Cause of Concern

Many organizations still have the practice of directly updating the production databases to fix data integrity issues. This shows that the one or more applications deployed on top of the database are not reliable enough to maintain the database integrity. This is one of the biggest concerns for the information security auditors as this requires certain resources being granted he access privilege to the production databases. This opens up opportunity for internal hackers to indulge into fraudulent activities.

There could be a multitude of reasons which could lead to such a situation, needing frequent database updates. The following are some such reasons that impact the reliability:

• Incomplete requirements – It may be possible that the business rules and / or validations are not completely gathered and documented. 
• Design deficiencies – Design deficiencies like inappropriate error handling, managing the concurrency, etc. could also lead to data integrity issues.
• Shared database across multiple applications – When multiple applications use a shared database, it might possible that some business rules or data validation requirements might be implemented differently or some applications might have technology or design limitations leading to introducing data integrity issues.
• Creeping code complexity over a period of application maintenance – As the applications move into maintenance cycle, and as newer resources may get on to maintain the application code base, chances are high that due to the growing complexity and lack of complete knowledge, issues might slip through the development and sometimes QA phase as well.
• Lack of adequate QA / Reviews – Review is a very effective technique to identify potential issues way ahead in the application development life cycle. But, unfortunately, most organizations does not give importance to requirement, design and code reviews or don’t get it done effectively. This review or QA deficiency could impact the reliability. 

Though the software development process has matured enough, organizations tend to compromise in some of the quality attributes which might lead to a situation of the application being not reliable. Thus, it may not be possible to completely eliminate the need for direct database updates. However, a process with adequate checks and controls should be put in place around this activity to ensure that the chances of security breach through this channel are under control. At a minimum, he following checks and controls need to be in place to have the database updates in control.

• Every request for database update should originate from business function heads and should formally be supported by a service request as logged in to an appropriate tracking system or into a register.
• Every such request shall be reviewed by the analysts and / or architects to identify whether the data update is necessary and there not another way of fixing this using any of the application features.
• The review should also suggest two solutions, one being the isolating the specific data table and columns that need to be updated (corrective action) and the other being the possible enhancement to the application(s) to prevent such integrity issue from occurring in the future. The review should also identify the constraints in implementing the data fix, for instance some of the fixes may warrant that they should be executed ahead or after a specific scheduled job or sometimes may need the database to be taken offline before execution.
• In most cases, these issues would be very hard to investigate, as the occurrence would be rare and upon encountering a unique combination of data / program flow. It would be beneficial if the result of such review flows into the process and necessary checks and controls are put in place to prevent such issues slipping through the review and testing phases of the SDLC.
• On completion of the review, developers may be engaged to create necessary SQL scripts that are required for such updates.
• This shall be subject to review by the analysts and / or architects and then subject to testing by the QA team. 
• Once the review and test results are clear the scripts shall be forwarded to the DBAs who should execute the scripts in production. Ideally such data updates should be performed in batches and the affected tables / objects should be backed up prior to execution, so that the old data can be restored when needed.
• The DBAs should maintain a record of such execution and the resulting log data and the same shall be subject to periodic audit, so as to ensure that the scripts remain unaltered and that no additional unwanted activities happen along with script execution.
• None of the resources involved in this process except the DBAs should have access to production database. For the purpose of investigation or troubleshooting certain cases, a clone of the production data may be made available on request and should be taken off when the its intended purpose is complete. It is important to have a practice of masking sensitive data while making such production clones and also should have restricted access over the network.
• It is important that the responsibilities are divided amongst different groups and the associated employees should have demonstrated high credibility in the past and the accountability should be well established.
• A periodic end to end audit should be performed, which should track right from the origination of the service request to its execution in the production database and any non-compliance must be seriously dealt with.

More than these checks and controls, the organization should look for declining database update requests over a period of time, which is an indicator of improving system reliablity. Another way to look at the improvement is that the recurring requests of the same nature should vanish after two or three occurrances. The organization's software engineering process also should call far adequate checks and controls which will contribute to improved system reliability.

Software Architecture Reviews

Review is a powerful technique that contributes to software quality. Various artifacts of the software development lifecycle are subject to review to ensure that any deficiencies could be spotted early on and addressed sooner, before letting it slip through further phases and in turn consuming more efforts than expected down the line. One such important review is the review of the software architecture. If you are asked to review the architecture of a software, it could be due to one of the following reasons.

1. Possibly, you are a Senior Architect and is expected to complement your fellow Architect by reviewing his work and thereby helping him and in turn the organization to get the best possible software Design. Some or most organizations mandate this need as part of their engineering process. When this review is done effectively, the benefits are huge, as this review occurs early in the development life cycle. 
2. One or more of the custom built application(s) used in the organization are suspected to have certain serious reliability / performance issue and you are engaged to come up with an analysis and a plan to set it right. If this situation arise, then it is very much evident that the first one did not happen or it wasn’t done well. In some cases, such situation arise when the stake holders knowingly compromise on certain software quality attributes initially and then surprised to see its impact down the line as it hits back. 
3. You are possibly looking out to license a product and are evaluating its suitability to your organization. In this, case you will probably have a checklist of items created based on the IT policies and framework of your organization and this is highly dependent on the information revealed by the product vendor. 

Though there could be more reasons, the above are some of the primary reasons as to why one would need to perform an architectural review. In spite of as many reviews and testing, issues slips through and challenges the IT architects at some point down the line. Resolution of such issues may call for certain specific reviews and the method and approach would be different based on the type of the problem. For instance, if there be a data breach, a security review of the architecture is what is needed to not only identify the root cause for the current problem, but also to identify potential vulnerabilities and come up with solutions to plug those gaps.

These specific reviews can be typically associated with the broad software quality attributes, which are also termed as non-functional-requirements. The best way to approach these specific reviews is to start with an architectural review. A review checklist would be a good tool to use for the purpose, but the checklist should be exhaustive enough to cover necessary areas, so that the reviewer can get the right and required inputs and would be in a good position to form an opinion about the possible deficiencies and can relate it with the problem being attempted to be resolved.

Keep a watch on my blog for more on specific architecture reviews.

The pressure points of Cloud Adoption

The values and benefits of cloud adoption is increasingly clear and well known. Not to be carried away with these values and benefits, it is important to identify and be aware of the pressure points that the Cloud Adoption brings in as called out by ISACA in its white paper titled as ‘Guiding Principles for Cloud Computing Adoption and Use. Essentially the differences in technology itself and its use impacts the way IT is governed and managed and the management’s reaction to these impacts brings on the pressure points as well, which need to be managed.

Differences such as change in cost allocation from capital to operational may have consequences that may not apparent at the beginning. For instance, contracting for a cloud based software would be an operational spend and may have a lower cost of entry and thus, such decisions may fall outside the review and approval process. While in most cases, the pressure points are to be managed as risks, these are not necessarily risks.

Speed and Agility

The time-to-market is a driver for cloud adoption as solutions to meet market needs would be available more quicker at lesser cost though there could be gaps in meeting the exact requirements. This agile exploitation in a reduced time frame puts greater pressure on enterprise, in which culture, process, and human factors related to technology have been developed to support longer development cycles and long term technology use. This pressure when not handled appropriately could result in increased risk level in the following areas:

• An unbalanced prioritisation of value over trust in technology solution choices
• Missed opportunities when other alternatives are not considered
• Recovery mishaps because fallback positions are not fully exploited
• Missing functionality if full requirements are not identified
• Increased long-term costs due to reliance on multiple short-lived solutions
• Reduced performance when enterprises are hesitant to introduce new solutions because of existing technology investments

Changing Boundaries

The reliance on cloud providers calls for change in the roles and responsibilities within the enterprise and transfer certain responsibilities to outside parties. Contracts and SLAs with service providers attempt to assign accountabilities, but governance dictates that the enterprises themselves, their board and management remain accountable. With this, the locus of decision making changes from governance functions to business line leaders. This change in the organizational boundaries can put greater pressure on enterprises. The risk outcomes out of this pressure point could be:

• Role confusion when accountabilities and responsibilities are not clearly defined
• Diminished effectiveness when decisions are made without engaging in a wider consideration of trust and value before cloud acquisition
• Failure to satisfy constituent and end-user expectations for protection and privacy
• Project delay and increased costs due to the need for personnel with governance responsibilities to revisit cloud plans
• Unclear specifications of provider responsibilities and accountabilities in SLAs
• Incomplete information being provided to board members and senior management

New Technologies and Technology Expectations

Cloud follows a sequence of disruptions in how technology is viewed, integrated into organizational strategy and managed and in how IT risks are identified and managed. Areas of high pressure can result when strategy and enterprise architecture do not consider the unique qualities of cloud computing and when enterprise processes and procedures do not easily adapt to changes made possible by cloud computing. The following risks could be the outcome of this pressure point:

• Missed opportunities to extract value from the integration of cloud and internal systems
• Increased vulnerability from incompatibilities and inconsistencies between cloud and internal systems
• Less than expected results when human factors are not considered in the design and integration of cloud services and infrastructures
• Levels of organizational performance that do not meet expectations because cloud solutions do not fully support organizational processes
• Levels of technical performance that do not meet expectations because processes do not take full advantage of cloud capabilities

Level Playing Field

Cloud computing removes the advantage that large enterprises have traditionally had in terms of availability of technology specialists and technical sophistication. Smaller enterprises now have the ability to leverage the cloud services and use technology sophistication that large enterprise used to enjoy. This brings the small and medium enterprises on an equal position with much larger enterprises. This level playing field can have an impact on the strategy and its implementation. Ignoring this impact can result in increase of risk levels in the following areas:

• New entrants claiming a segment of traditional market dominance
• Strategies that do not address competitor capabilities
• Less-than-expected benefits received from technology-dependent solutions

Utility Services and Service Supply Chains

With cloud computing, where computing is viewed as a utility, focus is shifting to the value and benefits obtained from such utilities. Agile enterprises benefits from solutions that can be used as needed and discarded when they no longer provide value. This view of computing as a utility and the delivery of solutions supply chain of information systems solutions puts greater pressure on enterprises that contain a culture that is not accepting of utility solutions, a structure that does not facilitate cooperative planning and processes that cannot take advantage of computing solutions provided as supply chain of utilities. Ignoring this could result in the following risk outcomes:

• Over-investment of resources in planning and building internally developed information system solutions
• Less-than-optimal results when value-producing cloud utilities are missing from the total solution
• Duplication of effort when specialist services available through cloud providers are not integrated as part of system management
• Less-than-expected results when utility components are not integrated into and managed as an information system capability supply chain

In the white paper, ISACA suggests that enterprises follow a six guiding principles that can help illuminate the path for cloud adoption. Click here to download the complete white paper which is available for registered (free registration) users.

Key risk areas that can impact the project success

Till recently and to some extent, even now, some of us don’t want our insurance advisor talk about our own risk of life. It has been the belief for some not to think or talk about the risk of losing life. However, things are changing and most of us today are managing personal risks well by atleast transferring the risk to the insurer for financial protection. Risk management is not just financial protection and there is more to it, even though finance makes the core part in most cases. The same way, if we look at managing software projects, the project manager and sponsors had to deal with so many issues every now and then, before it was felt that preventing such issues coming along the way is better than dealing with such issues, which is what is risk management.

The risk managers or risk experts always think of a what if scenario for every action / decision so that all possible risks are identified early on and this in the past was thought to be creating ‘negative vibes’ and did not receive much support from the project sponsors. Because, when much of the risks are identified upfront, it might be so that the project may have to be shelved at the start itself. Here again, things have changed and most CxOs are accepting ‘failing fast’ a better option than failing at the end. Failing at start is an even better option. Refer my own blog on ‘failing at start’.

Given that most of the project sponsors and project managers have realized that risk management is better than its only alternative crisis management and are believing that risk management is a key area of project management, let us explore the key risk areas in a broader context that need a close watch which if not could impact the success of an end to end software project.

User Expectations

Even though a well written functional specifications exist, and the development team developing to that requirement, there is a potential risk of end users when they look at the final product go back and say that “this is not working in a way we want’, and pushing back the product for rework. This is mainly due to the fact that everything around the business is changing with time. The more time the development team take in involving the end users, the chances are very much likely that the expectation would have changed. Agile is the solution to address this risk area, where by the end users are participating in the development and small chunks of the product are delivered every now and then for user feedback.

There are more to it, most projects do not have the non functional requirements documented and much of the user expectations go around such software capabilities, for instance application performance is a key non functional requirement, which the development team is expected to take care of as part of. While the solution for this lies with the solution architect, the project manager and the stakeholders should not lose sight of this important area and should be managing the user expectations all through the project execution.

If one can identify or spot the potential risks around the user expectation and manage it well, the chances of the project successfully reaching the milestone is very high.

Technology Shocks

This is a broader risk area and could be broken down into many sub areas. Many projects hit a road block when it get closer to production deployment, by when the infrastructure team may find heavy investment in terms of hardware and software tools required to support the product in production. Some projects even faces issues in the early stages as well, as the development team may find some tools or technology not suitable for the given solution.

A well done pre-project risk assessment can help address this risk as the architects involves in such assessments can anticipate and call out such road blocks, which might help the project sponsors to take a call. Development teams in most cases would want to jump on to the project and start building everything themselves without considering re-usable off the shelf components being available for most capabilities. This tendency can add to the schedule risk, as the project may take longer due to technical issues that the team may face.

Managing risks in this area early on is very important as certain choices might be very difficult to reverse in the middle of the project. It could also be a case where implementing certain requirements with a given technology platform or tools could be much more complex than with certain other tools. Much of this responsibility lies with the Architects, who should do a good job to take the project pass through this risk area.

Skill gaps

While this item is to some extent related to technology shock, there is more to skill than the technology itself and that made me to call this out as a separate risk area itself. Soft skills play a key role in taking the project on the success path. Staff attrition is inevitable in software projects and as such managing the dependency on people is very important. The resources holding key roles should have the right attitude of hand holding the teams, willing to share the knowledge, quick and effective in on-boarding new members to the team.

Such skills of key resources holding the lead role even influence staff leaving the team or even the organization and it could be some of the best resources of the project team exiting for such reasons. The Project Sponsors should play an important role here in getting to know of such risk items and manage them well so as to keep the morale of the team high and get the best of the team.

Every member of the project should contribute towards the success of the project, keeping in mind the project goals and objectives. It is not uncommon that some key members of the project make certain decisions in such a way that is beneficial to him or them and in turn putting the success of the project at risk. This is a sort of political behaviour by some members within the project. Here again, the sponsors should involve more into the project and look for such risks spotted early on, so that control measures can be put in place by changing the team composition or by imparting necessary training or counselling to the needy members.

This third risk, when identified and managed well will ensure the team members collaborate and communicate well and deliver their best which eventually will contribute towards project success.

Lack of Risk awareness

Finally, lack of risk awareness by the project stakeholders is the biggest risk. This calls for a proper risk strategy and objectives at the organization level and at every project level and letting every member of the project to actively participate in risk identification and management.

While most project managers do mandate risk management as part of the project charter and do maintain a risk register, they fail to apply the risk management principles consistently, which eventually lead to incorrect risk prioritization. Not to be stressed, the controls and tasks identified to reduce the risk level also need to be monitored on par with other project tasks for timely actions. It is also a common mistake that the project managers do by missing out to estimate the efforts for risk management and not making it part of the project schedule.

Another important aspect of risk management, which is normally ignored is the communication and continuous monitoring. Risks need continuous monitoring and need different levels of communication or escalation depending on the risk level. Most projects have a stale risk register, where the risks are just identified and no monitoring or follow ups being done on them. Use of an appropriate risk management tool is recommended as it will ensure the visibility of the risks to all concerned with automatic alerts and escalations and also will facilitate consolidation of risks across multiple projects, there by facilitating managing risks at enterprise level.

Pre-project Reviews help projects fail at start

A new project was approved and a 15 member team sit round the table in the project kick off meeting with excitement and enthusiasm. Business Analysts have put together the stories which Developers have started developing. There were periodical project status reviews and there were issues and risks discussed in these meetings and the project manager did well in managing the issues and risks. There comes a message from stakeholders that all work on the project be stopped with immediate effect.

That may be sounding familiar to every IT familiar as study says that 37% of the IT projects are at the risk of failing. Another study finds that 31% of the projects are cancelled before even hitting the finish line.  It really hurts the project team members when a project is cancelled or shelved. But there could be reasons for doing so and such decisions are taken when continuing with the project will only increase the loss and would not bring in value for the sponsors. This is where ‘fail fast’ will help as some times pulling the project down even earlier would save a lot of efforts and money for the sponsors.

Let us see what can be done even before starting any work on a project, so that the potential failure is spotted in the pre-project stage itself so that the project is not allowed to start in the first place. When the need for a project is felt, the executive management (sometimes called Project Review Board) takes a look at it and reviews it and if it sees merit in it, gives a go for the project. In some cases, by the time the Project Review Board (PRB) sees the project proposal, considerable efforts would have already incurred in the form of requirement gathering and analysis. The review by the PRB members, when done well will bring out the ability to measure the risk exposure and the RoI (Return on Investment) of the project, which in turn influences the further decision. However, it is important here that the PRB members shall be presented with adequate information that helps taking the right decision. A well drafted checklist or template that captures all the required information would help not to miss out the details and will help reduce the projects failing down the road.

The project proposal template shall at a minimum capture the following details, so that an informed decision is taken by the PRB.

Motivation:

The problem the project is expected to solve or a business opportunity that the project will help the business to capitalize should be stated well, so that the PRB members are able to appreciate the motivation behind the project need. It would be appropriate to quantify the value / benefit the solution would bring when implemented as intended. Some projects may bring immediate benefits, whereas some may bring benefits in the longer term, in which case, the same shall be called out explicitly. Similarly some projects may bring in monetary benefits, while others may bring in intangible value / benefits.

Estimated investment:

It may not make sense if the investment to be made for the project is significantly higher, which may leave the value or benefit negligible. Most projects get hit on account of cost overrun. The estimate should be close to being accurate and use of a template will make sure that all cost elements are considered. In some cases, a better estimation can be made only after gathering requirements with sufficient details. It would be wise that in such cases, the PRB may take a call to sponsor the initial efforts alone and let the proposal be placed again for review with more accurate estimation.

Constraints:

All projects will be constrained with various ifs and buts. Each possible constraint should be identified and called out in the proposal document. Each constraint will have one more associated risk items for which a contingency plan and mitigation plan has to be put in place. Risk Management practice has evolved in recent times and there are methods and techniques with which the risks can be quantified (a factor of probability and impact) and the overall risk exposure of the proposed project can be measured. This will help the reviewers to take an informed decision whether this much risk is worth to be taken for the value this project might give back.

Solution longevity and re-usability:

It would help if the expected life of the solution is determined. Some of the solutions may have shorter life, but may offer the re-usability with minor changes / enhancements. This will have to be determined considering the longevity of the tools and technology that forms part of the solution. Considerable number projects get cancelled as the sponsors gets to know that the useful life of the solution is going to be short and that the project may not be completed on time leading to further reduction in the longevity.

The above are some of the key factors that influence the decision on the project. There are many other factors which depending on the nature and size of the project may have significant influence on the decision making. For instance, security and compliance requirements could be a significant risk, which the PRB needs to know of while taking the go decisions on projects. Other factors that may find a place in the Proposal document include, deployment infrastructure, post production maintenance aspects, choice of technology, resource availability, etc.

On top of everything, the team that prepares the project proposal document should have the expertise in the business domain, technology used, estimation and related skill areas. Typically this will require a team of architects of appropriate specialization to accomplish this.

References:

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/projectfailures/cio-analysis-why-37-percent-of-projects-fail/12565

http://www.it-cortex.com/Stat_Failure_Cause.htm

http://www.articlesbase.com/training-articles/project-failure-what-are-the-reasons-for-and-statistics-on-it-871395.html

Software Testability Review

Introduction

Close to 40% of the overall software development efforts is spent in testing activities which include test design, test preparation, test execution, and test result analysis. Improvement of test criteria and coverage, test automation, use of tools test analysis and test case re-use, etc are the popular methods used to bring this cost down.

Testability of a software application also has an influence on the testing efforts, making it harder or easier to test and analyse the test results. Testability is an important factor to achieve an efficient and effective test process. Organizations attempt to achieve higher testability by adopting an systematic approach which cuts across the SDLC, which is called Testability Engineering. Software Architects or specialized test architects are called in at different stages of product design and development to ensure that the testability is designed and built as part of the system. Being an important characteristic as it plays a vital role in influencing the cost of testing. Testability review technique is one of the primary technique which when adopted at the right stages will ensure high testability. This blog focuses primarily on the Testability Reviews.

Testability Reviews

Reviews in general is a popular and widely used technique by Software project teams to isolate defects in various stages of design and development. While testers do participate in most such reviews, whether they are called upon to bring out potential testing problems during these reviews needs validation. Let us see some of the testability heuristics as derived from testing practices and related literatures.

Architecture Level

Concentrate control structure related to a particular functionality in one cluster (or class). At times, Software Arcitects tend to emphasize this aspect, which could lead to dependent functions or methods being part of different clusters and in case of distributed development, this could even be with a different development teams. This will call for unnecessary development of test stubs or test drivers while testing.

Give higher priority to the modularity of a system than to the reuse of components. This one is debatable, but the reason why it is an important testability heuristics is that a higher stress on reusability may mean the non-availability of some such dependent methods or components, leading to delays in testing. One has to carefully evaluate the pros and cons and take a call on this heuristic.

Implement a standard test interface within each domain class. Implement a standard test interface within base classes and technical classes if they are selected for direct class testing. A standard test interface in all classes causes minimal additional implementation effort and has a high potential payback.

Introduce observation points at semantically meaningful points. Observation points are helpful in being able to collect or watch states and values of various objects or variables as the code execution pass through different stage. Observation points will be very helpful to debug or troubleshoot some of the hard to simulate defects.

Map your test strategy and your design approach with respect to inheritance hierarchies. Polymorphic method calls between classes within an inheritance hierarchy may require re-testing of the superclass when a subclass changes and vice versa. There are at least three different ways you can deal with this problem:

1. Avoid inheritance, use delegation instead: re-testing is not necessary.
2. Use inheritance, perform an analysis of the dependencies between super- and subclasses, and use a selective regression testing strategy.
3. Use inheritance, don’t analyse dependencies and rerun all test cases (test automation strategy).

Design Level

Make control structures explicit. Sometimes, control structure can be hidden in data, which gives room for chances of omitting important test cases there by leading to reduced test coverage. Being explicit will help testers to overcome this problem.

Avoid cyclic dependencies, especially between methods. Cyclic dependencies make the determination of test order complicated and also necessitate stubs and drivers and this could significantly increase the testing efforts.

Avoid unmotivated polymorphic method parameters, especially if strict subtyping does not apply. This could have a multiplier effect on the number of test cases or the test data as the all combinations of parameter classes need to be tested. An alternative here could be to use strict sub typing or minimize the number of parameter classes and restrict the type by appropriate casts wherever possible.

Avoid implicit inputs and side-effects. It is easy to miss implicit input and side-effects of methods, especially if they are not well documented.

Avoid unmotivated state behavior of objects.  This could lead to increase in number of test cases as it would be necessary to test each method for each object state.

Implement a state testing function for each test relevant class and restrict its invocation by test drivers if necessary. The state of an object is an important part of the test result after each test case execution but normally not accessible from the outside. Encapsulation makes testing more difficult. Breaking the encapsulation introduces unwanted dependencies between test drivers and the class to test.

Compensate test relevant information loss by built-in-tests. Built-in-test facilities like assertions provide a way to review and control intermediate computation results, thereby reducing the impact of information loss on the testing efficiency.

There has to be at least one input element (or combination of input values) for each output element. Unachievable output values (called output inconsistencies) may be indicators for unreachable statements and paths. This when avoided makes test result analysis a lot easier.

Provide means to trigger all exceptions. Some exceptions do never occur according to theory but needs consideration as it could improve the reliability of the system. It is a challenge for testers too to being able to trigger these exceptions so that the test cases cover all exceptions. A testable exception handling requires a design strategy and perhaps simulation of failure modes.

Code Level

Don’t squeeze the code. Code readability is an important factor which will be of great help when the testers are to design test cases and achieve maximum code coverage especially in case of unit testing.
Avoid variable reuse. Variable reuse leads to implicit information loss, i.e. loss of intermediate computation results and can be avoided by using more variables.

Minimize the number of unachievable paths. Unachievable paths will impact the code coverage as it would be difficult for the testers to design test cases that traverse through such paths. In order to reduce the number of unachievable paths, avoid correlated decisions.

Avoid recursive implementations of algorithms if there is no checking of invariants. It is difficult to test recursive algorithms because we cannot easily create a stub for the component or method we want to test. A solution to this problem is to split it into pairs that call each other or to use built-in assertions.

Summary

Dealing with testability issues during reviews of software artifacts should be the first choice to achieve an effective and efficient test process. Testability is not a characteristic of code alone but applies to the architecture and design as well.  The heuristics presented above are not exhaustive as more heuristics may need consideration depending on the test & design strategies, the nature of the system, the tools and technologies used for development and testing.

GRC for IT Architects

Governance Risk and Compliance (GRC) as most of you might know, is more than a catchy acronym used by IT and security professionals and in fact it is an approach or framework that an organization adopts to ensure proper management and control. 

The broader term Governance calls for a better way of managing the business, which includes protection of the assets of the organization (includes information as an asset), sustainability of the organization irrespective of the business or economic climate. Risks are the unforeseen events or forces which could potentially result in severe impact on the overall performance of the organization.  Better Governance cannot be achieved without a good risk management program in place. The risk appetite of an organization should be known to the stakeholders who should manage or control the risks, so that the risk exposure is well within the risk appetite. The term Compliance denotes the organization’s approach to being compliant with various legislative requirements of different countries in which it operates and also to comply with social commitments.

GRC exists at different levels, for instance Governance could exist at the corporate level, project level or at sub organization level. While the goals of the GRC at various levels will be the same, the means or techniques used to achieve it vary. 

As one could observe these three terms have inter-relations amongst each other and it’s for that reason, there is a need to have a 360 degree view of all these three together. GRC aligns various components of the enterprise (processes, employees, systems and partners) to be more efficient and more manageable leading to better business performance.

An organization is primarily comprised of People, Processes and Technology. The technology domain in turn is made up of Data, Applications and Infrastructure. The Corporate GRC goals can be met when these components are aligned to meet the respective goals.

Much of the risks that today’s organization is battling with are around Data and Applications used within and outside the organization. The IT Architects in turn play important role in designing the solutions involving data, applications and the infrastructure. Thus it is important for the IT Architect that the solution design process is aligned to the GRC framework of the organization.

Information Systems Audit and Control Association has recently released COBIT 5, which helps organizations to get more value from both information and technology investments. By approaching Governance, COBIT 5 helps maximize the trust in and value from organization’s information and technology. Let us go over some of the questions the stake holders would raise on the governance and management context of enterprise IT and see how it will be relevant for IT Architects.

How do I get value from use of IT? Are end users satisfied with the quality of IT?

IT investments are about enabling business changes and are expected to bring enormous value to the business. But 2 out of 10 enterprise IT projects are outright failures. Keeping a focus on the value delivery from proposal stage till delivery of the solution is likely to improve the chances of success. The Architects should establish the business value that the solution could bring, so that the stakeholders can make an informed decision whether to go ahead with the investment or not.

The perceived value out of IT investments is also dependent on user satisfaction on the service delivery using the solution. The usability should not be ignored for any reason by the Architects and to achieve this Architect should collaborate with target end users on a continuous basis to solicit and elicit feedback.

How do I manage performance of IT?

As businesses heavily depend on IT, the performance of IT to the satisfaction of business is important. Among various other reasons, poor or sub optimal solution design is a major cause for IT’s non performance. Here again, IT Architects have an opportunity to factor the best design practices and ability to generate appropriate metrics so that each of the IT services can be measured and monitored in terms of its performance.

How do I best exploit new technology for new strategic opportunities?

Information Technology is advancing in a faster pace, and the trends are shifting too frequently. Newer tools and technology frameworks that come into the market make enabling business changes more and more easier. This at the same time calls for the people’s abilities in mastering related skills. The Architects has to do a balancing act in not missing the opportunities that the newer technology and tools have to offer and at the same time should not risk the business by taking on such changes so early when skills to manage it is hard to get. Many a times, exploiting new technology ahead of the completion can spur business growth.

How dependent am I on external providers? How well are IT outsourcing agreements being managed? How do I obtain assurance over external providers?

Organizations are embracing cloud and started looking at SaaS applications as these offer a higher degree of flexibility in terms of investments and in terms of capabilities. This is happening though there exist quite many security and other compliance concerns that the industry is still trying to address. This resulting in more external vendors being engaged, calls for a well drafted SLA, which should be in line with the security and regulatory compliance needs of the organization. A careful evaluation of the product and the vendor is essential as it does not absolve the organization from this compliance needs.

What are the control requirements for information?

Information and data as assets are gaining significance and in the next few years, the ability to control and manage large volumes of data from discrete sources in an efficient and effective manner will be looked forward by almost all organizations. At the same time, data breaches are also on the rise and the information security practice is also drawing considerable attention from the CIOs. It is time that the CIOs or CSOs put in place an Information Governance program, identifying and classifying sensitive data and information and defining the control requirements around the same. This will require the all the applications be designed appropriately to have these control requirements implemented.

Did I address all IT related risk?

Risk is one of the important area to be managed well to minimize uncertainty and the associated impact on the business. Risk Management has to be practiced at every level including IT Architecture. IT Architects start risk management right from proposal stage to delivery and even after that. Lack of Risk Management skill amongst the Architects could itself be a risk.

Am I running an efficient and resilient IT operation?

With high dependence on IT, today’s enterprise needs an efficient, effective, secure and resilient IT infrastructure for its survival and success. This requires the sub systems of IT to be highly performing and at the same time architected in such a way to be flexible enough to accommodate changes to it. The Architects should always be willing to embrace change and make sure that the solutions that they design is receptive such changes.

How do I control the cost of IT? How do I use IT resources in the most effective and efficient manner? What are the most effective and efficient sourcing options?

The Architects who design IT solutions are not usually constrained by a budget, and so why in most cases the solutions designed are not necessarily a cost efficient one. Ideally, the Architecture team should consider better budgeting and estimation techniques and should be able to quantify the capital and operational costs, which allows the stakeholders to take informed decisions.

Do I have enough people for IT? How do I develop and maintain their skills, and how do I manage their performance?

Choosing the right tools and technology should also mean that availability of people in to manage and support it. Architects sometimes get carried away by the features and abilities of such tools and sometimes carried away or influenced by vendors and eventually end up in a situation where incurring huge cost in finding skilled people and retaining them. Architects should seriously consider the talents available in house and the availability of such skills in the market on demand, while making such choices.

How do I get assurance over IT?

Quite often, the IT is pulled in to diagnose the problem of an application coming down crashing. Teams like Developers, Architects, Network engineers, Hardware engineers, etc come together to trouble shoot the problem and come up with a corrective and preventive action. Every such instance throws a new root cause and the teams keep on learning out of such outages. But what the end user community wants is a stable and reliable system, which the business can depend on. While it is hard to rule out outages, there should be processes in place, which helps reduce the down times. The systems should be designed to being able to log information necessary for trouble shooting, raise alerts upon encountering exceptional conditions, factor redundancy in hardware and software components. Periodic audits and reviews should be carried out to ensure that the recovery measures put in place are working.

Is the information I am processing well secured?

With cyber security crimes on the rise, organizations are investing heavily on securing the data and information assets that are stored within and outside the organization. IT Security should be one of the key non-functional requirements that the Architects should consider while designing solutions. The significance of Security needs could vary based on the organization’s nature of business and the information being processed or stored. Many countries have pronounced legislations on security requirements for specific industries and specific class of data, which should be complied without exception. Here again, period audits and reviews would help assure about the IT security level to the stakeholders.

How do I improve business agility through a more flexible IT environment?

Agility is key to quickly turnaround business changes as solutions. Flexible IT enables the organizations to quickly capitalize on the new opportunities, to innovate and to get ahead of the competition. This saves time and increases efficiencies. Some of the key evaluation or design criteria to make this happen are:  shared / outsourced infrastructure, ability to scale up and scale out, reduced complexity, continuous data and application availability, built-in efficiency within every component, etc.

The above is not an exhaustive list to be taken care by the Architects. Most of the above would be addressed if one follows the best design practices considering all of the undocumented abilities (scalability, availability, maintainability, usability, etc.) required out of the solutions and applying the right design patterns.

Reference: COBIT 5 published by ISACA, COBIT 5 and GRC

Emerging Cloud Trends – Impact on IT

A recent Gartner Report identified five Cloud computing trends which could affect the cloud strategy through 2015. While Cloud Computing has a significant potential impact on every aspect of IT, the uncertainty, confusions and misunderstandings continue to exist and the five sub trends would be accelerating and need to be factored into the planning process. This means that the CIOs would be inclined to revise the cloud strategies to align with these trends. This will also mean that the enterprises would need IT workers with skills that could help in making this strategic shift successful. Here are the five sub trends and the skills that these trends would demand.

Formal Decision Frameworks facilitate Cloud Investment Optimization

The benefits of cloud include the shift from CAPEX to OPEX models, reduced spending, greater agility and reduced complexity. These benefits do not come just like that and they come with some challenges in the form of security, lack of transparency, performance & availability concerns, vendor lock-in, licensing constraints and integration needs etc. It is important that these benefits and concerns are carefully mapped against the needs of the enterprise and an appropriate decision is made and necessary monitoring and management processes are put in place. Each of these benefits needs to be quantified considering the organization’s current and future priorities and constraints. For instance, a financial services firm may find the greater agility as a challenge as well (as against a benefit), because, greater agility could mean more frequent changes, which would have an impact on the reliability and stability of the applications. Realizing such impact in mid-course could result in rolling-back from cloud adoption and the resulting impact is obvious.

Over the next few years, organizations would be putting in appropriate decision frameworks, more specifically for the cloud adoption so that the benefits and risks are known upfront and decisions are taken appropriately. The skills that this trend may demand include Risk Management, IT Security, IT Governance, Estimation and Metrics.

Hybrid Cloud Computing as an Imperative

As there are enough reasons for enterprises not moving all their IT on to public cloud, Gartner sees a unified cloud model, where a cloud of clouds is a possibility, in which a single cloud may comprise of multiple cloud platforms part of which could be it internal. As everyone know, the key challenge with hybrid cloud computing is the integration of application and data between on-premise and cloud applications.

This calls for existing internal applications being enhanced to support integration with external cloud applications and at the same time the cloud applications should expose APIs for consumption by other cloud applications and / or the organization’s internal applications. Applications on public cloud need to adhere to industry standards and best practices, so as to support varying integration needs of its customers. The skills that an IT professional would start seriously looking at to get on with this trend are EAI (Enterprise Application Integration), SOA (Service Oriented Architecture), ETL (Extract Transform and Load) and EII (Enterprise Information Integration).

Cloud Brokerage will facilitate Cloud Consumption

As cloud adoption proliferates, so does the need for consumption of assistance. Gartner believes that Cloud Service Brokers (CSB) are one of the most necessary and attainable opportunities for service providers, service distributors and internal IT organizations. The CSB model provides an architectural, business and IT operations model for enabling, delivering and managing different cloud services within a federated and consistent provisioning, billing, security administration and support framework. This will help the unification of the cloud services delivery and management. Gartner has designated Jamcracker as a “Cool Vendor in Cloud Service Brokerages”.

This trend will call for the IT professionals to have a great deal of knowledge on SOA in addition to various standards, practices and tools on service provisioning, delivery monitoring, billing and management.

Cloud-Centric Design becomes a necessity

Migrating existing workloads with highly variable resource needs to cloud platforms is among the immediate opportunities that many organizations are looking at utilizing. But this will not make the cloud adoption complete, as it will result in using various work-around approaches to make it work with existing applications, by-passing standards and best practices. This might work in the near term and but may not scale and yield the real benefits in the longer term. Organizations should start looking at development of cloud-optimized applications that exploit the potential of the cloud. Even internal applications should be designed with cloud-centric model, so that it can exploit the private cloud platform and would make the integration with public cloud applications easier over hybrid cloud computing platforms.

This trend will expect the application and solution architects to start acquiring necessary cloud skills, so that the solution that they architect is cloud-centric and will have identifiable service end points for use with various other internal and external applications and also factor in the support for Cloud Service Brokerages. The design patterns, standards and practices around cloud-centric design is evolving and it is important for the IT workers to keep a watch in this area.

Cloud Computing influences future Data Center and Operational Models

In public cloud computing, the providers have implemented such a model so that the ability of provisioning, delivering and managing the services is optimized and automated to a great deal. This also ensures optimal utilization of the underlying hardware and also minimizing the energy and other operational costs. Enterprises are attempting to implement the similar models within their data centers and have private clouds setup for the consumption of their own internal consumers. This trend is increasing and Gartner predicts that in the next few years any data center (small or big, internal or external) implementation would follow the cloud model.

This trend will expect the Infrastructure Architects to be cloud aware and be familiar with the underlying tools and technologies, which form part of the cloud service provisioning, delivery and management.

Reference: Gartner report "Five Cloud Computing Trends That Will Affect Your Cloud Strategy Through 2015." The report is available on Gartner's website at http://www.gartner.com/resId=1920517.

Enterprise Application Integration - Challenges

The increased complexity and diversity in the information systems and the inability to rebuild the information systems from scratch is forcing enterprises to look at EAI as an alternative solution that will help extend the life of the existing applications and also add on newer applications to meet their changing needs. EAI, if not well done could add to the woes of the enterprise. Here are some of the typical challenges an EAI project will face, which need to be worked around to reap the real benefits of EAI.

• Change Management Plan

It is important that the employees are bought in for the EAI initiatives and are taken into confidence for the changes that EAI brings in. With EAI, this is important as the Integration could be between many to many applications not only within the enterprise but also with partner / vendor applications. Many times, changes to such applications and / or the processes are necessary to implement best EAI solutions. Lack of proper Change Management Plan to support EAI initiative would mean resistance or reluctance from various business and IT teams to support the EAI project, which could lead to failure of EAI initiatives.

• Project Costs

According to Gartner 50% of EAI projects are over budget.  Even when cost is under control, the projects slip the schedules and hits production later than expected. Typically, the cost of acquisition of knowledge of various systems, additional software & hardware, infrastructure support, vendor management, etc are ignored or not appropriately estimated in the planning stage resulting in cost overrun. In addition EAI requires lots of technical and business decisions to be taken during the course of the project and that calls for experts with tons of experience who in turn have a hefty price tag. While the project cost itself is not an issue, it is important that the overall cost is well estimated and the return on Investment is well established to the satisfaction of the Management, so that they will continue to support the EAI initiative. If this is not done well and if the project cost keep shooting up every now and then or if the schedule keeps slipping off, then the management is likely to withdraw the support, which would mean shelving the EAI initiatives.

• Continuous Support

Like any other application, the EAI project is not an one-time implementation and it needs continuous support and maintenance. This is evident as the participating applications keep evolving and the business processes around which the integration needs are orchestrated keep changing depending on the growth and diversity of the business operations. In case of most EAI projects executed by vendors, this aspect is ignored and the recurring cost that arise on account of support and maintenance could be a surprise.

• Choice of Technology & Tool

While the business team look for quick and easy solution that is flexible and cheap, the IT team look for reliability and ease of use among other things. The IT team also expects that the business team will be appreciative of certain limitations of the technology and tools, which is an area of concern for the business team. It is extremely difficult to choose a technology or tool that meets all the needs. For instance, especially in the Integration space, EAI tools are great for real time integration of small chunk of data between applications, whereas there are different tools for bulk ETL kind of integration needs. Similarly, EAI tools typically do not support complex transformations and instead the source or target solutions need to be enhanced to handle transformations. The Architects have a key role to play in establishing the process and practice aspects of EAI within the enterprise and it is important that these are thought of ahead of tools and technology selection.

Connecting people and technology is always a challenge, which is magnified further with great many choice of tools and technology. It is important that these challenges are understood well and an appropriate plan to work around these is put in place well in advance would ensure the success of EAI initiatives in an enterprise.

Developers’ take away from a support project

Developers usually tend to prefer development projects over production support projects. Developers always want new challenges in terms of technology and would like to be using the latest tech tools and platforms. As most development projects offer them this advantage, they usually prefer to get away from production support projects.  But in reality, the production support projects do offer them certain key benefits, which are very much required as they move up in their career path. Let us examine some of these here.

The real life business scenarios

A software project begins with perceived business requirements as drafted by the Business Analysts and approved by customers. In most cases, the requirements are far from complete and that leads the developers to live with ambiguity giving room for more defects in the product that they develop. How much ever the software is tested, when it hits the production use, the real life business scenarios will for sure throw the software out of gear and makes it fail. Thus, those involved in the support projects get the opportunity to deal with production business scenarios which will sharpen their business / domain knowledge. Given that the world has started embracing the cloud and SaaS applications, there will be less of development and more of customization and managing the configurations. That means that the need for domain skills with the developers will rank very high amongst the SaaS providers and consumers.

Better product / domain knowledge

In product development, it is quite possible that a developer or a team of developers would be working on just a small part of a product. That means, the developers associated with development projects have very little opportunity to have complete understanding of the product. Whereas the developers involved in the production support would get opportunities to work with all parts of the product and some times across other products too. They get better visibility on the operating processes / practices associated with a use case, there by getting a better product / domain knowledge.

Solution design skill

Developers tend to believe that support projects do not have much opportunity in the solution design space, which is a myth. A production defect is far more difficult to deal with than a defect identified during the development life cycle. Resolution of a production defect involves at a high level the following steps:

• Quickly come up with a data fix to maintain the data integrity if impacted by the defect.
• Perform a root-cause analysis and come up with the real life scenarios that could lead to this defect being encountered.
• Come up with an interim work around if any available to prevent it from recurring in the shorter term.
• Identify a best solution to prevent it from recurring – This is rather challenging as the solution has to be designed within the existing product architecture, with lesser efforts and least impact to the already working software.

Each of the steps when done well in combination with the real life scenarios add tremendous value to the abilities of the developers and that will lead them towards software or solution architects. Solutions in support project see production quicker than the development projects and as such high appreciation from business teams. 

Code Re-factoring

Learning from one’s own mistake is a good way of learning. But, learning from other’s mistake is a smart way of learning. Every time a developer attempts to resolve a production defect, he might be looking into the code written by someone else and may come across many different ways of achieving a result. Taking it positively, a support developer may enjoy reading through the code written by others and pick up some better algorithms and at the same time, how not to write codes. This will for sure better their coding abilities.

The developers in the supporting a production instance of a software product will realize how important the readability of the code is and hopefully they will be making it their habits to write readable code with appropriate comments and indents.

Trouble shooting expertise

Usually software products are moved to production environment after atleast three levels of testing. A defect in production means that it has slipped through all the testing phases during development. So the scenario under which this comes to surface is not something that has been visualized during the development phases. Some of such defects would be very difficult to reproduce without which resolving it would be a nightmare. Those involved in support projects would quite often exposed to such scenarios and they will over a period gain good trouble shooting expertise. Read one of my other blog on Debugging performance problems.

Collaboration with other teams

During development phase, a software developer would be looking up to his lead for any clarifications on the work that is assigned to him and would not get exposed to other teams. Whereas, those involved in production support get to work with various other teams like the infrastructure, IT security, subject matter experts, quality assurance, business analysts, end users, third party vendors when any of their components are used, etc. This collaboration and interaction brings room for acquiring some additional skills both in technical space and also on the soft skill space.

Conclusion

Being in production, support projects facilitates the enterprise to perform its operations and earn profits on an ongoing basis. They play a vital part in the business continuity of the enterprise. As long as a production software is well supported and maintained, the IT heads would not think of replacing it unless a major technology overhaul is expected.

Of course, there are certain downsides of being support projects too. For instance, one may have to be on call to support any emergency and some times, a hard to crack defect could result in tremendous pressure and stress.