Skip to content
James Dawson By James Dawson Principal I
DevOps: Build Bridges not Silver Bullets

I've lost count of the number of times I've had or heard a conversation along the lines of:

Bob: I have this problem to solve, I've had it before quite a long time ago and I know others infrequently experience it too, or something like it.

Alice: Sounds like a candidate for automation.

Bob: I know, but when I have the problem I'm always under pressure to get past it - I can't really spare the time to automate it, even though I know it will be useful in future.

Programming C# 12 Book, by Ian Griffiths, published by O'Reilly Media, is now available to buy.

Alice: But if it's going to help others too, surely that's enough to justify taking the extra time now?

Bob: Other people don't have the exact same problem and I don't know enough about what they need to build something that would help them.

The final exchange tends to go one of two ways:

Alice: Oh well, I guess if you just need to fix it then fix it - maybe you'll be able to do it properly next time - or someone else will in the meantime?

or

Alice: Just worry about solving your problem, once people know what you've built they'll be able to tweak it to solve their variation with much less effort than if they had to start from scratch.

Azure Weekly is a summary of the week's top Microsoft Azure news from AI to Availability Zones. Keep on top of all the latest Azure developments!

Building a system that solves even just 10% of a problem is a worthwhile endeavour, but it's often easy to defer such plans until you have time to solve more of the problem space or even just to know what that remaining 90% actually is!

I don't say this simply because the 10% delivers more value than doing nothing (though obviously it should!), but because I believe that the mere existence of the system is the long-term value. It does more to encourage others to use and improve it than the value they derive from the 10% solution itself. Each such contribution notches-up the direct value from the solution itself and spreads the knowledge across more people.

I find this is particularly true with automation systems. Much of the effort of building a robust automated process is not necessarily in the automation that addresses the problem itself, but in the plumbing and processes that tie it all together and allow it to be easily used and maintained. This can be compounded when such plumbing may touch technical areas that an individual is unfamiliar with, despite otherwise being well-placed to solve the actual problem.

This is the 'barrier-to-entry' problem and is why many things don't ever get automated.

By understanding the psychology of these situations, if you're someone who is comfortable with automation 'plumbing' then don't be put off from doing something just because you can't solve the whole problem - there are likely many others who will gladly collaborate once they see that a foundation has been dug.

Given the title of this post, it might seem a mixed metaphor but the bridge in this context is the one connects the world of this 'plumbing' (concerned with having effective, maintainable automation) with the world of a particular problem domain. Once joined, each world can now see the contributions of the other and hopefully broaden their horizons so they can build their own bridges in the future - and so the virtuous circle continues (hopefully!).

FAQs

How do I encourage automation within my team? Lower the barrier-to-entry for others by taking care of the plumbing that good automation requires. This allows colleagues to focus on the particular domain problem they want to address without the cognitive overhead of having to build the foundations too.
Why don't teams automate things even when they know it would help? Good automation has a number of non-functional aspects to consider, even before you get to the actual value-providing process itself. Often teams are put off from automating something not because the process itself is complicated, but because these other aspects present a high barrier-to-entry when starting from scratch.
Is it worth building automation that only solves part of the problem? Absolutely. Building a system that solves even just 10% of a problem is worthwhile, not only for the direct value it delivers, but because its mere existence lowers the barrier for others to collaboratively iterate on it. Each contribution notches up the value and spreads knowledge across more people.
What is the barrier-to-entry problem in automation? Much of the effort in building robust automated processes is not in the automation that addresses the problem itself, but in the plumbing and processes that tie it all together and allow it to be easily used and maintained. This plumbing may touch technical areas unfamiliar to individuals who are otherwise well-placed to solve the actual problem.
What does building bridges rather than silver bullets mean in DevOps? The bridge metaphor represents connecting the world of automation plumbing with the world of a particular problem domain. Rather than waiting to build a perfect end-to-end solution, focus on building the foundations that allow others to see across into unfamiliar territory and contribute their own expertise, creating a virtuous circle of collaboration.

James Dawson

Principal I

James Dawson

James is an experienced consultant with a 20+ year history of working across such wide-ranging fields as infrastructure platform design, internet security, application lifecycle management and DevOps consulting - both technical and in a coaching capacity. He enjoys solving problems, particularly those that reduce friction for others or otherwise makes them more effective.