Originally published March 11, 2010
Once upon a time, the IT department was the place where new technology entered the corporation, where applications were built, and where end user requirements were the focus of the organization. Fast forward to today and the IT department looks nothing like the IT department of yesteryear. Today, the IT department is filled with people who select and install new technology. Most people in the IT department today have never come close to building or implementing a system from scratch. Try finding a person today who can shoot a dump. Even better, try to find someone who even knows why you would want to shoot a dump.
If you look merely at yesterday and today, it is almost incredible the two departments were ever related. But when you look at the phenomenon of the evolution of the IT department today in a step at a time progression, everything seems natural and gradual.
Such a progression might look like the following:
1960
Build, implement systems – COBOL, assembler, Fortran, et al.
Build, implement systems with master files
1965
Build, implement structured systems with master files (influence of Yourdon and DeMarco)
Build, implement structured systems with databases – IMS
1970
Build, implement structured systems with online databases and transactions, CICS, et al.
Ensure good response time and availability, maintain systems, occasionally build a new system
1975
Ensure high performance, maintain systems, install 4GL - Focus
Ensure high performance, maintain systems, service 4GL, allow PC access to system
Ensure high performance, maintain systems, 4GL, PC access, write extract programs
Ensure high performance, maintain systems, PC access, extract programs, data model
1980
High performance, maintenance, PC access, data dictionary, extract programs, data model
Performance, maintenance, PC access, metadata, extract, data modelHigh performance, maintenance, PC access, data dictionary, extract programs, data model
Performance, maintenance, PC access, metadata, extract, data model
1985
Performance, maintenance, PC, data warehouse, data model – Irwin
1990
Performance, ERP, PC, data warehouse, data mart, ODS
Performance, ERP, data warehouse, data mart, ODS, exploration warehouse – the Corporate Information Factory
1995
Performance, ERP installation and implementation, data warehouse, data marts
ERP implementation, data warehouse, data marts, archival storage
2000
ERP implementation, data warehouse, lots of data marts, near line storage
ERP operation, data warehouse, lots of data marts, DW 2.0
2005
ERP operation, data warehouse, lots of data marts, DW 2.0, data warehouse appliances
2010
ERP operation, data warehouse, lots of data marts, DW 2.0, data warehouse appliances, textual ETL
When one looks at the IT department of 2010 and harks back to the IT department of 1960, it is simply amazing to see the differences in the people, the activities, the priorities, and the sophistication of the two different environments. It is truly like comparing a Stone Age caveman to a modern day astronaut.
Recent articles by Bill Inmon
Comments
Want to post a comment? Login or become a member today!
Posted March 12, 2010 by Antoon Van Nuffel avnuffel@hotmail.com
When you look at the tools I aggree that the comparison stands, when we look at the quality of the software, I see no progress at all (today I received again updates for Windows XP a software that is more tahn 10 years old) and the expectation is even so that people accept that software has errors. When we look at the data quality produced by these systems I often have the feeling that the caveman was better equiped and that I wil not be an astronaut who will risk his live based on the information quality delvered by these flashy tools.
Regards
Antoon Van Nuffel
Is this comment inappropriate? Click here to flag this comment.