Jason's Blog Of All Things Digital

Quit trying to pimp the workflow

Mon, 11 Jul 2011 09:00:00 +0100

Why forcing a technology solution to fix your workflow is a waste of time and money

A conversation that seems to crop up on a fairly regular basis is one that I am sure most of you are familiar with. It goes along the lines of...

"We need to make process X more efficient, let's get a super whizz application installed that will make it easier to do things and will let us do all these other things at the same time."

My response is nearly always in the form of a question, and nearly always the same question.

"Before you run off and do that can you tell me exactly what the process is and what your problems with it are?"

It's right about then that I see a lot of puzzled looks and head scratching starts. A sudden realisation occurs that when they actually think about it the workflow, it isn't really that well defined and the problems with it are actually more fundamental business wide issues, rather than specific issues with the actual workflow.

Sadly what often happens next is many rounds of discussions trying to argue that even if the problem space isn't 100% defined, application Y is bound to make things a bit better which is surely better than nothing at all, isn't it?

The answer to that position is a resounding 'No, it won't!', followed by a slap to the head for even suggesting that it would. The fundamental mistake that most businesses make in operations these days is patching workflow problems with perceived "silver bullet" technology. Also when I say "workflow problems" in reality it's usually only the symptoms of the underlying problems that are being addressed rather than the true cause. You have to dig deeper.

The first and most important thing to do is actually to step back. Getting a higher level view of the overall situation before getting down to the nuts and bolts makes sure you're not busy defining your way into a dead end, or working on only part of the actual process in question. Invariably workflows do not work in isolation, so having an understanding of the different workflow couplings and integrations is essential.

Once you have a handle on the entire problem space, then you can get down to defining the actual workflow you are trying to address. There are many ways to achieve this, but one method that is as good as any is to grab pencil and paper and actually map it all out in one or several flow diagrams.

Now we're getting somewhere. The problem space is understood, we have a visual definition of what the actual workflow is, now what? Time to implement that super whizz application because we have a definition to work with. Wrong. The next step is to implement the workflow using minimal technology, just enough to make it work, aided with manual processes, and simple technical additions, nothing fancy. This is the validation and testing phase. If you have truly understood your workflow and got that definition right, even a fairly manual process will still give you tangible improvements over the old broken way you were doing things. It's not exciting, it's not flashy but it works. And importantly it's probably cost you nothing other than some management time to setup and actually fix your workflow.

If you haven't got things right it should be fairly obvious and also simple, cheap and quick to amend how your doing things to get it right.

So what about the flashy technology. Well, assuming your new semiautomated workflow is doing well, then you should have confidence that you understand your system now and are therefore in a strong position to move to the next stage of full automation. From here on in your are looking at a cost/benefit analysis to pick the right time to invest in the right technological upgrade to get that final level of workflow optimisation. You're no longer trying to fix problems, but improve efficiency in an already well established and functional workflow.

Why we chose SilverStripe as our CMS

Tue, 03 May 2011 09:00:00 +0100

In simple terms, what is a CMS?

First of all it might be worthwhile defining what we mean by CMS or more completely, a Content Management System. For the purposes of this entry we will limit ourselves to website systems, so in that arena, a CMS is a web application used to manage the content of a website.

Typical features allow for a site structure to be created from pages, with the content and features of those pages being defined by the administrators of the website (who may or may not be skilled in the coding of HTML web pages). SilverStripe is one such system from a selection of hundreds of similar systems available today. CMSs vary in function, cost and complexity from the most basic offerings to systems that cost hundreds of thousands of pounds to deploy on sophisticated hardware architectures. Some can be limited to working with low numbers of pages in simple brochure-ware sites to those capable of managing libraries worth of pages. Their feature sets are just as varied, so the selection of a CMS to suit the needs of any particular business or website can be very difficult.

The situation before SilverStripe

I joined E-scape in mid 2008, at that time the company was utilising a mix of custom code, and a few CMS systems mostly MODx and Text Pattern. Both of these systems are PHP based Open Source CMS. They were both fairly basic and they both had some pretty serious limitations that were preventing E-scape from meeting our clients business needs. It was clear at this point that a new and more feature rich CMS was required. The ideal CMS needed to meet some basic requirements for selection, some of which were:

It had to be Open Source
It had to have an active and helpful developer community
Ideally it needed to be backed by a commercial entity to provide longevity to the project
It had to work on Linux and Mac OS X, and if it worked on Windows it was a bonus
It had to have an easy and intuitive management system for our clients to use
It had to have a clear and easy to understand template language to make it easy for our design and production team to work with
It had to provide a clear and extensible code base to work with that could be controlled with traditional Source control tools
It had to not rely on a database for system configuration
It had to provide page revisions for roll back of content changes
It had to allow for draft changes
It had to be easy to learn - quickly
It had to perform well
It had to be sellable to our clients

The major contenders

First of all we looked at a broad range of systems that were developed in PHP, Ruby and Java. Of these we eliminated the Ruby offering, Radiance, because we felt that it was at the time a hard enough sell to get a traditionally Microsoft client base to accept PHP which was well known, let alone a relatively unknown platform such as Ruby on Rails. This was a real shame as Ruby on Rails is an excellent platform that we wish we could develop with as well as PHP. The major contender in the Java arena was Alfresco. Alfresco at the time was more targeted at competing solely with Microsoft Sharepoint and was only just starting to extend into the Web Content Management area. So as well of a lack of maturity, it was rejected due to its complexity and minimum cost of deployment - its just too big for most small businesses.

So in the PHP frame we looked at a large cross-section eliminating a large number for not meeting the basic requirements. Of those that were left we had, Joomla, Drupal, a possible rework of MODx and SilverStripe a relatively new system out of New Zealand. Joomla was ultimately rejected for its poor user experience and overly complex template system. Drupal was rejected because its development cycle was far too aggressive and its context based editing system was confusing to use in conjunction with the rest of the management interface. The MODx option was more complicated. The promised re-development of MODx on paper met all the requirements, there would be some cross over of skills which would also be of benefit. In the end however the time frame was against us and the new release was just not going to be with us in time. We had to move to a new platform sooner rather than later. And so SilverStripe was the one still left standing.

So what made SilverStripe stand out in the first place?

First of all it was featured as an up and coming platform to watch by a few different reviews of CMS platforms that happen on a fairly regular basis. Its interface when compared to the outgoing MODx and Textpattern was fresh and intuitive and it met all of the requirements in our list. Beyond that though, it promised to be more than just a CMS for us. It was built on a Framework called Sapphire that could be used for more general web development beyond the scope of the CMS. This was definitely a bonus as one of the things you learn pretty quickly when dealing with customers and web sites is that no two are the same and every customer wants just that little bit more than the last. So with a decent framework supporting the CMS, we were confident that it would not limit us in the future.

From a developers point of view, the clean division of code and configuration from user interface and content management was refreshing. Being able to work in code for all of our development with out any need to configure deployments through a web interface would allow us to heavily integrate our development and release processes with a solid source control system. This would provide a much needed reduction in the amount of development work and tweaking that was being done to production environments. In fact the actual goal was to eliminate any direct changes to production systems to protect their integrity and increase the level of service to our customers.

The verdict after a couple of years usage?

A CMS's strengths on paper are one thing but what about in practice. Has SilverStripe lived up to expectations? In summary a resounding yes! There are of course a few areas that have caused us some issues for instance third party modules not keeping pace with the main line updates. To be fair this is not an uncommon situation with platforms that allow strong developer integration and extension. Of course the fact that the entire platform is Open Source has meant that in those cases where we have had problems we have had the ability to correct them ourselves if needed.

SilverStripe as a platform for our development has not stayed static either. The core development team have steadily improved the CMS over the time we have been using it, introducing new features and improving overall performance and security. In reality this continued development is probably more important than the initial feature set that we settled on in the first place. A static platform is of no use to us as a business as we continue to develop new and inspiring websites and applications for our customers.

What does this mean to our customers?

SilverStripe and its continued maturing and growth over the last couple of years has fostered an environment within E-scape that is benefiting existing and new customers alike. We have a growing team of experienced developers who are getting more and more comfortable working with a platform that is not only great to work with, but is also allowing them to challenge their own skills and knowledge to go that step further towards excellence. Working on a platform that is stable but continuing with an active and relevant roadmap of enhancements and extensions gives our customers confidence that they will get what they ask for and not be blocked from growth in the future as their own needs evolve or adapt to their market place. Continued growth of our skill base in SilverStripe is also making our offering to clients more cost effective as we build up a library of our own modules and building blocks to speed delivery to market for client projects.

And what about the future?

Right now its an exciting time to be a SilverStripe developer. The core team is working hard on version 3.0 of SilverStripe CMS and the Sapphire framework. This release is a watershed event for SilverStripe as it includes a complete rework of the Sapphire framework finally de-coupling it completely from the CMS, re-working the ORM to provide a more rational, consistent and intuitive interface as well as a whole raft of other features and enhancements. For the CMS this release features a radically redesigned user interface that provides a visually more pleasing experience combined with some significant improvements to the usability for content administrators and contributors.

I am following these developments very closely and am very excited about being able to bring these improvements to our customers.

Open Source - what it should mean to businesses

Wed, 16 Mar 2011 16:31:09 +0000

A bit of a look back

Open source has been with us for much longer than most people would think. It has been a fundamental part of the Internet since its inception running up to the 1990s. Indeed the very first web browsers and servers were freely available to download, use and experiment with before the Internet had broken out of military and academic fields. So what is Open Source exactly?

In its simplest terms it can be defined as computer software that is made available for use and modification by its authors. There are many different ways, or licenses that are used to achieve this from a legal standpoint. There are also lots of opinions on how Open Source relates to the terms 'Free as in Beer' or 'Free as in Freedom'. But the important factor to take forward is that there are no license costs, and you have the right to use and modify the software to meet your needs. Further, in most cases you are free to distribute those modifications as part of a business with minimal, if any, requirments or restrictions from the original authors.

So today, over twenty years on, there is a massive pool of open and freely available software to address a vast array of user requirements with an equally impressive community of developers and experts offering support, advice and service for free or commercial gain.

The argument against

With the array of software and expertise out there, why is it that Open Source has been seen as a pariah by the business community for so long? The usual arguments thrown about are, in no particular order;

that the quality of the software is poor
that support is ineffective or unreliable
that nothing is truly free and the cost of retraining staff is prohibitively expensive
that there are always hidden costs
that it is a security risk to use Open Source
that it just can't be as good as the best commercial products out there
something is bound to go wrong and you'll lose your job because you chose Open Source

The list goes on, and to your average decision maker its a convincing argument. Or so it has been until events such as global economic crisis with extreme financial pressures have forced businesses to seek out any avenues for savings or survival. Even the path of the damned that leads to Open Source has become well trodden in recent times. All very dramatic but what's the real picture when you take away the fear mongering from the commercial software providers and ill-informed?

The argument for Open Source

With the levelling of the economic playing field businesses are re-evaluating Open Source and paying more attention to the claims of its benefits and potential cost savings. More and more large organisations are moving away from the traditional platforms and software providers to embrace the Open Source option and are reaping the benefits of doing so. Some of the largest businesses in the world have based their entire operations on Open Source, Google, Facebook, Twitter, Netflix, Amazon. And it is not just web giants, the London Stock Exchange operates from a derivative of the GNU/Linux Open Source operating system. It's also not just large businesses. If your business has a website that is run on a system provided by any one of the thousands of web hosting company, then the chances are that it is run on the Apache Web Server one of the most widely used Open Source systems available today.

Open Source covers all aspects of software and business in some way or another, from where you expect it, running web servers and Internet services, or as an Office Suite in your business, or driving your mobile phone, to places you would never think of, such as running your Fridge (Electrolux Infinity I-Kitchen), or in your TV (Google TV).

So what are the counter arguments, why can Open Source be trusted in your business?

It's cost effective - by the mere fact that there are no punitive license fees your business is able to use that expenditure on alternatives such as digital marketing to increase your revenue in more direct terms.
It's as secure as commercial software (some might argue more secure) - this is due to the very openness of its code. Everyone gets to see how it works and evaluate it for security and quality. There is nowhere to hide any dirty secrets, short cuts or shoddy code. Not if you want your project to be accepted by the community and succeed.
It's quality is more visible - for the same reasons it is more secure, everyone can see what your doing.
It's protected from vendor termination - how many times has a commercial product suddenly been discontinued because of a change in direction by the owning company. With Open Source you are protected as there is always the option to develop the code with other parties. In fact it is quite normal for long running projects to have changes in leadership, bringing fresh ideas and impetus to flagging development cycles.

So how does E-scape use Open Source?

The first thing is, that E-scape does not exclusively use Open Source to run its business. Sure we could do it if we really wanted to, but it doesn't always make sense. The Open Source world is not a replacement for commercial software, it is an alternative that can often be uses in harmony with existing commercial systems. We find the best tool for the job be it Open Source or otherwise. Of course we always check out for an Open solution before looking commercially, why pay for something when it might be out there for free. But even if there is an Open option it still has to do the job properly before it gets selected.

So we have not chosen to use the Open Source operating system GNU/Linux on our desktops becasue it just does not quite work well enough for us. However, we do use it for all our web servers as it out performs everything else in that role. Because we have chosen to use Mac OSX on our desktops we have a whole load of Open Source tools pre-configured for our development team right away. Web Servers, development languages, databases, and most of the core operating system for Mac OSX are open source. We also have a large list of commercially bought tools to assist with operating those Open Source systems.

We do nearly all of our development in PHP, Java, and Javascript. All of these languages are Open Source, or Open Standards that are freely available for implementation by the development community or commercial entities.

With this combination of commercial and Open Source solutions we are able to cost effectively deliver an Open solution for most of our clients, that gives them all of the benefits and freedoms that we enjoy so much about the Open Source world.

The power of Twitter - an example of how to use Twitter successfully in business

Fri, 25 Feb 2011 10:30:04 +0000

Recently I had the opportunity to experience the true power of Twitter as a consumer and see how that power was turned into a positive customer experience by a business participating fully in their social network. As an online agency E-scape uses several Cloud based hosting solutions which up until recently were only available in US data centres. One of our primary solution providers, Rackspace recently made their Cloud solution available via their UK data centre and so it was a perfect time to start the migration of a few clients to servers closer to their target market.

The first part of this process was to create a new user account with the UK service. Easy right? Not so much as it turned out. After several failed attempts to complete the processes I contacted Rackspace's "fanatical support" to request assistance. Using their online chat service an agent tried to diagnose the problem without much luck. Not a problem sometimes front line support can't solve the problem so I was informed that someone would call me back shortly to assist.

Two hours later and no call. Not so fanatical after all then. Back onto support, go through the exact same diagnostic process with another agent. Told again that someone would call. Benefit of the doubt given, wait for the call.

Another few hours and another call with no results and it's time to act. So out goes a tweet mentioning Rackspace and expressing my dissatisfaction with the situation so far.

@jasonstratford: Been trying to setup a UK @rackcloud account since 9.30am. So far a Jersey address seems to be a problem that no one can fix. #fail #in

Fifteen minutes later I have a response on twitter with an email address of someone willing to sort it out.

@Rackspace: @jasonstratford sorry you're having trouble! Could you send details to twitter@rackspace.com so we can help sort things out?

A couple of emails later and I am on a call with that person being walked through the process to diagnose the problem with an activation agent waiting on the call to take over as soon as the account is set up. Now that's more like the "fanatical support" I was expecting.

So what have I taken from this experience?

First, voicing a complaint in a public forum can shake the tree and get results. But it's best to keep it civil as being pissy is going to be counter productive.

Second, the first is only true if the company your complaining to takes their social presence and reputation seriously.Your can get a good idea if this is true by reviewing their presence. If its filled with lost of positive feedback and personal interactions your on the right tracks.

Third and finally, a strong and positive response in a public arena can turn a failure into a win for both the customer and business.

We are still happy Rackspace customers and although their support initially showed some pretty big problems, in the end they solved the problem and kept a customer. Not a bad save for having someone keeping an eye on their Twitter account.