In our experience, organisations with an internal IT function roughly fall into four categories;
- ‘Daily checks‘. Utilising native product administrative consoles to confirm systems are operating as expected. This approach is labour intensive, leaves room for human error and provides very limited visibility to the leadership teams unless more effort is spent on generating reports and by the time it’s presented it is already outdated.
- ‘Swivel chair‘. Some systems provides native some form of native monitoring and alerting and although the administrative insights might be unparalleled, the monitoring component is not ideal as systems administrators have to swivel chair between various consoles and rely on email notifications to alert them of incidents that required their attention. There’s still very limited visibility to the leadership team as in the first group.
- ‘Overflowing toolbox‘. Whether it’s through mergers and acquisitions, organic growth, or simply inferior monitoring tools, organisations end up with a range of monitoring tools that are no longer capable of monitoring a complicated hybrid, multi-cloud environments. This results in multiple point solutions that don’t correlate events, increasing diagnosis time to establish the root cause of an incident. The traditional monitoring tools also require many resources to both run and operate and in isolation unable to provide a holistic view to both administrators and leadership teams.
- ‘Integration to Event Management systems‘. While this might be the answer in a scenario where there are limited or non-existent monitoring capability for bespoke systems, this is a very expensive, complicated and ongoing labour intensive solution as the integrator constantly has to play ‘catch-up’ as new products and features are released and face the challenge of event correlation and route cause analysis.