MIS 'bad guys' - animosity between MIS and microcomputer users must be overcome for enterprise-wide computing to become a reality

Software Magazine, March 15, 1990 by John Desmond

MIS 'BAD GUYS'

While the buzz-phrase "enterprisewide" is moving into full implementation in the computer industry, it sounded a meaningless buzz at the Networld show in Boston last month.

Enterprise computing implies that all computers contribute to the enterprise and there is no artificial boundary between machine sizes. That also implies there are no artificial boundaries between the people implementing information system strategies on the various platforms, be they mainframe, PCs or ... whatever.

But the traditional animosity between the PC and MIS communities was in full evidence at Networld. If this is a true picture, then these two communities desperately need to find a middle ground.

Now that IBM's SAA blueprint is so firmly entrenched in manuals on data processing shelves throughout the land, and given that SAA pushes "cooperative processing," I thought this animosity was outmoded. It isn't.

TURF WAR CONTINUES

A telecommunications consultant for Aetna Insurance, Hartford, Conn., outlined how his group installs and supports local area networks. A woman in the audience asked innocently, "How did you convince data processing to offload some of their processing onto your LAN? Our DP department doesn't understand why we need PCs." Conclusion: Turf war continues in 1990.

A speaker for Shearson Lehman Hutton, New York, said his answer was to appeal directly to end users. "They want instant gratification and nobody can say no to them," he advised. Lesson: How to get around data processing.

The worst horror story was told by the Aetna LAN consultant, whose attempt to get data processing to support a Help line for LAN users failed. Data processing could not figure out a chargeback scheme that would enable them to recover the cost to deliver the service. This is not a technical issue. This is an attitude: one of non-cooperation.

Insurance companies often get picked on as representing some of the worst aspects of the data processing profession. For example, insurance company executives like to complain about changes in Cobol, but they traditionally don't participate in the process governing the changes. Insurance companies also are among industries making up the backbone of IBM's commercial data processing mainframe business. Is this correlation significant?

Maybe. IBM's SAA blueprint promises a lot. One thing it is far from being, however, is delivered. One product "announced" at Networld was a version of Microsoft LAN Manager for MVS, being jointly developed by Microsoft and Micro-Tempus. Delivery schedule? One year away. So rush out and get your LAN Managers while supplies last.

The DP professional loyal to IBM--there are many--who would like to wait out delivery of the cooperative processing strategy, is being put in an extremely sensitive position. The many DP professionals dedicated to serving their customers may not be able to wait. This is unfortunate, and it perpetuates the "organization man" stereotype of data processing, which is not fair.

The changing DP professional of today is perhaps typified in the experience of the MIS department at the University of Texas at Austin, where microcomputer manager Karen Arledge has witnessed analysts develop a preference for Macintosh workstations. Why? Because they are not afraid to try new things, and their loyalty is to getting the job done.

"Many times, the PC user sees MIS as the bad guy. But I think that is a misperception. Most MIS shops are trying to push the edge," she said.

A key question for IBM is whether the animosity is justified. Is SAA a straw man for keeping the mainframe in control?

Where the industry will be when the IBM solution is available is anybody's guess. The power of the network solutions on display at Networld was certainly impressive. The evolution of local area networking to wide area networking and distributed processing continues, while IBM's developers toil and their MIS constituency awaits true solutions. The continued animosity is not surprising.

The PC revolution and enterprise-wide computing should mean the same thing. But the PC loyalists at Networld are still viewing the enterprise from their perspective, while obstinate mainframe devotees are still reluctant to adopt a spirit of cooperation. If good sense eventually prevails, one wonders whose enterprise-wide scheme will take the spoils.